A communist country is projected to beat your shit stain capitalist country...

A communist country is projected to beat your shit stain capitalist country, yet you backwoods sister fucking hicks wail like banshees that communism doesn't work. Lol fucking retards.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady-state_economy
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Lol. China is capitalistic as fuck.

every single day OP chokes on massive, rude amounts of dicks he finds on craigslists no less than one butthole does his tongue touch per night and he parts his hair to the left on weekdays and parts it to the right on the weekend. That's right. OP is a weekender.

Apparently communism now means allowing megacorporations to run rampant throughout the country now.

China's interior cities and rural/semi-rural areas are still very backwards and communist. The port cities and Beijing have been granted special exemptions which make them very good places to engage in commerce and foreign trade.

Can someone explain to me in a reasonable way actually why we need this endless economic growth? Why is this the holy grail? Why can't we have new technology and a working society without economic growth? Is it due to the debt based monetary system?

>the irrelevant parts of the country are communist
tell me more

china is 100% fascist

Ok.. And? That doesn't make them communist. China is more capitalistic than india.

People are greedy user. The reason we have the quality of life we do today is because we were never satisfied with what we had, but always sought to make more comfortable lives for ourselves. It's just basic human psychology, if we weren't like that we would still be hunter gatherers.

China is basically national socialist at this point. They literally called their whole policy "socialism with chinese characteristics".

It's a conservative authoritarian capitalist state.

They will also be the first country to develop 200cm superstrenght chads with 145+ IQ with gene editing.

It sure as shit helps the bottom line when you have next to no rules or regulations to worry about, and the state sponsors whatever they want to actually happen by throwing tons of money at it.

That argument is utter shit, sorry. It must have to do with the economic system, not human psychology. Otherwise people wouldn't go apeshit when the economy isn't growing. You can have the progress you want without needing a larger economy.

>implying china is communist
>implying america is capitalist

We need to keep expanding until there is no natural force that can stop us, and that is assuming we are completely alone in the universe.

We are still in minute 1 of this grand RTS game we all play in. Our #1 priority is correctly growth because we are starting with nothing.

They instituted capitalistic policies around the 1990s dumbass, and they're not a communist country anymore but an oligarchy.

>Is it due to the debt based monetary system?
yes, which ironically cripples economic and technological advancement.

WTF I live in communism now

Go live there then.

shit bait, sage, get gulag'd commie faggot

Your graph represents the imaginings of a hand wringer. You should be embarrassed to have posted it as fact, you cross dressing better wearing fart sniffer

>Otherwise people wouldn't go apeshit when the economy isn't growing
If the population is growing but the economy isn't, then that means that there is gradually going to be less and less to go around, and it would mean that we're literally regressing as a society, which would be a very serious concern.

>You can have the progress you want without needing a larger economy.
Define "progress". Sure, you can still have new technologies come out, but they won't do as much good. What's the point of developing cell phone technology if no one can afford one?

>china
>communist

Yes but do they have freedom?

Better
>beret
Beret is a word. Why does my own IT insist on fucking me over?

>If the population is growing
are you kidding me? we have to import mexicans so that we can keep the population increasing.

>communist
LOOOOOOOOL

China is the only country the libs can say "that's not real communism" and be right, and yet the only one they don't

China hasn't been anything resembling communist since the 70s

China's economy is Keynesian, so of course a Keynesian invention like GDP would be highest for them.

>Can someone explain to me in a reasonable way actually why we need this endless economic growth? Why is this the holy grail? Why can't we have new technology and a working society without economic growth? Is it due to the debt based monetary system?
Economic growth is natural to an extent, but a lot of our growth is because there is a world wide bubble because of central banking. The natural state of growth would be growth in markets due to people leaving poverty.

>the irrelevant back water dirt poor areas are commie
>the wealthy areas that make up by far most of the economic growth, manufacturing and technological innovation are more economically free with the wealthiest and most succesful areas (Shenzen) being the most free

Must be a coincidence, OP said communism was good.

