Actually, there are many areas of comparison (cultural diffusion, enslavement, chauvinism, etc.)–some even raised by your claim about China’s imperial exceptionality above. I take it you are not familiar with Tarquinius Priscus and Rome’s core, are you?

“but the fact that TVs are near universal and cell phones have such a high penetration rate in rural China would crush your point – if you had any facts to back it up in the first place.”

Not surprisingly, it wouldn’t. It would, however, explain your obsession with two pieces of technology while 50% of China’s population makes do with 15% of its energy.

“Whoops, it already dropped in several quarters.”
—indeed. If the trend continues, or accelerates, Xi will be in for a nice coronation.

“China’s aggregate net worth being high but the “people” being relatively poor because there are so many to divide the assets among”
—I suppose that’s part of it, but I was actually referring to the assets the CCP owns versus the assets Chinese people own. Or you can think of it as public vs private.

“Per capita wealth in China is growing faster than anywhere in human history.”
—perhaps, but the distribution remains skewed, and is getting progressively more skewed. And if the economy/GDP growth drastically slows, the per capita effect might be blunted (because of the population size), but the have-nots will quickly approach ‘have-nothing’. And that could be a powerful motivator for such people.

“The CCP doesn’t give referendums because it sees no need to.”
—hey, you’re the one talking about “endorsement”. I’m not surprised if the CCP sees no need to obtain “endorsement”, since it only cares about its own survival and the approval of her people is of no importance. Of course, even a dog-and-pony show of “endorsement” is something authoritarian regimes love to put on (N. Korea comes to mind). So i guess the CCP doesn’t have quite the iron grip of the Kim’s (a good thing), and it doesn’t want to know. I don’t blame them for being leery of what people might say.

Anyway, hope you now have a better understanding of your own BBC study.

Again with your “letting Chinese decide” BS. No, 51% of Chinese decide for the other 49%. I see no problem with local democracy (for cities and prefectures), but the concept does not scale well.

However, if the GDP starts to drop

Whoops, it already dropped in several quarters. Or do Chinese people only care about YOY figures?

Like I said earlier, China the country is fairly rich. Chinese the people, however, are not.

I take this as a simplistic point about China’s aggregate net worth being high but the “people” being relatively poor because there are so many to divide the assets among, correct?

I don’t see the point here. Per capita wealth in China is growing faster than anywhere in human history.

I think the CCP being chicken-shit has much to do with it.

The CCP doesn’t give referendums because it sees no need to.

Handler
It seems the phrase you are reaching for is “Nice one, Centurion!”

Your failed attempt on a point presumes, with no evidence, that Imperial China was anywhere near as evil as Rome was. There is no comparison.

What I am bemused by is your attempt to claim the military wasn’t extraordinarily active in expanding the Chinese empire

I said China wasn’t expansionist. Holding fiercely on to territory already incorporated into the state is a different matter.

the divide between China’s urban and rural areas is enormous, and the fact that industry is concentrated in cities doesn’t help your argument that rural areas are enjoying the fruits of China’s technological advancement.

Yes, it does. Cities simply require that much more power to function. It doesn’t explain all of the difference, but the fact that TVs are near universal and cell phones have such a high penetration rate in rural China would crush your point – if you had any facts to back it up in the first place.

A nation whose citizens are technologically empowered will witness an increase in the consumption of energy in the form of residential and electrical use.

Are you saying China hasn’t “witnessed an increase in the consumption of energy”? Please explain why technology is proliferating in the Chinese countryside faster than anywhere else.

No. I suppose it’s a speech.

You mean the Insubrian Gauls? The same Gauls that raided Roman territory for hundreds of years? The same Gauls that enslaved their own people and those of Rome’s allies and sold them?

It seems the phrase you are reaching for is “Nice one, Centurion!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URTj4naIdAs

“Yes, common sense and real history are no doubt a surprise to you. You seem you think you’re an expert, but you’re shocked that nomads invade sedentary civilizations? Oh those poor Mongols, Huns, Gokturks, Avars, etc.”

I’m not. Nor am I shocked that sedentary civilizations expand and take over more territory. What I am bemused by is your attempt to claim the military wasn’t extraordinarily active in expanding the Chinese empire (and holding it together), and not only because it is still necessary to hold it together today.

“So you’re neither a historian nor an economist – got it. The cities use more power because industry is concentrated in urban areas.”

Naturally the cities use more power, but the divide between China’s urban and rural areas is enormous, and the fact that industry is concentrated in cities doesn’t help your argument that rural areas are enjoying the fruits of China’s technological advancement.

“Do you really think a nation expends most of their power heating water and run mobile devices and television sets?”

Are you are limiting technological advancement to those provisions? A nation whose citizens are technologically empowered will witness an increase in the consumption of energy in the form of residential and electrical use. One needs to use both categories to account for the potential consumption of residential energy in highly untechnological forms like cheap biomass rather than things like refrigerators, air conditioners, adequate public and private lighting, appliances, computers and electronics. The US consumes roughly 10% of its energy in residential and commercial use and 40% in electric power. Yes, we know China is a developing country. Let’s just not try to exaggerate the degree to which the rural populace is “enjoying the benefits of technological advancement” brought to them so rapidly by the CCP.

JR

Is this talking?

