Billionaires, but not their billions?

https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/rise-wealth-private-property-and-income-inequality-china

The share of China’s national income earned by the top 10% of the population has increased from 27% in 1978 to 41% in 2015, nearing the U.S.’s 45% and surpassing France’s 32%.

Why is income inequality rising? Are you saying the Chinese working class are enjoying the trickle-down benefits of billionaires getting richer?

Further, you have no proof of the PRC lying about pubkic ownership.

Again, billionaires, and their existence, is proof that the profits are not publicly owned.

Even further, they cannot indefinitely build towards Socialism.

No they can just lie and say “we’re in a transitionary phase to socialism” indefinitely while being more repressively capitalist than America could ever dream of.

as firms grow and get folded into the public sector and socialization increases

Again from the same link posted above, the opposite is happening, China is privatizing.

“The state-owned (vs. privately-owned) share of China’s wealth fell from 70% to about 30%”

The presence of structures potentially contradictory to higher stages of Socialism, like banks, stock markets, and billionaires, does not mean they are not progressing towards those higher stages.

So what does then? If income inequality is rising, billionaires are getting richer, public ownership is disappearing, privatization is increasing, then what are you basing this idea that they are “progressing towards those higher stages” on?

Given our prior interactions, I already know you aren’t a Marxist, why should anyone trust your evaluation of Marxism?

I’m a socialist. I’m trying to get you to think about your definitions by challenging what you believe with the facts. Like this idea that China is “working towards socialism”.

Do you also believe Trump is “working towards Christian values”?

Chinese public to Chinese billionaire: “Can I have some of our public profits?”

Chinese billionaire: “No.”

Again, saying they’re “public” and actually being publicly owned are two different things. The PRC is just lying. They can be in this “building towards socialism” phase indefinitely while they profit off the labour of the working class.

And a simple observation of their economic makeup will see things that you typically see in capitalist economies, like banks, and stock markets, and billionaires, things that are pretty explicitly the antithesis of Marxism.

China has a capitalist economy, not a socialist one.

It sounds like you’ve been soaking up Chinese propaganda!

You’re like those Christian Americans who truly believe that Trump is promoting “Christian values” despite being as far as you can get from Christian values.

All it takes for socialism is to just wave the flag and talk the talk, but not walk the walk, eh?

I didn’t realize banks, financial trade, and currency were also classically Marxist.

What do the PRC do that is socialist? I’m honestly asking because I haven’t seen them do anything socialist.

China isn’t Marxist so I’m confused wtf that has to do with anything.

Specifically though, which part is relevant here?

How do you know?

What theory?

Yeah that tracks, same with Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Being aware of America’s abuses of power is good. Being contrarian and acting like everything they’ve ever said about China is a lie is bad.

The “english” setting does nothing.

Sweet I’m already using PostgreSQL because it’s the only thing Blynk supported!

Tiny plastic part that holds the handle to my fridge broke. Need a new 50 cent plastic part.

GE wants $200 to replace all 3 metal handle assemblies. Can’t just get the plastic part, it comes in a bundle with all 3 metal handles. Which would immediately go in the garbage.

If we can’t get them on the “intentionally gouging customers” angle, we can surely get them on the “creating excess waste” angle.

Because there’s fewer foreign bots trying to make you hate everyone in your country, and fewer social media engagement bots trying to make sure you stay online arguing with someone.

Why not? They were fixing Windows XP remote-execution exploits all the way up to 2017. For free, for anyone to download.

And that stuff is only used to take down children’s hospitals, they don’t waste 0-day exploits on some rando’s home PC.

Bring guns.

If you thought women growing up with uncaring fathers was bad, wait till you meet men who grew up with uncaring mothers.

AI is great for when you’re typing out 30 slight variations of the same thing, and you can just be like “see what I’m doing here? Do it for the other 30 variables” and it does it just fine.

Most of the drugs they ban like cannabis are because of a UN convention that, under US pressure, forced them to, in the 1960’s and 1970’s.

The data surrounding cooperatives don’t appear to indicate any danger to large firms and other Capitalist entities dominating markets.

Can I see that data?

Since I’m sure you’re arguing in good faith here and have actually looked at some data, and you’re not just making things up.

Umm, no. Elected politicians can do whatever tf they want. There’s no legal mechanism to make them fulfill the promises they made during their campaign.

The next election is the mechanism that makes them fulfill the promises they’ve made during their campaign. If your politicians aren’t afraid of losing the next election, you don’t live in a real democracy, you probably live in a FPTP country, and you should fix that.

Not to mention that elected politicians aren’t controlled by the people, most of the government positions aren’t elected.

I don’t know what country you are assuming counts as the entire world with this sentence, I’m going to assume America because it’s usually Americans that do that.

But even then, what is wrong with me hiring someone to hire more people?

Democracy is when Government is owned by people. People own government through democracy. Great argument.

What is your counterargument other than “no”?

If you ask government to persecute people who break the law, do you no longer own people who break the law?

You can’t own people, you never did, what are you trying to ask here?

What do YOU think the people owning the means of production looks like?