11–20 of 38 posts
Sounds like the US oil industry. Many wells that should be shut down as uneconomical at current oil prices are still producing. This is to service an estimated $150 billion in loans from banks and hedge funds.
One significant way where a free market economy has an advantage in efficient resource allocation over a planned economy is not the priority allocation of resources to successful enterprises/groups/economic niches (both styles can do that), but a rapid, ruthless deallocation of resources from unsuccessful enterprises, so they can then be used elsewhere. Planned economies could do that in theory, but this has always b…
How do you think is planned economy unable to direct this effect? Maybe random faults even out arbitrary bias that would be introduced by regulation. How is a government spending tons on military not partially a planned economy?
One significant way where a free market economy has an advantage in efficient resource allocation over a planned economy is not the priority allocation of resources to successful enterprises/groups/economic niches (both styles can do that), but a rapid, ruthless deallocation of resources from unsuccessful enterprises, so they can then be used elsewhere. Planned economies could do that in theory, but this has always b…
How do you think is planned economy unable to direct this effect? Maybe random faults even out arbitrary bias that would be introduced by regulation. How is a government spending tons on military not partially a planned economy?
For examples in planned economies, USSR had a lot of examples, and this article is another. For examples in otherwise-freemarket-but-not-in-this-case economies, see "too big to fail" situation with bank bailouts, and your own example on USA military industrial complex - where failed projects get propped up instead of allowing them to die as they should, thus in the end harming the long-run perspective in the whole sector.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that the person above wrote in English and is on this site means they are likely an expat/ABC. Thus your accusation that they get all their news from xinhua is a laughable ad hominid.
It's evening in China right now, I assume everyone in the USA is still asleep. Why would parent not be in china, there are plenty of Chinese in China who speak English well enough, I work with them. Of course, the poster could be in Europe, but what does it matter? Compare say china daily (an English version of xinhua mostly) to NYT, and you'll see a vast difference on bias and reporting standards, where NYT is vastl…
"I'm physically in China and I find that the NYT reports on China often don't match the reality that I see." "Shut up xinhua shill"
Comparing the quality of xinhua and NYT is completely tangential to the point I was trying to make. I'm not saying we can't or shouldn't have a serious discussion about China. I am saying that such a conversation is not happening here. I expect better than this HN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that the person above wrote in English and is on this site means they are likely an expat/ABC. Thus your accusation that they get all their news from xinhua is a laughable ad hominid.
>>The fact that the person above wrote in English and is on this site means they are likely an expat/ABC. That's one possibility. They can also be a Chinese national who is fluent in English. I don't know if you're aware but there are many such people.
I stand by my speculation, but it is not central to the point I was trying to make. The point I was trying to make is "Let's not dismiss every pro China comment as CPC shilling".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>The fact that the person above wrote in English and is on this site means they are likely an expat/ABC. That's one possibility. They can also be a Chinese national who is fluent in English. I don't know if you're aware but there are many such people.
seanmc accused contigenics of "only getting their news from xinhua". This is on intellectual par with responding to a slightly liberal argument by saying "stop watching fox news". I merely speculated on contigenics nationality to point out the that he/she likely does not only watch xinhua. I stand by my speculation, but it is not central to the point I was trying to make. The point I was trying to make is "Let's not…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's evening in China right now, I assume everyone in the USA is still asleep. Why would parent not be in china, there are plenty of Chinese in China who speak English well enough, I work with them. Of course, the poster could be in Europe, but what does it matter? Compare say china daily (an English version of xinhua mostly) to NYT, and you'll see a vast difference on bias and reporting standards, where NYT is vastl…
Here's a quick (terse) summary of what happened up-thread: "I'm physically in China and I find that the NYT reports on China often don't match the reality that I see." "Shut up xinhua shill" Comparing the quality of xinhua and NYT is completely tangential to the point I was trying to make. I'm not saying we can't or shouldn't have a serious discussion about China. I am saying that such a conversation is not happening…
One significant way where a free market economy has an advantage in efficient resource allocation over a planned economy is not the priority allocation of resources to successful enterprises/groups/economic niches (both styles can do that), but a rapid, ruthless deallocation of resources from unsuccessful enterprises, so they can then be used elsewhere. Planned economies could do that in theory, but this has always b…
How do you think is planned economy unable to direct this effect? Maybe random faults even out arbitrary bias that would be introduced by regulation. How is a government spending tons on military not partially a planned economy?
Look at a large corporation like IBM some floundering business units persist for decades because of the internal political cost of ending them when economically it is the prudent thing to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
seanmc accused contigenics of "only getting their news from xinhua". This is on intellectual par with responding to a slightly liberal argument by saying "stop watching fox news". I merely speculated on contigenics nationality to point out the that he/she likely does not only watch xinhua. I stand by my speculation, but it is not central to the point I was trying to make. The point I was trying to make is "Let's not…
It is obvious that contigenics is in China, they admitted that in their post; you were only calling out nationality, but that isn't even relevant. If they don't have a VPN, like I don't, where else are they getting news from? NYT is blocked, WSJ is blocked, BBC is blocked. You don't have to tell me to "stop reading NYT" because I can't! So your whole argument makes an assumption that is not even technically correct.…
"Wow, yet another anti-China article from NYT. I can't get over the volume and frequency. Things look pretty good on the ground here!"
No one said anything about the availability of news sources. Contigenics simply pointed out that the article in discussion is incongruous with what you are likely to see on the ground in China. He/she further points out that NYT seems to publish a disproportionate number of negative stories on China (which may also be of dubious veracity). Therefore it is worth entertaining the possibility that the NYT might be full of shit. This possibility is independent of whatever qualm you wish to raise with regards to CPC journalism policy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that the person above wrote in English and is on this site means they are likely an expat/ABC. Thus your accusation that they get all their news from xinhua is a laughable ad hominid.
It's evening in China right now, I assume everyone in the USA is still asleep. Why would parent not be in china, there are plenty of Chinese in China who speak English well enough, I work with them. Of course, the poster could be in Europe, but what does it matter? Compare say china daily (an English version of xinhua mostly) to NYT, and you'll see a vast difference on bias and reporting standards, where NYT is vastl…