If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Global Geopolitics)   The Chinese are now invading Belarus by building a city 40 percent larger than Manhattan   (glblgeopolitics.wordpress.com) divider line 48
    More: Scary, Belarus, Chinese, Manhattan, Belarusian, Minsk  
•       •       •

2826 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 May 2013 at 10:30 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-27 07:50:42 AM
The "modern city on the Eurasian continent," as it's called in marketing documents, will be built around the M1 highway that links Moscow and Berlin via Belarus and Poland. A speed-rail network will tie the airport to the center of the city

Do you know who else built large manufacturing centers along railway lines in Eastern Europe?
 
2013-05-27 08:22:26 AM
I don't think this is going to end well.
 
2013-05-27 08:30:02 AM
Doesn't China already have dozens of citys that are virtual ghost towns?  Why not populate them first?
 
2013-05-27 08:30:43 AM
cities.  Argh.
 
2013-05-27 08:38:59 AM
40% larger to host a tenth of the population? Yeah. That's <I>really<I> the same thing there, subs.
 
2013-05-27 10:22:48 AM

Radak: Doesn't China already have dozens of citys that are virtual ghost towns?  Why not populate them first?


Well, yeah. And a ton of theme parks that are gigantic, that have no visitors. At this point, they have to keep folks moving and doing something, or they might get ideas into their heads...
 
2013-05-27 10:24:49 AM
I wouldn't trust china to build a sandwich, much less a city.  Good luck with that Belarus.
 
2013-05-27 10:32:23 AM

Ambivalence: I wouldn't trust china to build a sandwich, much less a city.  Good luck with that Belarus.


Brace yourself, but they are building our bridges.

Bridge comes to San Francisco with a Made-In-China label:    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html?pagew a nted=all&_r=0
 
2013-05-27 10:34:23 AM

Ambivalence: I wouldn't trust china to build a sandwich, much less a city.  Good luck with that Belarus.


Whatsamattawityou? They're deleadcious.
 
2013-05-27 10:36:11 AM
Maybe they could do that here.  Just a thought.
 
2013-05-27 10:36:56 AM
I mean for every trillion we spend, throw in a free city.  Amirite?
 
2013-05-27 10:37:48 AM
That's what, about .04 Rhode Islands?
 
2013-05-27 10:39:12 AM
Thugs backing a thug. Good luck with Luko kicks off or is shot in a courtyard
 
2013-05-27 10:40:08 AM
So it's a quarter the size of Chicago, or a tenth the size of Houston?  That doesn't sound so outrageous.
 
2013-05-27 10:44:32 AM

Radak: Doesn't China already have dozens of citys that are virtual ghost towns?  Why not populate them first?


A few theories, one of which is that there's plans to sell the cities to corporations as a sort of wage-slave city but less horrible. Also another possibility is that these cities are there to absorb North Korea when it fails and China goes in to pick up the pieces. Another possibility is that China just genuinely wants to diminish its population density, so they're planning on major relocations or incentive programs for the next generation to fill them.

Also, a not-immaterial possibility is that they built those cities to have something to build, to serve as economic stimulus. Given their economy has been growing non-stop for the past forty years, I wouldn't say it's failed.
 
2013-05-27 10:49:39 AM

hubiestubert: Radak: Doesn't China already have dozens of citys that are virtual ghost towns?  Why not populate them first?

Well, yeah. And a ton of theme parks that are gigantic, that have no visitors. At this point, they have to keep folks moving and doing something, or they might get ideas into their heads...


Well there you go.  We keep seeing stories about people paying upwards of 1000 bucks a day to jump the queues at Disney.  Tourism opportunity right there.  It would cost a helluvalot less to spend a week in China, in a nicely-appointed condo in a ghost town, getting to ride all the rides at a ghost theme park with no lines.  Get with it, China!

They don't own Disney yet, right?
 
2013-05-27 10:53:44 AM

TalenLee: Radak: Doesn't China already have dozens of citys that are virtual ghost towns?  Why not populate them first?

