gradenko_2000 posted:

gradenko_2000 posted:

quote:

The People’s Bank of China has never been politically independent like a Western central bank, but it has nonetheless enjoyed a special status in the nation’s economic hierarchy. Now, President Xi Jinping’s shake-up of China’s financial sector is stripping that away.

Earlier this week, pressured by senior leaders worried about plunging economic growth, the PBOC said it would ease banks’ reserve requirements, effectively making more cash available for bank lending. The move went against policy signals it had sent weeks earlier and came as the central bank and other financial institutions came under scrutiny by Beijing, part of Mr. Xi’s effort to curb capitalist forces in the economy.

Of all the financial institutions being scrutinized by Mr. Xi’s discipline inspectors, the PBOC is arguably the most consequential. The central bank oversees one of the world’s largest financial systems. Though it needs approval from the top bodies of government before it makes big decisions such as those about interest rates, the PBOC has worked for years to establish credibility among investors, at home and abroad, as China’s markets became more sophisticated and their influence extended across the globe.

In recent weeks, Communist Party discipline inspectors from China’s top anticorruption agency have visited the central bank’s headquarters in central Beijing. Officials briefed on the matter said the inspectors asked questions, reviewed documents and brought an unusually stern message: Beijing has little tolerance for any talk of central-bank independence; the monetary authority, just like any other part of the government, answers to the party.

[...]

“The PBOC has carved out a modest amount of operational autonomy to push forward financial liberalization and a more market-oriented monetary policy framework,” said Eswar Prasad, an economics professor at Cornell University and former China head for the International Monetary Fund.

“That notion of operational autonomy is now coming into conflict with a more intrusive role of the government in the economy,” Mr. Prasad said, adding: “The PBOC is losing.”

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

now this is just getting avant garde

https://twitter.com/AmbassadeChine/status/1469314982424846343

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

now this is just getting avant garde

https://twitter.com/AmbassadeChine/status/1469314982424846343

A Spherical Sponge posted:

I mean, they're not wrong, but isn't that just a straight rip off, tune-wise, of the sea-shanty thing that's been going around for like a year now? also lazy writing to have the hook every other line.

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

now this is just getting avant garde

https://twitter.com/AmbassadeChine/status/1469314982424846343

Antonymous posted:

yeah gimme that hate amerikkka beat

Bro Dad posted:

lol isnt this the ship that has galvanic corrosion problems?

you know, the thing the british navy figured out in the 1670s

Atrocious Joe posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmmU6B8ifD8

In the directors cut you find out the woman is also a magician

This is a whole series
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwYu02BTL4s

strange feelings re Daisy posted:

Watching these makes me feel like I took a shitload of drugs. This is like the state news equivalent of outsider art. Magician talking to a goat about sectarian differences in Iraq followed by a Wellerman cover. I'm in awe.

Atrocious Joe posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmmU6B8ifD8

In the directors cut you find out the woman is also a magician

This is a whole series
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwYu02BTL4s

gradenko_2000 posted:

Palladium posted:

remember, this a littoral combat stealth ship built on the very realistic assumption that the millions of Chinese fishing boats will not be able to visually spot it off the coast

Palladium posted:

remember, this a littoral combat stealth ship built on the very realistic assumption that the millions of Chinese fishing boats will not be able to visually spot it off the coast

AnimeIsTrash posted:

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1468654180441235463

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

new username

https://twitter.com/Peter_Atwater/status/1468906049948241922

Palladium posted:

remember, this a littoral combat stealth ship built on the very realistic assumption that the millions of Chinese fishing boats will not be able to visually spot it off the coast

stephenthinkpad posted:

Question for the military nerds, do US actually sell price competitive arms in the international market?

I assume most of the US arm sales goes like this: The Feds print a lot of extra money; US government gives truck load of "military aid" to a third world country; the ruling elites take a big cut of said aid and turn around and give majority of the aid back to the US MIC to buy overpriced military gears. It's basically a "legal" racket to grease the palms and also keep the MIC/associated senators happy.

So my question is, does US actually sells price competitive weapons to the developing world/global south at all? Why would a poor country like Cambodia actually spend their hard earned foreign reserve to buy US weapon? Unless military aid is involved? That's why India buy most of the weapons from Russia and some from Europe and hardly anything from the US. I think India buys carrier gas turbine engine from GE and also C17 plane which basically have their own monopoly niche.