So correct me if I'm wrong: Due to the debt based system, total amount of interest that is needed to be paid increases. In order to pay that, the state has to have more income, which they can do by increasing taxes (which will create civil war at a certain point) or they can increase income due to the higher amount of taxes received from a growing economy?

Tldr: growing economy => more taxes for the guberment => able to pay interest => at some point, government needs to loan more money due to money being "destroyed" by paying interest => total interest increases => economic growth needed

???

>2003
>No Source
>Forget GDP projections dropped in 2008

>China
>Communist

FUCK OFF RUSSIAN FAGGOT

>and communist.

>In May 1929, the Sovnarkom issued a decree that formalised the notion of "kulak household" (кyлaцкoe хoзяйcтвo). >Any of the following defined a kulak:[3][12]
>use of hired labor
>ownership of a mill, a creamery (мacлoбoйня, butter-making rig), other processing equipment, or a complex machine with a mechanical motor
>systematic renting out of agricultural equipment or facilities
>involvement in trade, money-lending, commercial brokerage, or "other sources of non-labor income".
>By the last item, any peasant who sold his surplus goods on the market could be automatically classified as a kulak. In 1930 this list was extended to include those who were renting industrial plants, e.g., sawmills, or who rented land to other farmers. At the same time, the ispolkoms (executive committees of local Soviets) of republics, oblasts, and krais were given rights to add other criteria for defining kulaks, depending on local conditions.[3]

Dekulakization of China when?

>10x population
>1.3x GDP

lol

China is practically an ancap paradise

No, no it isn't.

>or they can increase income due to the higher amount of taxes received from a growing economy?
Artificially inflating income is inflation. Inflation is caused by manipulating money supply. It does not matter if you manipulate money supply through printing fake shit or forcing fake prices. Both lead to your money being worth less and that is a hidden tax.

China had been operated like an enteprise for years
Up until a few years ago, GDP data had been one of the biggest criterions by which the performance of regional gov officials were evaluated for a promotion/demotion

Not really. As soon as you start to do well the cpc goons swoop in to snatch their share.

Hong Kong comes pretty close, but not the rest of China.

In the 70s it became pretty clear that the country had failed to modernize. The current iteration of China's constitution, put in place in 1982, places less emphasis on class struggle and allowed for so called 'alliances' with non party groups which were considered to be beneficial to the development of the country. This allowed for the growth of investment and corporations, albeit under close watch of the Chinese government.
However, the Chinese restricted the growth of their new corporate allies into the interior of the country, because their whole purpose was to conduct foreign trade and the ports are the best place to conduct trade.
Take a look at historical road maps of China through the 20th century. The vast majority of new infrastructure projects have taken place in coastal, "commie-exempt" regions where construction companies are allowed to operate. The rural areas, however, have only made small stride in infrastructure development, and this is mostly because practically all of it has to be subsidized by the state.
Communism: don't try it, better red than dead.

This.

China is Keynesian economically and by western standards far-right socially.

>If the population is growing but the economy isn't

You have it the wrong way. We import people to make the economy grow. Due to increasing productivity, we could reduce our population while keeping the economy stable (no growth or decline). Yet, we always need more and more economic growth.

>that means that there is gradually going to be less and less to go around, and it would mean that we're literally regressing as a society
That is malthusian economy of the pre-industrial era. Due to the economic institutions in place, increasing population increases consumption, and thus, grows the economy (which is the basic idea behind importing people).

>What's the point of developing cell phone technology if no one can afford one?
Why wouldn't people suddenly no longer be able to afford new technology? Why would they suddenly become so poor?

why do I never see chinese flags on here? and when I do,the person almost always says they are a foreigner. Why is that?

goldman sachs

China is set to implode very soon. Ask the typical peasant wage slave laborer how happy they are...

i don't see any communist countries on that chart

Yeah. Let's have slave labor like China.
Who wants to sign up to live at a factory working everyday until you die or an hero?
>over 1 billion
>vs one quarter
Still close in terms of $$$.
Get rid of niggers are we stay #1.