A few theories, one of which is that there's plans to sell the cities to corporations as a sort of wage-slave city but less horrible. Also another possibility is that these cities are there to absorb North Korea when it fails and China goes in to pick up the pieces. Another possibility is that China just genuinely wants to diminish its population density, so they're planning on major relocations or incentive programs for the next generation to fill them.

Also, a not-immaterial possibility is that they built those cities to have something to build, to serve as economic stimulus. Given their economy has been growing non-stop for the past forty years, I wouldn't say it's failed.


A very warped liberal mindset. China is a ticking time bomb.
 
2013-05-27 10:53:49 AM
The Chinese are undercutting the competition. Look at Africa, where there is growth the Chinese are the ones building the infrastructure and they bring in their people to do the actual work.

The local populations aren't too happy with it though....let's see how it plays out in Belarus.
 
2013-05-27 10:54:44 AM
Manhattan is neither a city nor a particularly large amount of area.  It also only has 1.6 million people - so that comparison is not particularly impressive.
 
2013-05-27 10:57:06 AM

TalenLee: Also, a not-immaterial possibility is that they built those cities to have something to build, to serve as economic stimulus. Given their economy has been growing non-stop for the past forty years, I wouldn't say it's failed.


This is the real reason, they move people from the country, put them in urban housing, build huge buildings, subsidize some farmer families housing and have tons of empty space.

My folks have lived in a couple apartments in Shanghai and, while fairly nice, none were beyond 30% capacity.    The make work projects are going to be great until the whole house of farking cards collapses (along with any number of hastily made buildings).

People who fear China as a hugely threatening new hyperpower in the future have obviously never been to China.
 
2013-05-27 11:06:54 AM

Nemo's Brother: A very warped liberal mindset. China is a ticking time bomb.


They're a ticking time bomb next to us, with whom we trade, and who have been trying to help the United States fix their economy. Don't worry, though, I'm sure when they're the next global superpower because the US can't pull its head out of its ass, we'll all come to hate them as much as we hated you.
 
2013-05-27 11:08:12 AM
David Gaeber talked about this in his book, Debt, the first 5000 years.  The Chinese have always shown power by tribute.  Which is also why they're flooding American with cheap goods.  China's long term goal is to make the whole world a suzerainty.  If you think about it,  Americans are dependent on cheap goods making up for their lack of good wage, we're all kinda vassals of the Chinese state; we pay tribute, we get stuff, and they're doing this kind of thing all over the world.
 
2013-05-27 11:12:56 AM

DarnoKonrad: David Gaeber talked about this in his book, Debt, the first 5000 years.  The Chinese have always shown power by tribute.  Which is also why they're flooding American with cheap goods.  China's long term goal is to make the whole world a suzerainty.  If you think about it,  Americans are dependent on cheap goods making up for their lack of good wage, we're all kinda vassals of the Chinese state; we pay tribute, we get stuff, and they're doing this kind of thing all over the world.


well, they're doing it wrong then since the tribute comes back to companies which pay Chinese people to make them.
Next time you see a trinket stamped Made in China, look at the producer. They're more likely to be headquartered in Raleigh, NC than Beijing
 
2013-05-27 11:33:53 AM

DarnoKonrad: David Gaeber talked about this in his book, Debt, the first 5000 years.  The Chinese have always shown power by tribute.  Which is also why they're flooding American with cheap goods.  China's long term goal is to make the whole world a suzerainty.  If you think about it,  Americans are dependent on cheap goods making up for their lack of good wage, we're all kinda vassals of the Chinese state; we pay tribute, we get stuff, and they're doing this kind of thing all over the world.


Sigh.

i2.kym-cdn.com
Tribune doesn't work that way!
 
2013-05-27 11:38:10 AM

kimwim: I don't think this is going to end well.


No kidding.

Belarus is the most backwards place I could think of to build a manufacturing complex.  I'd rather be in Siberia than Belarus.
 
2013-05-27 11:42:08 AM

Bad_Seed: DarnoKonrad: David Gaeber talked about this in his book, Debt, the first 5000 years.  The Chinese have always shown power by tribute.  Which is also why they're flooding American with cheap goods.  China's long term goal is to make the whole world a suzerainty.  If you think about it,  Americans are dependent on cheap goods making up for their lack of good wage, we're all kinda vassals of the Chinese state; we pay tribute, we get stuff, and they're doing this kind of thing all over the world.

