Just one reason we should all say, "**** the Chinese government"

John Oliver on Last Week Tonight did a really interesting report on how China's mismanagement over the 1 child policy is still persisting, since they didnt actually abandon the program and instead simply shifting to a 2 child policy, still preserving a lot of the inherent fuck ups from the first program that the government are now aware of and just going with it anyways. 

Chinas government could very well fuck the country back into third world status, similar to the dissolution of the USSR or the economic collapse of Venezuela, except on an even more fantastical scale 

Depends on how disposable 65+ aged Chinese are.

oooof

Isn't the purpise of a one/two child policy to ensure that the population doesn't get out of control?

Yes but there are about 30 to 35 different and much less asinine ways to manage population than child limitation policies 

Like what?

1 - Better education on the nature of having kids 

2 - Better education on how to use contraceptives

3 - Expanding the availability and access to contraceptives 

4 - Commercial broadcasts laying out reasons why to not have too many kids 

5 - Promoting foster care systems so people who want kids can adopt rather then make new ones 

6 - Provide information on the complications and stress that pregnancy can have on women 

7 - Family planning organizations that could help people realize if they are or are not in a financially stable situation to have additional children

8 - Promotions that tell people to focus more on career advancement then starting families

9 - Just illustrating the costs of child-rearing and how expensive it is to raise even a single child

10 - Subsidize operations that allow people to become physically unable to have more children such as vasectomy's 

That's just off the top of my head 

Yeah i dont respond to single posts featuring just a youtube link and nothing else

Make an actual argument otherwise im just going to spend my time elsewhere

It was a link supporting your argument but whatevs. Be pms.

you forget that they eat babies, do you believe any of that shit? are you serious its all right wing propaganda made up absurdities, show me some pictures show me some proof anyone can make shit up, i suport the ccp and sociaist china

For someone who calls themselves a hater of tyranny, for you to back China up is morally reprehensive and absurd all at once. China is what happens when corruption is simply embraced. They don't even deny it, they genuinely embrace how corrupt and oppressive they are over their people and their people respect it too. It's sad, pathetic and will eventually lead to its demise as is already happening in Hong Kong.

if you want an omelet you ned to crack some eggs study the history of china before the revolution china was a failed state opium addiction famine imperialists chewed off her here and there  it has ben a long march but in the past 40 years china has used a mixture of capitalism and Socialism to left 800 million people out of poverty .. no one had ever done anything about that.. you cant be "free' if you are starving and naked, the Chinese have made great progress  and and they are winning their war on islamic terrorism they had a few incidents 10 to 15 years ago and so they put the fear of god into the muzzies. how can you be free and happy with a bunch of rag heads runing around stabbing you and setting off bombs they chinese wont put up with that shit and i say? bravo

Do you know how they treated and treat the Muslims in their nations to achieve this 'win' you speak of?

yes i do i have no problem with what they did none at all we should do the same we interned the japanese in ww2 muslsim should be treated in the exact same fashion we are at war  war is not for the weak of heart https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeOtPVxGJFQ

Then tag Christen not me. He's the one asking for examples and evidence of why the child limitation policies are stupid

Sorry, I just thought a small clip explaining how a local Chinese government is allowed to drag a 7-month-old pregnant woman into a clinic against her will and inject her with labor-inducing drugs so that they can meet population restriction quotas...

i'm all for it, i consider islam like all regions reactionary, i dont believe in mercy i believe in the revolution like mao said this aint no party this aint no disco this aint no fucking around stalin did no wrong

If socialism works so well, then why did capitalist Hong Kong experience far greater economic growth than China, but without having to starve and kill over 20 million people?

fair comment marx always states revolution was to occur in an advance nation like usa germany or uk , he was wrong about that and other things, but the ccp and eng finally caught onto what lenine did with the nep , china and russia and eastern europe were all third world backwaters that came far under socialist policies  china needed to cach up to the west and used singapore as a model singapore is run also by "ex' socialists it is an incredibly rich city state, and is very pro market but has very quirkly socalist aspects https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2018/03/09/how-capitalist-is-singapore-really/ china has used this model to catch up and no one has come as far as  fast as china 

"In the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom, Singapore ranks as the second most “economically free” country in the world just behind Hong Kong. Since many use this index as a shorthand for “most capitalist” countries, a lot of prominent people end up saying some really weird things about Singapore. For instance, in his Liberty Con remarks, Bryan Caplan claimed Singapore was one of the closest countries to the capitalist ideal.