Rare

very few chinese people have good english skills and most don't really have any excitement to interact with foreigners. also Sup Forums might require a vpn now and a lot of people don't bother with that. anyway you should be happy because chinese "netizens" are fucking annoying.

both systems fall to the same thorn of corruption... capitalism is more resilient to corruption than communism, look how many commie nations have come and gone in americas life span (and i havnt heard that fat lady for us yet either)

>increasing population increases consumption
It also increases the workforce, allowing (in fact, necessitating) more production. Which is the entire idea behind the economic growth in the first place, so I'm not sure why you oppose it.

>Why wouldn't people suddenly no longer be able to afford new technology?
Because you've stopped economic growth. Without economic growth you can't have new factories and businesses being created in response to new technology, which means that amazing new cell phone will never be capable of being mass produced and so only a select few will be able to buy it.

To post, you need to pass a kaptcha hosted by google and google is blocked in China
However if you buy Sup Forums pass it allows you to bypass the kaptcha

>increasing population increases consumption
Of course this theory only works if you import producers, or should I say smart people who are not poor. The West is not doing this. Importing poor dumb people means they are consumers of state resources. This artificially could increase GDP because the government will give them gibs so they can spend. Of course the government does not have the money so they borrow fake money, this of course reduces what your dollar is worth and prices continue to rise dramatically year after year. This is a huge tax on people. If you work hard and earn a good living, you are being fucked. Not only does your tax dollars go to gibs, you are again taxed out the ass through the hidden tax of inflation. The entire thing is a pyramid scheme and we, the producers, are not winning.

China is a modern day fascist state more and more every day. Fascism won, but white people abandoned it.

>yfw china hasnt been communist since the 70's
>yfw china is actually a facist technocracy
>yfw china is successful because its NOT communist

Hey antifag, do another post when China crumbles and 200 million people starve to death. That's not too far away, don't worry.

GDP per capita. Someone's never taken economics and so has never heard of convergence theory.

>china is a communist shithole with African levels of poverty for decades
>decides to try capitalism
>literal explosion of wealth
>hundreds of millions lifted out of poverty
>mfw people still try to claim it wasn't because of capatalism

...

>so I'm not sure why you oppose it.

I never opposed it, I wanted to understand why we actually need it in economic terms, with economic arguments.

>Without economic growth you can't have new factories and businesses being created in response to new technology
Of course you can. You can create new all that without economic growth, i.e. GDP stays constant.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady-state_economy
>A steady-state economy is not to be confused with economic stagnation: Whereas a steady-state economy is established as the result of deliberate political action, economic stagnation is the unexpected and unwelcome failure of a growth economy.

^ this

feels good to be right

>increasing population increases consumption
Also, if you want to increase GDP, you do not need to import producers, you can just increase your exports and imports. (((they))) do not want that though.

We don't. It's just that so many people have confused economic with technological growth that the two are synonymous in a lot of minds. But technology does what it will and the economy just reacts. Sometimes it adds jobs, sometimes it destroys them. The magical rule of always just coming up with new jobs is just speculation based on hope.

>You can create new all that without economic growth, i.e. GDP stays constant.
Not without getting rid of other businesses first. You'd have to decide what businesses needs to arbitrarily die so that people can enjoy their new cell phones. I don't see the point of that when we can just have both businesses and continue growing.

>Not without getting rid of other businesses first.

Of course, that was implied. Remove the unneeded/unwanted and replace it with new technology.

>I don't see the point of that when we can just have both businesses and continue growing.

You seem to misunderstand what I'm getting at in the end. In our economic model with the debt based monetary system, we NEED economic growth as the holy grail in order to keep using this system, otherwise everything will crash. If we would not have the debt based monetary system, we CAN have economic growth, but it is optional. Then, without economic growth, we would most likely stagnate but not collapse because there is no interest to be paid by the state, thus money is not destroyed in the economic system.

It's not about growth vs no growth, it's about "need" and "want". Right now, we need it due to the fact that we have created a retarded system which needs the scheme in order to sustain itself.