Sigh.

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 320x240]
Tribune doesn't work that way!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tributary_state

Relevant part:

Historically, the Emperor of China saw himself as the emperor of the entire civilized world. It was not possible for such an emperor to have equal diplomatic relations with any other power, and so all diplomatic relations in the region were construed by the Chinese as tributary. The disdain of the state ideology of Confucianism for trade, and the conceit that Chinese civilization had no need of products or technology from outside meant that trade, when it was permitted, was also construed as tributary. Diplomatic missions and trading parties from non-Chinese regions were interpreted in Chinese records as being tributary, regardless of the intention of those regions. Under this construction, the goods received by China constituted a tributary offering, while those that the visitors received were interpreted as gifts that the emperor in his kindness had bestowed upon his distant tributaries
 
2013-05-27 11:50:12 AM

TalenLee: Radak: Doesn't China already have dozens of citys that are virtual ghost towns?  Why not populate them first?

A few theories, one of which is that there's plans to sell the cities to corporations as a sort of wage-slave city but less horrible. Also another possibility is that these cities are there to absorb North Korea when it fails and China goes in to pick up the pieces. Another possibility is that China just genuinely wants to diminish its population density, so they're planning on major relocations or incentive programs for the next generation to fill them.

Also, a not-immaterial possibility is that they built those cities to have something to build, to serve as economic stimulus. Given their economy has been growing non-stop for the past forty years, I wouldn't say it's failed.


It's imperialism plain and simple.
 
2013-05-27 11:55:44 AM

DarnoKonrad: Bad_Seed: DarnoKonrad: David Gaeber talked about this in his book, Debt, the first 5000 years.  The Chinese have always shown power by tribute.  Which is also why they're flooding American with cheap goods.  China's long term goal is to make the whole world a suzerainty.  If you think about it,  Americans are dependent on cheap goods making up for their lack of good wage, we're all kinda vassals of the Chinese state; we pay tribute, we get stuff, and they're doing this kind of thing all over the world.

Sigh.

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 320x240]
Tribune doesn't work that way!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tributary_state

Relevant part:

Historically, the Emperor of China saw himself as the emperor of the entire civilized world. It was not possible for such an emperor to have equal diplomatic relations with any other power, and so all diplomatic relations in the region were construed by the Chinese as tributary. The disdain of the state ideology of Confucianism for trade, and the conceit that Chinese civilization had no need of products or technology from outside meant that trade, when it was permitted, was also construed as tributary. Diplomatic missions and trading parties from non-Chinese regions were interpreted in Chinese records as being tributary, regardless of the intention of those regions. Under this construction, the goods received by China constituted a tributary offering, while those that the visitors received were interpreted as gifts that the emperor in his kindness had bestowed upon his distant tributaries


Yeah, last time I checked, China doesn't have an emperor. Despite what a bunch of confused Confucians might have thought hundereds of years ago, trading real goods for paper is not tribune. What you're pointing to is the deluded hubris of old Chinese civilization. The fact that China essentially disintegrated throughout the 19th and 20th centuries goes to show how wide off the mark they where. The Chinese these days are a not quite so deluded.
 
2013-05-27 12:01:08 PM

TalenLee: Radak: Doesn't China already have dozens of citys that are virtual ghost towns?  Why not populate them first?

A few theories, one of which is that there's plans to sell the cities to corporations as a sort of wage-slave city but less horrible. Also another possibility is that these cities are there to absorb North Korea when it fails and China goes in to pick up the pieces. Another possibility is that China just genuinely wants to diminish its population density, so they're planning on major relocations or incentive programs for the next generation to fill them.

Also, a not-immaterial possibility is that they built those cities to have something to build, to serve as economic stimulus. Given their economy has been growing non-stop for the past forty years, I wouldn't say it's failed.


They aren't as organized as you think they are.