“but since you think the Chinese people will overthrow the CCP whenever they are mad enough, the fact that they haven’t is clearly a 30 year endorsement of CCP rule.”
—actually, the fact they haven’t, using your own logic here, is simply because they aren’t mad enough…yet. THere is no endorsement of CCP rule…i mean, how can there be any endorsement? In fact, if the CCP wanted an endorsement, she would actually need to put the choice to Chinese people, which the CCP is too chicken shit to do. However, if the GDP starts to drop, then people may well get mad enough at the CCP to demand a change in scenery. And it won’t be a moment too soon.

“I used TV/internet as an example.”
—LOL. An example of what? Oh, that’s to be determined later when you need to start waffling and obfuscating as per standard procedure.

“China could afford subsidizing solar even if GDP slowed to 0% growth,”
—is that an “example”, or a “point”? With your low-rent style, one can hardly tell. Sure, China can finance stuff even without growth. Like I said earlier, China the country is fairly rich. Chinese the people, however, are not. Hey, but you never know, if China’s GDP growth stalls, perhaps the average Chinese person can be placated with most excellent internet connections and not demand removal of the CCP. Good luck with that.

“and what has the CCP got to do with that?…
lol.”
—you’re right, for once. Cuz the CCP has sweet jack all to do with it.

Anyway, nice to see you justifying CHina stealing IP. Goes to character, like I’ve pointed out before. You seem to have ignored the rest of the paragraph though: “But still, that’s a fantastic package. The CCP should be so proud of being able to go before the public and be judged based on her accomplishments…except the CCP isn’t quite so keen to go before the public and be judged. Why is that?”. I think the CCP being chicken-shit has much to do with it. Perhaps you have other “insights”.

BTW, one wonders if you even bother to read your own links, like that BBC survey from #70. On the other hand, we can always rely on you for inadvertent comic value. Anyhow, the BBC survey actually reports 95% confidence intervals. Basic stuff, but something Pew even fails to do. In the methods and elsewhere, you’ll see that the Chinese sample came only from urban centers – same flaw of non-randomness as Pew. But at least stated clearly; they didn’t try to hide it. But the main problem for you is that it is NOT a survey of the satisfaction of Chinese people with China/CCP, the aforementioned methodological limitations notwithstanding; it is a survey of international views of national influence. So it’s asking what respondents thought of China’s influence in the world; it’s not asking how content Chinese people are within China. It is most definitely not a “happiness” survey that you alluded to in #61. Anyway, in the future you might want to run it by me first to see if a study says what you’re hoping it would say, rather than having me tell you in no uncertain terms after you’ve already put it out there. Then again, for someone in your position making the arguments that you make, i guess there is no room for being thin-skinned and shy, eh?

The Orkhon inscriptions, by the Gokturks? The same Gokturks that raided Chinese territory for hundreds of years? The same Gokturks that enslaved their own people and those of China’s allies and sold them?

Well, that’s a surprising argument. Poor China. More than one third of all the wars noted in the historical record. Surely China is an exceptional victim.

Yes, common sense and real history are no doubt a surprise to you. You seem you think you’re an expert, but you’re shocked that nomads invade sedentary civilizations? Oh those poor Mongols, Huns, Gokturks, Avars, etc.

Considering the urban/rural population ratio, the difference in energy consumption is astounding. You can’t be using technology if you are not consuming energy.

So you’re neither a historian nor an economist – got it. The cities use more power because industry is concentrated in urban areas. Do you really think a nation expends most of their power heating water and run mobile devices and television sets?

SK Cheung
I’m just saying that China’s is increasing…right there…courtesy of your own link. LOL.

All I’m saying is that your “point” is irrelevant. LOL. Answer my question, how do you think the CCP should reverse or stop the increase? Do you even know how taxation works in China? And since you reject comparisons, we can now throw out democracy from the discussion altogether as unproven theory. China just is.

But it hasn’t…so right now, you have nothing…which is becoming habit-forming for you.

Learn how to read and follow an argument, and stop whining like a little baby. Your argument was that if GDP slows to any significant degree (not my illustrative exaggeration) the people will overthrow the CCP. My argument is that your childish wet dream will never come to fruition – but since you think the Chinese people will overthrow the CCP whenever they are mad enough, the fact that they haven’t is clearly a 30 year endorsement of CCP rule.

ahh, so once again, when my stupidity gets called out, the point changes. No longer is it the “TV/internet connections” crap you tried to pull in #61, but it’s solar heating and solar electric…the latter of which is a highly subsidized industry that the CCP can afford to pay for because of…you guessed it…the economy.

Learn how to read. I used TV/internet as an example. The fact that you don’t know anything else about China’s technological advancements is not my problem. The fact that you’re not smart enough to follow simple logic is also not my problem.

China could afford subsidizing solar even if GDP slowed to 0% growth, my economically/financially challenged friend. Learn what net worth means.

and what has the CCP got to do with that?

lol.

THe IP part is a bit much, considering what she has stolen and what little of other people’s IP the CCP protects.

What an incredibly stupid statement. China buys most of their IP, and the ones they “steal” don’t get counted as domestic patents. Regardless, the CCP isn’t exceptional in “stealing” technology. The only difference is that the CCP is sophisticated enough to pull it off and get away with it. They use their market as a weapon just like America and the EU do. Any other nation in China’s position and with China’s capabilities would do the same.

I’ve had you pegged as someone with shoddy character and lousy quality of upbringing since the very beginning.

Meaningless, as your opinions and judgments are usually incredibly retarded.

justrecently
but exchanges with CM rarely fall into that category.

I’m sure – me arguing with you is like a Mike Tyson punching a little girl’s face in. You are horribly outclassed.