Atrocious Joe posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmmU6B8ifD8

In the directors cut you find out the woman is also a magician

This is a whole series
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwYu02BTL4s

quote:

Full text of tweet:

AN OPEN LETTER TO ROBREDO

Dear VP Leni,

It was around this time in 2015 when I wrote an open letter to Roxas that went viral. I suggested that he should change his campaign strategies and political messages. Unfortunately, I was attacked by his supporters, so I silenced myself.

This time, I won't be quiet. I'll be exhaustive. I'll make sure that this open letter won't be dismissed as a mere plethora of personal opinions. I'm doing this because I don't want another government of liars and thieves. My insistence is noble since all I want is a good leader.

[cut for length]

Also, dump those who tell you that radical love and calm positivity will defeat populist, nostalgic, paternalistic, and strongman politics. A culture shaped by patriarchy and machismo doesn't consider love and positivity masculine or strong. They belong in churches and convents.

...

A positive campaign strategy that's passive and doesn't attack or counter is for losers. Elections are wars without bombs and guns but minds and mouths. They aren't for saints. Even good, righteous leaders become sinners when they campaign and govern like saints after they win.

Now let me illustrate your ineffective campaign that'll only waste a political movement and suggest remedies using the cases in India and the US. Perhaps your people will defensively say that we're Filipinos, but the cases I'll cite are similar to what we have in the Philippines.

The 2022 election in the Philippines is following the Indian general election in 2019. There were two main contenders for prime ministership--Modi (paternalistic, nostalgic incumbent PM) and Gandhi (reformist, idealistic opposition leader), almost like Marcos versus Robredo now.

Modi and Gandhi projected love and positivity in their campaigns, but Modi's supporters used lies, insults, fabricated images, and fake news against Gandhi who didn't attack or counter. Like Robredo who is called "stupid", Gandhi, who went to Cambridge, was called pappu (child).

Like the education of Marcos, Modi's is so vague that many consider him semi-literate. Gandhi was so like Robredo--calm, love, positivity, reforms, development, etc. In the end, Modi won although his previous government reeked of corruption, cronyism, economic mismanagement, etc.

Two things can be learned from that Indian case: idealistic positivity and virtuous politics are losing strategies. Attacks and counterattacks are necessary to win an election in an era of social media, mass disinformation, and manufactured narratives. Passiveness is surrender.

Another thing happened in the 2019 Indian election campaign that sealed the win of Modi. There was a bombing incident in Kashmir. Before that, Gandhi looked competitive. After that incident, the majority of Indians opted for Modi. Gandhi's positivity and idealism came off weak.

I'm afraid the 2022 election will follow the path of the 2019 Indian election. An explosion in Manila will defeat Robredo who has been attacked as weak and dumb using manufactured images and fabricated narratives that are unanswered because of radical love and calm positivity.

Our country is misogynistic. Our culture demeans what isn't macho. Our collective consciousness degrades weaknesses. Our society is ruled by patriarchy. Oh, in our politics, women leaders are labeled as whores or lunatics and always as weaklings if they're not GROs of patriarchy.

VP Leni, you've been called "crazy" and "delicate", and the attacks have failed to define and ruin you because the people see what you really are as our vice president. Sadly, you still have another tag to deal with--"weak". Radical love and calm positivity will reinforce that.

I'm not all about criticism. I also suggest. I offer alternatives. So, let me use Obama's campaign image and positive political campaign. Like you, Obama was a political outsider and he relied on his strong presidential image or on how people perceived him as a potential leader.

From the 2004 Democratic National Convention to the 2008 Presidential Election, Obama was about an image of strength--no drama, no clowning, but authenticity and audacity. During the 2008 election, he talked about hope and declared "Yes, we can", but he countered when attacked.

Obama's campaign in 2008 was, indeed, positive, inspiring, hopeful, and visionary, but his anti-Bush supporters were busy attacking Republicans and their capitalist allies and friends who made money out of coffins and body bags. They were noisy, livid, and effective. I was there.