Those ghost towns are what happens when local mayors & party bosses go on kicks to increase their prestige or dump $$ in the hands of their cronies.
 
2013-05-27 12:10:14 PM

Bad_Seed: Yeah, last time I checked, China doesn't have an emperor. Despite what a bunch of confused Confucians might have thought hundereds of years ago, trading real goods for paper is not tribune. What you're pointing to is the deluded hubris of old Chinese civilization. The fact that China essentially disintegrated throughout the 19th and 20th centuries goes to show how wide off the mark they where. The Chinese these days are a not quite so deluded.


Irrelevant.  The Chinese culture has a particular way of looking at the world, which is why they're so eager to fill up your house with cheap televisions and build roads in Africa -- just like they used to export silks and porcelain for the relatively worthless silver and gold which had nothing to do with their paper money system.  Today it's just USD and treasury bonds.  They want global respect, and they do it by making people dependent on them.
 
2013-05-27 12:11:56 PM
www.dvdspring.com
 
2013-05-27 12:13:50 PM
I guarantee the words "special economic status" is in the agreement somewhere.

CS,B:

China nearly bought the nation of Laos for a few million in bribes. The ruling party of Laos agreed to a deal where China would build the nation a high-speed rail system.

First off, Laos has zero need for such a thing. The economics of it are absurd, and the geography even more so. Of course, the deal was that all the work would go to Chinese companies as well. So Laos gets bupkis.

Standard enough imperialistic technique. But here's where it becomes Bond Villain:

*WHETHER OR NOT THE RAIL GOT BUILT* China would get a "preferred economic zone" 14km on either side of the proposed route with special tax and visa status for Chinese nationals.

In other words, millions of chinese businesses and people could move into this strip zig-zagging through a poor agrarian nation that connected all it's cities and ran from China to Cambodia. Laos as an independent country wouldn't stand a chance.

The Laotian people found out about it, and it became a Big Deal... Evidently they stripped or watered down the "preferred economic zone" clause, but they're still looking to build the rail.

It's scary to think how close China came to swallowing them whole without firing a shot.

Something Belarus may want to consider. If I had to guess, China wants leverage within the EU.
 
2013-05-27 12:23:46 PM

Makh: Maybe they could do that here.  Just a thought.


Or we could just repair and upgrade our existing cities.  Plenty of crumbling bridges and needed public transit.
 
2013-05-27 12:23:54 PM

lilplatinum: TalenLee: Also, a not-immaterial possibility is that they built those cities to have something to build, to serve as economic stimulus. Given their economy has been growing non-stop for the past forty years, I wouldn't say it's failed.

This is the real reason, they move people from the country, put them in urban housing, build huge buildings, subsidize some farmer families housing and have tons of empty space.

My folks have lived in a couple apartments in Shanghai and, while fairly nice, none were beyond 30% capacity.    The make work projects are going to be great until the whole house of farking cards collapses (along with any number of hastily made buildings).

People who fear China as a hugely threatening new hyperpower in the future have obviously never been to China.


How many centuries over the last 4000 years hasn't China been a hugely threatening hyperpower?  You also seem to be forgetting all the make work project in the depression and just how many things (mostly rail bridges) that collapsed in the 19th century, both critical times in the US becoming a hugely threatening hyperpower.

That said, there are a few things that limit growth:
1.  Corruption.  If you can make more by ripping off the other guy (whether by shoddy production or Bane-style vulturism) you will hit limits much sooner than otherwise.  Everything I've heard about China's capitalism seems that they learned it from communist propaganda.
2.  IP strangulation.  Newton said he launched physics by standing on the shoulders of giants.  US IP laws are designed to make sure nobody grows taller than existing giants.  China's companies can largely ignore this, but it means that you have to profit from whatever you come up with much faster (since the other guy is going to copy you quickly).  Can't say which will work best in the end, but both are obviously flawed.
 
2013-05-27 12:33:37 PM

maxheck: I guarantee the words "special economic status" is in the agreement somewhere.

CS,B:

China nearly bought the nation of Laos for a few million in bribes. The ruling party of Laos agreed to a deal where China would build the nation a high-speed rail system.

