261–270 of 270 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not between, but making it more difficult for Russia to safely send troops into the Donbas region. Based on the way you write it seems you think this is problematic. Do you?
I don't understand your question? I was addressing a strawman. That is all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, but foreign business expertise and technology uses goes hand in hand with foreign investment (otherwise, why bother?). So China isn't going to get the former, if they don't make the later easier. Ease of capital flow is one reason why Singapore has done so well (among many reasons). You can turn Singapore dollars into whatever currency you want, in whatever quantities and move it out of the country with no barr…
>why bother? For example because your production capacity in China will produce your stuff for cheap and you will be able to sell this stuff with a good markup? You will not be able to easily sell the production capacity and move the resulting capital outside of China as you would in the US or EU, but as long as it operates it will generate you profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buy crypto in China, sell it abroad. At least that was one approach. Note if you do it fairly quickly it doesn't matter what the value of the crypto is, just the liquidity. Another way is 'business' investments in other SE Asian countries, that then get liquidated and moved further abroad. China does a lot of business with S. Korea for example. If you have an export company, and China exports a lot, you can hold a po…
> Buy crypto in China, sell it abroad. I heard this many times and I can’t figure out how it works. Crypto is sortof banned in China for a while for this reason and yet it’s still a route to take money out of China. But how? Who is going to give you crypto for yen in China?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that in turn might cause them to start a war... Because when the regime has nothing to lose all bets are off, even though it makes no sense whatsoever. They will have to distract from their culpability somehow.
I really wish we wouldn't speculate about China starting a war. It's completely baseless and comes across as some sort of china-man-bad xenophobia.
It's my opinion there are generally 4 kinds of Chinese UHNWIs: 1. Mainland with no interest in foreign investment 2. Mainland mostly with some foreign investments 3. Split between mainland and foreign 4. Trying to move mostly foreign while keeping some in mainland (generally to take care of family or business concerns back home) In the US as a more stable asset haven, hot real estate markets are usually where large p…
I mean technically people can’t own land in China, they’re just leasing it from the government. This assumption has been baked into real estate prices but people bid it up anyways.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a fair chance of that happening. But: The cult of the individual leader has always been a strong component in China historically. So it wouldn't be a new thing, more a regression to the norm.
It's been a strong component the world over. Even in the US we've got exemplars such as George Washington, FDR, and the Adams and Bush dynasties. Democracies as political-individual-leader absent as Switzerland are the exception, not the rule. And the less so for other forms of government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rich Chinese are getting their money out of the country, because if their money is in China, they don't really own it. The CCP could take it any day and there would be nothing they could do about it. And then there is Western capital, used to rule of law and personal property. They don't see that reality as a realistic threat. So they keep pumping money into China. It will work. Until it doesn't. And then the CCP wil…
>because if their money is in China, they don't really own it The same can be said about money moved to the West, just with a different risk profile. As the Russian situation has shown, your property can be creatively taken away if your country of origin pisses off the US too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s the point of this distinction? Also where do you get this information from?
Isn't it obvious? Some people will care about an ability to move money offshore while others don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> technically people can’t own land in China, they’re just leasing it from the government So it works like land in the UK, which is all owned by the King of England, but which is "leased" from him?
That's... not how land in the UK works. Even the fraction of land which is owned by the Crown Estate and has tenants with fixed term contracts and obligations isn't administered by and doesn't send revenues to the King...
You are correct in what you said, but as I said, it works in China like it does in the UK (with of course some differences naturally). If you consider how the Crown Estate works in the UK, China works in a similar way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand your question? I was addressing a strawman. That is all.
I'm just pointing out that the way you phrase it makes it sound like: "[robbers has a legitimate concern that] with all these cops and all this cameras and security doors they can hardly pull off a heist any longer"