It is true of course that Singapore has a market economy. But it’s also true that, in Singapore, the state owns a huge amount of the means of production. In fact, depending on how you count it, the Singaporean government probably owns more capital than any other developed country in the world after Norway.
The Singaporean state owns 90 percent of the country’s land. Remarkably, this level of ownership was not present from the beginning. In 1949, the state owned just 31 percent of the country’s land. It got up to 90 percent land ownership through decades of forced sales, or what people in the US call eminent domain.
The Singaporean state does not merely own the land. They directly develop it, especially for residential purposes. Over 80 percent of Singapore’s population lives in housing constructed by the country’s public housing agency HDB. The Singaporean government claims that around 90 percent of people living in HDB units “own” their home. But the way it really works is that, when a new HDB unit is built, the government sells a transferable 99-year lease for it. The value of that lease slowly declines as it approaches the 99-year mark, after which point the lease expires and possession of the HDB unit reverts back to the state. Thus, Singapore is a land where almost everyone is a long-term public housing tenant.
Then there are the state-owned enterprises, which they euphemistically call Government-linked Companies (GLCs). Through its sovereign wealth fund Temasek, the Singaporean government owns a large share (20% or more) of 20 companies (2012 figure). Together these companies make up 37% of the market capitalization of the Singaporean stock market. The state also owns a large share of 8 real estate investment trust (REIT) companies (2012 figure), which they call GLREITs. The value of the GLREITs make up 54% of the country’s total REIT market.
The sovereign wealth fund Temasek doesn’t just own domestic assets. It also is invested broadly throughout the world, especially in other Asian countries. In March of last year, Temasek had a net portfolio value of S$275 billion, which is equal to around 62% of the country’s annual GDP. To put this figure in more familiar terms, Temasek’s total holdings are equivalent to if the US government built a $12.4 trillion wealth fund.
Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t generally associate state ownership of the means of production with capitalism. One way to see whether libertarians or conservatives actually think Singapore’s system is uber-capitalistic is to imagine how they would respond to someone who ran a campaign in the US aimed at bringing the country up to the Singaporean ideal.
In this campaign, the candidate would say that the state should expropriate nearly all of the land in the country, build virtually all of the housing in the country, move almost everyone into public housing leaseholds, become the largest shareholder of more than a third of the country’s publicly-traded companies (weighted by market capitalization), and build out a sovereign wealth fund that holds tens of trillions of dollars of corporate assets. Would this campaign meet with a warm libertarian embrace or perhaps be derided as a bit socialistic?
The case of Singapore is more than just a funny gotcha to use against right-wingers. It actually raises an interesting question about what it is people care about when it comes to “capitalism” and “socialism.” Is capitalism primarily about markets or private ownership? Relatedly, is socialism primarily about ending markets or promoting collective ownership? Often these things are bundled together, but they are logically and practically separable. Singapore (and Norway, among others) shows that it is quite possible to collectively own the means of production while also using price systems to assist in the allocation of productive factors. This is what market socialists have been saying for a hundred years."

let god sort them out, this is how you end the jihad

i sir am your worst nightmare, i have wet dreamsabout the days i spent with Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre  and our beloved national razor

You have not answered my question. Instead, you have gone into a rant about Singapore, a country that is significantly less socialist than China, which you claim has good policies. I repeat:

I have blocked you on moral grounds. I don't want replies from a supporter of merciless tyranny. Why not go type such shit from a Chinese IP? See how they like your freedom of speech then. Even though it's pro-China, you'll end up very restricted. Sweet blissful irony...