First off, Laos has zero need for such a thing. The economics of it are absurd, and the geography even more so. Of course, the deal was that all the work would go to Chinese companies as well. So Laos gets bupkis.

Standard enough imperialistic technique. But here's where it becomes Bond Villain:

*WHETHER OR NOT THE RAIL GOT BUILT* China would get a "preferred economic zone" 14km on either side of the proposed route with special tax and visa status for Chinese nationals.

In other words, millions of chinese businesses and people could move into this strip zig-zagging through a poor agrarian nation that connected all it's cities and ran from China to Cambodia. Laos as an independent country wouldn't stand a chance.

The Laotian people found out about it, and it became a Big Deal... Evidently they stripped or watered down the "preferred economic zone" clause, but they're still looking to build the rail.

It's scary to think how close China came to swallowing them whole without firing a shot.

Something Belarus may want to consider. If I had to guess, China wants leverage within the EU.



It's something for us all to consider.  The U.S. economy is dependent on cheap imports to make up for a declining real wage.  Without those imports things go haywire very quickly.   Americans think debt is what the Chinese value, but that's just a cognitive bias on the part of westerners.  The Chinese have no use for treasury bonds or USD, they can manipulate the Yuan do whatever they please -- much to the consternation of freemarket neoliberals who don't share their worldview.  What they really value is subsidizing people's income with consumer goods.  It's a kind of global social welfare program to make people vassals of the Chinese state.
 
2013-05-27 12:34:19 PM

yet_another_wumpus: How many centuries over the last 4000 years hasn't China been a hugely threatening hyperpower?


Hyperpower in a global sense?  Never.   There have only really been 2, the British Empire and America after the fall of the Soviet Union until some indeterminate time but probably the 90s.  There have been other superpower empires throughout history, but none had truly global spheres of influence until then.

You also seem to be forgetting all the make work project in the depression and just how many things (mostly rail bridges) that collapsed in the 19th century, both critical times in the US becoming a hugely threatening hyperpower.

The depression make work projects had two differences, one is that they were actually projects of things we needed - infrastructure.  Two, is that they were not meant to be permanent engines of growth.   China keeps building half empty farking buildings, you can't just keep doing that to keep your economy growing perpetually.   When the other pillar of your economy is generating cheap crap and that takes a big hit when the western countries have economic crises like we do now, then you have some fundamental problems.

That said, there are a few things that limit growth:
1.  Corruption.  If you can make more by ripping off the other guy (whether by shoddy production or Bane-style vulturism) you will hit limits much sooner than otherwise.  Everything I've heard about China's capitalism seems that they learned it from communist propaganda.
2.  IP strangulation.  Newton said he launched physics by standing on the shoulders of giants.  US IP laws are designed to make sure nobody grows taller than existing giants.  China's companies can largely ignore this, but it means that you have to profit from whatever you come up with much faster (since the other guy is going to copy you quickly).  Can't say which will work best in the end, but both are obviously flawed.


Also both things that aren't going to help.

China is still pretty farked up and have a long way to play catchup.
 
2013-05-27 12:42:32 PM

lilplatinum: Hyperpower in a global sense? Never. There have only really been 2, the British Empire and America after the fall of the Soviet Union until some indeterminate time but probably the 90s. There have been other superpower empires throughout history, but none had truly global spheres of influence until then.


China was sucking so much gold and silver out of Europe there were widespread currency shortages for decades on end.  They practically ran the fortunes of Europe for a few hundred years, with whole governments toppling due to debts owned ultimately to China.  If you don't think China was a hyperpower, you just don't know your history.  They did it better and longer than anyone.  The British Empire, America, and the Soviet Union (which was never a global power, they just had some nukes and western paranoia to play with) are blips in a much longer narrative.
 
2013-05-27 12:45:11 PM

DarnoKonrad: Bad_Seed: Yeah, last time I checked, China doesn't have an emperor. Despite what a bunch of confused Confucians might have thought hundereds of years ago, trading real goods for paper is not tribune. What you're pointing to is the deluded hubris of old Chinese civilization. The fact that China essentially disintegrated throughout the 19th and 20th centuries goes to show how wide off the mark they where. The Chinese these days are a not quite so deluded.