Maybe your people will counter that my views are Americentric. Well, social media, black propaganda, fake news, manufactured images, and fabricated narratives are American inventions. Filipinos are just end-users. Political greed in Texas isn't different from that greed in Davao.

VP Leni, there's already a template for defeating populist demagogues and their hostile supporters like Trump and those MAGA "deplorables" in 2020, besides uniting. Movements, attacks and counterattacks online or offline and on social media or mainstream media worked for Biden.

Like you who are dismissed as "stupid" or "weak", Biden was also attacked as old and senile, which didn't really spread and root even though it could be possible based on his age. That was so because anti-Trump forces weren't passive and weak. Every lie was countered with truths.

Biden had two movements: of blacks and of anti-Trump Republicans. Those movements were too far from radical love and calm positivity. Biden focused on policies and reforms, while his supporters made attacking Trump, Republicans, MAGA, QAnon their daily duty online and offline.

We should learn from Roxas' blunders in 2016. Because he believed in "decency" and "the straight and narrow", he and his supporters didn't attack Duterte's "3 to 6 months" and counter the fabricated images and narratives unleashed by Dutertists. Please don't let the Marcosian conspiracy theory of Tallano Gold spread and take root.

Here's my suggestion: Allow the Pink Movement to attack and counterattack. Separate yourself from that political aggression. Let that movement organize a Lincoln Project or Meidas Touch. Focus on policies and reforms. Your image should be of strength. After all, you are our hope.

I'm not really sure why you want radical love and calm positivity to define your campaign when you should be talking about corruption, cronyism, economic crisis, Chinese puppetry, mass hunger, ballooning poverty, etc. Any movement exists not for love and quiet. That's so sixties.

Even the silent salt march of the Mahatma or the non-violent protest of that black minister who had a dream wasn't passive or weak. Non-violence may be physically passive, but their struggle for freedom was aggressive. VP Leni, please don't waste the movement that's behind you.

Done.

stephenthinkpad posted:

Question for the military nerds, do US actually sell price competitive arms in the international market?

I assume most of the US arm sales goes like this: The Feds print a lot of extra money; US government gives truck load of "military aid" to a third world country; the ruling elites take a big cut of said aid and turn around and give majority of the aid back to the US MIC to buy overpriced military gears. It's basically a "legal" racket to grease the palms and also keep the MIC/associated senators happy.

So my question is, does US actually sells price competitive weapons to the developing world/global south at all? Why would a poor country like Cambodia actually spend their hard earned foreign reserve to buy US weapon? Unless military aid is involved? That's why India buy most of the weapons from Russia and some from Europe and hardly anything from the US. I think India buys carrier gas turbine engine from GE and also C17 plane which basically have their own monopoly niche.

stephenthinkpad posted:

I had never heard of F14 rumor. Why would China want a F14 in the 90s? they had no carrier.

See flagship fighter is not a good example of comparing weapon cost, because you are either only allowed to buy US planes (NATO, Japan, Korea etc); or you are not allowed to buy (Taiwan); or its too expensive to begin with (global south); or you are not allowed to touch (China/Russia/allies).

Now comparing 2nd tier, 3rd tier light fighter, or mid range tanks, I think they are fair comparison since most country can afford to buy them from most vendors. But I am not enough of a Clancy nerd to know this topic.

stephenthinkpad posted:

I had never heard of F14 rumor. Why would China want a F14 in the 90s? they had no carrier.

Ardennes posted:

I would actually contest that considering numerous nations with access to American weaponry are instead choosing Russian/Chinese alternatives. The S 400 is a good example of this.

Also the su 27 is pretty comparable to the f-14 and usually there are comparable alternatives to most NATO equipment at this point. The new Su-75 seems to be comparable to the f-35.Do

(Also f-35 sales in particular are often the result of plenty of arm twisting and a lot of nations are buying them without a solid reason. Also, most decent later 4th generation fighters could take out a f-35 if it ever got close to it, it handles like a boat.)

Ardennes posted:

Btw, it was in the 1980s when the F-14 generally was much better than most of the alternatives except perhaps the mig 29, which China didn’t have access to. By the 1990s, the PRC could access Soviet/Russia tech and went down that route (by that point the F-14 had more robust competition.)