Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
As for the rest MAGONSDAUGHTER, smarter people than I will have to suggest adopting different ways of doing things based on other countries. I am not against it, but I am also not versed enough on the intricacies of the way other countries do things. Best I do not preach to extensively and suggest we emulate them, as too many here are fond of doing. I know of many things in this country that are not as they seem when seen through the eyes of someone from elsewhere. I don’t know where you are from but I know here. I have enough background learned from life’s experiences and though our education system to make sound judgments on the goings-on in this country, and what would go a long way to fixing our ills.

Just my opinions of course. But they are sound.

si shen

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
As for the rest MAGONSDAUGHTER, smarter people than I will have to suggest adopting different ways of doing things based on other countries. I am not against it, but I am also not versed enough on the intricacies of the way other countries do things. Best I do not preach to extensively and suggest we emulate them, as too many here are fond of doing. I know of many things in this country that are not as they seem when seen through the eyes of someone from elsewhere. I don’t know where you are from but I know here. I have enough background learned from life’s experiences and though our education system to make sound judgments on the goings-on in this country, and what would go a long way to fixing our ills.

Just my opinions of course. But they are sound.

si shen

---

I was giving examples of what other countries do to demonstrate different models exist that are not 'communist' as you claimed in one of your contradicting posts.

Sometimes simply understanding that things can be done differently without 'tyranny' being fasttracked in to your lives, means that you might consider different ways of doing things.

Over the years I've had many frustrating conversations with Americans about how x y and z can't be done without a country turning into North Korea. It's like the rest of the world doesnt exist.

Or it exists like this

---

Quote:

---

Keep in mind when you think America you are thinking the world.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I can't follow your views, probably because they get lost in your snarks. So one minute you are having a go about being communist in response to a post and the next you are agreeing.

Quote:

---

Keep in mind when you think America you are thinking the world.

---

No, that was the point of the map. You are NOT the sum of the world, no matter how many languages are spoken there, which BTW, is not a unique feature of the US.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Why would you be surprised by my assuming you meant some form of communism when you suggested we look at how other countries operate? I just spent the last two days arguing with two about that very topic? Let it go.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Keep in mind when you think America you are thinking the world. We have 83 different languages spoken in our school system just in the small city I am from.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I've always been in favour of governments being able to own resources and utilities. There is no reason why governments shouldn't make a profit and redestribute that as infrastructure spending. That means for resource rich countries that funding for education, healthcare, care of the elderly could be pretty much funded by resource profit and that individual taxpayers would not have to bear such a burden, plus you don't have to rely on user pays systems.

---

Quote:

---

…My response
You can accomplish the same thing by ending corporate welfare and expanding the tax base once again.

---

Quote:

---

…You

Yeah, you can accomplish it in a number of ways, but having control over natural resources and being able to reap the profit from natural resources as a people is a good idea.

---

Quote:

---

…Me
No it's not. It's called communism.

---

Quote:

---

…You
Strange, I've actually never made suggestions for what your country should do, just point out some alternatives to pure capitalism. If anything, I'm thinking about these changes for my country. However, in order to implement any of the suggestions regarding education, investing tax on natural resources, government ownership of utilities, we'll possibly have to wait until Rupert Murdoch is dead and the dominant paradigm around thses issues shifts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Strange, I've actually never made suggestions for what your country should do, just point out some alternatives to pure capitalism. If anything, I'm thinking about these changes for my country. However, in order to implement any of the suggestions regarding education, investing tax on natural resources, government ownership of utilities, we'll possibly have to wait until Rupert Murdoch is dead and the dominant paradigm around thses issues shifts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Once again our resident troll sock puppet, when presented with the analysis of a world-class economist, posted nothing of intelligence or even mild interest in response, and posted absolutely nothing to substantiate the mental diarrhea it tries to pretend is discussion. I really do wonder what passes for a brain in it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Why look at China and India 1kiki when they are both playing catch up with us. When both had to abandon what they were doing and adapt our approach to business. You should remember that both did the same thing in attracting business. They gave state assisted Education to many of its citizens while we have to incur large debts to educate ourselves, thus our need to demand higher wages. That along with state assisted medical which is a big burden to business in this country. Other than that it is us that built up their countries by moving our jobs there.

---

Quote:

---

....1kiki

The biggest point you are apparently unable to take away from the story is that “Quality of Life: India vs. China” is that what’s behind improving conditions in both countries is their enhanced practice of capitalism.

---

Because it is a distraction from the point and wants to suggest that we should think more like the Chinese and or India because they are becoming more successful and or have better philosophies. Ignoring the fact that they are climbing out of the gutter by riding on our backs, along with Europe. They are doing well because much of our economy (jobs)shifted to those countries. (cheep labor)

When Thomas Freedman asked some India officials what is the United States supposed to do with all it's jobs migrating to India? They responded by saying the United States should do what it always does. Create the jobs of the future.



si shen

---

Thanks for the link 1kiki. Another reminder of how dim witted you are.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

And Capitalism isn't foolish. It's a shrewd system for the maintenance of a class of people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
So why do we trust our lives to this stupid and foolish human system?

---

What? Why do you think? Because RICH FOLK.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Best system there is, so this thread is stupid and foolish.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

I prefered the sidebars where possibilities were explored.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
No, you missed the point:

ELECTRICAL GENERATION IS OWNED BY THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. Not "some", or "most", but ALL. Petroleum purchase and refining, and petrochemicals. Banking. Transportation. The state-owned enterprises (SOEs) comprise the backbone of strategic, heavy, large industry, and when you add provincial and city ownerships, it rises even more. Furthermore, China seems to be reversing course on its liberalization policies

Quote:

---

A new shorthand has entered common parlance: guojin mintui, meaning the state [sector] advances and the private retreats. It seems to suggest that the state sector's share of the economy is growing, which it is not; non-state businesses are in fact prospering. But the government has been muscling in on business in a variety of ways. It has been tightening its grip on some industries it considers “strategic”, from oil and coal to telecommunications and transport equipment. It has been devising market-access rules that favour state firms. And to the chagrin of private businesses, it has allowed state companies to remain active in a surprising range of palpably non-strategic sectors, from textiles and papermaking to catering. In recent years property development has become a lucrative sideline for government businesses. “The tentacles of state-owned enterprises extend into every nook where profit can be made,” writes Zheng Yongnian of the National University of Singapore.

Of 42 mainland Chinese companies in the Fortune 500 list of the world's biggest firms in 2010, all but three were owned by the government. Carl Walter, a Beijing-based investment banker, said in a recent book that getting as many companies as possible into that select group was a matter of deliberate policy. China's own list of the 500 biggest Chinese companies spans 75 industries. In 29 of these not a single private firm makes the grade and in ten others they play only a minor part.

---

http://www.economist.com/node/18832034

Is it capitalist economy?

---