Irrelevant.  The Chinese culture has a particular way of looking at the world, which is why they're so eager to fill up your house with cheap televisions and build roads in Africa -- just like they used to export silks and porcelain for the relatively worthless silver and gold which had nothing to do with their paper money system.  Today it's just USD and treasury bonds.  They want global respect, and they do it by making people dependent on them.


That is one of the stupidest theories I've ever heard. And lest face it, it's a bit racist. These insusceptible orientals and their mysterious ways, they don't think like us, they've always been different. It's also a bit wrong. Silver was never worthless, the period during which China had a stable, non-metal backed paper currency system was relatively brief and didn't coincide with the rise of European trade.

Plenty of countries, in Asia and elsewhere used the export-led route to economic growth. But when China does it, all of a sudden it's because they want to turn the whole world into a tribune state (they're different you see!).

It's a mistake to think that the people of the most populous country in the world have or have ever had a unified outlook. What the madarins locked up in the Forbidden City believed might not be the same thing that the people in the street and the countryside believed. And to drive the point home, they've had two civil wars, two revolutions a sprinkling of smaller rebellions and a concerted, deliberate attempt to destroy "old thought" within the space of just over a hundred years.  But, hey. I'm sure this can be all swept aside and all of the country's complex economic decisions can be explained by appealing to a stereotyped idea of what the emperor used to think.
 
2013-05-27 12:50:15 PM

Bad_Seed: DarnoKonrad: Bad_Seed: Yeah, last time I checked, China doesn't have an emperor. Despite what a bunch of confused Confucians might have thought hundereds of years ago, trading real goods for paper is not tribune. What you're pointing to is the deluded hubris of old Chinese civilization. The fact that China essentially disintegrated throughout the 19th and 20th centuries goes to show how wide off the mark they where. The Chinese these days are a not quite so deluded.

Irrelevant.  The Chinese culture has a particular way of looking at the world, which is why they're so eager to fill up your house with cheap televisions and build roads in Africa -- just like they used to export silks and porcelain for the relatively worthless silver and gold which had nothing to do with their paper money system.  Today it's just USD and treasury bonds.  They want global respect, and they do it by making people dependent on them.

That is one of the stupidest theories I've ever heard. And lest face it, it's a bit racist. These insusceptible orientals and their mysterious ways, they don't think like us, they've always been different. It's also a bit wrong. Silver was never worthless, the period during which China had a stable, non-metal backed paper currency system was relatively brief and didn't coincide with the rise of European trade.

Plenty of countries, in Asia and elsewhere used the export-led route to economic growth. But when China does it, all of a sudden it's because they want to turn the whole world into a tribune state (they're different you see!).

It's a mistake to think that the people of the most populous country in the world have or have ever had a unified outlook. What the madarins locked up in the Forbidden City believed might not be the same thing that the people in the street and the countryside believed. And to drive the point home, they've had two civil wars, two revolutions a sprinkling of smaller rebellions and a concerted, deliberate attempt to destroy "old th ...



Dude, first you claimed tribute didn't work that way, when I showed it did,  you deflected with some nonsense about how there's no emperor anymore.  You don't know what you're talking about.  I'm not going to waste my time arguing with pure ignorance.
 
2013-05-27 12:57:06 PM
China is playing the long game by using their positive trade surplus to invest in more trade.  Building an economic superpower is self-reinforcing.

When playing my strategy games, I always invest heavily in resources and infrastructure because that is the way to win the end game.  Economic dominance leads to diplomatic and military hegemony.

/Why yes!  Strategy games have made me an expert in geo-politics.
//I am available for hire by any think tanks out there.  High scores available on request.
 
2013-05-27 01:09:12 PM

DarnoKonrad: Dude, first you claimed tribute didn't work that way, when I showed it did, you deflected with some nonsense about how there's no emperor anymore. You don't know what you're talking about. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with pure ignorance.