*communist sstate collapses*
WaSn'T rEaL cOmMuNiSm
*communist state evolves into a still fucked up and weird but still rather capitalist state that is actualy doing quite well*
ITS REEL COMMUNISM YOU GUISE

I'd rather have the US government unleash hell, release weaponized nanotech to cull and annihilate all, than ever living a second through your ideology.

STARVE CITYFAGS

>Remove the unneeded/unwanted
If they were unwanted they wouldn't be in business. The government would have to decide what the citizens don't need. For that new cell phone maybe a popular car company has to die. Maybe you could have a mass survey, or pull a lottery, or just trust the government officials to arbitrarily kill the right business.

>In our economic model with the debt based monetary system, we NEED economic growth as the holy grail in order to keep using this system, otherwise everything will crash
I don't deny that. The entire reason the system works is because you can loan someone money, then the economic growth they create allows both you and them to make money from the deal.

There would still be growth in a system that outlaws loans, it would just be slower.

Perhaps having a population of 1 billion people helps compared to the United States' 317 million?

There was nothing there in MainLand China 50 years ago. All the countries experiencing fast economic growth are doing so because primitive countries never figured out markets.

And all the China growth figures are lies and bullshit. China will implode in the next decade.

no shit it will. its over 1 billion people majority of which live in poverty.

god im so sick of you fucking idiots who are incapable of thinking critically

>country X is a shithole and has terrible GDP
>country X modernizes and their GDP rises to relatively low levels per capita
>total GDP is incredibly high because their population is incredibly high
>WESTERN COUNTRIES BTFO

nah faggot, they're still shitholes

strawman
we don't need endles economic growth

you only need economic growth until everyone is lifted out of poverty. then stability becomes more important

>The entire reason the system works is because you can loan someone money
That would also be possible in other systems. In ours, we create money out of thin air by lending money and creating inflation. "Loaning some money" and getting interest would also be possible without the debt-based monetary system and fractional reserve banking, thus not creating inflation. The state could still print money and inflate the currency, but they would no longer have to pay a interest because there is not debt to be paid.

>ok guis let's go to Sup Forums pol and make communism threads
>from communism discord

What is op?

it's not real communism though

Except china has a largely free-marcket economy. This is bait or op is a fucking retard to the 4th degree.

>In ours, we create money out of thin air by lending money and creating inflation
I do agree that we need to stop that and end the Federal Reserve.

this shit right here

>you only need economic growth until everyone is lifted out of poverty. then stability becomes more important

But then the state still has to pay interest, which destroys money in the system, deflates the currency. You can't get stability. You'd have to change the system itself... and the current system certainly isn't in place to lift everyone out of poverty.

China is more capitalistic than the usa you are a big twat.

...

>But then the state still has to pay interest
only if you have a state in debt

>Lol fucking retards.
Right-wing retards are dumb as fuck. They probably can't even point to China on a map.

Personally, I think we should all aspire to live like the Chinese do!

There was actually no reason for USA going into shitters compared to China. Or actually yeah there was a (((reason))). Chinese are blessed in such that they are not distracted by identity policies which have driven everyone on the edge in the west, so that we are all in survival mode already with difficulties making solid long-term plans and dreams of far future. You know, like African countries with multiple tribes fighting among each other. This survival mode has led to low time-preference in west.

We could have used EU and USA to take us to the stars and promote state-pioneering high-tech society, but now we are stuck over which race gets the gibs.

We have a debt based monetary system... you know what that means, right? In the current system, the state ALWAYS has debt.

/thread

China is a kelptocracy.

>We have a debt based monetary system
More accurately, we have a fractional reserve central banking system

>In the current system, the state ALWAYS has debt.
not necessarily true, but in practice sure

Hey Trumpfkins, I bet you wish you lived under Communism now!

>China
>Communist
Pick one

1st person to achieve ultra instinct was asian

It's from Hong Kong revenue and Hong Kong doesn't operate under much of the same commie rules

...