Tribune doesn't work that way. Tribune is not export. Your entire argument is based around the fact that the emperor and his advisers conceived it as such. I pointed out that: 1. The emperor was wrong. There is an objective standard of what tribune is and the current Chinese economy is not it. and 2. You cannot interpret the decisions of the current Chinese leadership and businessmen in the light of what some Chinese people thought hundreds of years ago. Especially since that system was overthrown, discredited and smashed to pieces.

You're wrong and your theory is stupid.

As for this:

DarnoKonrad: China was sucking so much gold and silver out of Europe there were widespread currency shortages for decades on end. They practically ran the fortunes of Europe for a few hundred years, with whole governments toppling due to debts owned ultimately to China.


I'll be more polite and simply say [citation needed].
 
2013-05-27 01:56:39 PM

Bad_Seed: DarnoKonrad: Dude, first you claimed tribute didn't work that way, when I showed it did, you deflected with some nonsense about how there's no emperor anymore. You don't know what you're talking about. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with pure ignorance.

Tribune doesn't work that way. Tribune is not export. Your entire argument is based around the fact that the emperor and his advisers conceived it as such. I pointed out that: 1. The emperor was wrong. There is an objective standard of what tribune is and the current Chinese economy is not it. and 2. You cannot interpret the decisions of the current Chinese leadership and businessmen in the light of what some Chinese people thought hundreds of years ago. Especially since that system was overthrown, discredited and smashed to pieces.

You're wrong and your theory is stupid.

As for this:

DarnoKonrad: China was sucking so much gold and silver out of Europe there were widespread currency shortages for decades on end. They practically ran the fortunes of Europe for a few hundred years, with whole governments toppling due to debts owned ultimately to China.

I'll be more polite and simply say [citation needed].


You're right, but when you continuously refer to it as "tribune" it really undermines your credibility.
 
2013-05-27 04:14:00 PM
Well, you made a trade-related journey from Beijing to Minsk...
 
2013-05-27 05:20:11 PM

miss diminutive: The "modern city on the Eurasian continent," as it's called in marketing documents, will be built around the M1 highway that links Moscow and Berlin via Belarus and Poland. A speed-rail network will tie the airport to the center of the city

Do you know who else built large manufacturing centers along railway lines in Eastern Europe?


Stalin?
 
2013-05-27 05:33:45 PM

FrancoFile: kimwim: I don't think this is going to end well.

No kidding.

Belarus is the most backwards place I could think of to build a manufacturing complex.  I'd rather be in Siberia than Belarus.


they had a huge, really huge, tractor plant when i was there in 1990. but that was before the collapse and it hasn't fared all that well. the city of Minsk was one part semi new after the great patriotic war but it just looks like shiat. and one part old where there is no running water in the houses but they have the cutest gardens, which of course they needed since food distribution sucked. the apartment complexes have grocery stores on the ground floor and i have never seen such horrible looking food ever. (ok i'd only been in Mexico besides the US before then) (but still, man was i glad i could eat in the tourist hotel)
 
2013-05-27 07:42:08 PM
raerae1980:
Bridge comes to San Francisco with a Made-In-China label:    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html?pagew a nted=all&_r=0

Eh, it's San Francisco. Chinese would be building it even if it were the locals.
 
2013-05-28 09:55:21 AM
Much more detailed analysis of the surrounding China-Belarus relationship and the strategy behind the city:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-05-26/china-building-beachhead - i n-europe-with-5-billion-belarus-city
 
2013-05-28 11:38:13 AM

DarnoKonrad: China was sucking so much gold and silver out of Europe there were widespread currency shortages for decades on end.  They practically ran the fortunes of Europe for a few hundred years, with whole governments toppling due to debts owned ultimately to China.  If you don't think China was a hyperpower, you just don't know your history.  They did it better and longer than anyone.  The British Empire, America, and the Soviet Union (which was never a global power, they just had some nukes and western paranoia to play with) are blips in a much longer narrative.


I never claimed the Soviet Union was a hyperpower - the only two hyperpowers in the world history were the British empires and maybe us for a decade, thats it.   The Chinese never had a direct global hegemony - fact.  The fact that you read one book where a guy said otherwise doesn't make it true.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report