China seeks food security, but at what cost?
How do you know that? People in China go hungry all the time. Official poverty rates might've been reduced significantly, but the poverty line in China is much less livable than the poverty line in America. If you make $2.31 a day in China, you're not technically in poverty!
Not to mention similar homelessness rates to America
you didn't say anything about the rates of hunger in China. Those people that are in poverty still don't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from
Similar amount go hungry in the US
US has 4-5x less the population of the PRC. The PRC is doing a better job, with room to improve, of feeding its citizens.
Which means, given the government's record in improving the quality of life of China for the past 50 years, the CPC is on a trajectory of virtually solving food insecurity in China.
Now, let us be honest. All of your questions in this thread are just begging the same questions other federated instanced posters are asking:
Why don't you share our hate for China?
Personally, hate doesn't make me happy. I don't hate China because if their prosperity would mean US decline, it means there's something wrong with the economic system that treats survival in a world of post scarcity production as a zero sum game. After China is balkanized, and a decade of harvesting China and the rest of Asia occur, the US would invent new enemies and power blocs to exploit and eviscerate. An elimination of the last world powers would just reinvent the same exploitative power dynamics that the US and Europe had with the continents of South America, Africa, and Asia in the 18th and 19th centuries.
I would live in prosperity off exploiting others or in perpetual misery supporting alienated, affluent, and hollow people.
Even if that doesn't bother you, or you don't care about China, you should still know that the elimination of those enemies won't result in the reintroduction of a New Deal in the 21st century. Paraphrasing from someone: You're not going to get Star Trek, or the world of Interstellar. You're getting Elysium and then we're all getting extinction.
Just a life of meaninglessness under the leadership of the West.
You don't have to praise or fawn over China but you can't delude yourself into believing that the collapse and dissolution of America's enemies would mean that their spoils would be shared with you. It'll be shared among the masters, administrators, and enforcers of annihilation. And all that cheerleading, xenophobia, and chauvinism would just end up wasting your own time and your colleagues time in preventing the annihilation of meaning and solidarity between humanity.
Man, the thought terminating cliche rigging of the brains of people on these subjects is really depressing.
We make long well thought out good faith posts and get dismissed as propaganda, even though we're just regular people with earnest opinions. Like come on, have some intellectual curiosity. Think. This isnt even a enthusiastically pro-China post. Please. If you're going to come to our instance, please, please actually come here in good faith.
Earnest and good faith? I clicked the fucking link, there was a literal NSFW pig, shitting on its fucking testicles. Why would I listen to what they have to say after that?
99% of the post was earnest and good faith, it ended with one of our memes. Stop doing that thing libs do where they pick out one element of a post to refuse to engage with the rest of it. You're just making excuses to not think.
Also, you're switching lanes here anyway. You said it was propaganda. Not that you were put off by the meme at the end.
Why would I "engage in good faith in the marketplace of ideas" with authoritarian, fake communists that justify or deny brutal genocides like the Holodomor and cultural genocides of the Uyghurs? See I don't think you're as bad as fascists and nazis but I also find the kind of authoritarian rhetoric very scary and dangerous.
When they say something like "I'm not reading that propaganda!" or "Umm acktually, no u!" or "You're being rude to me! I'm not listening to you! Waaaah!" it's just a sign that they know they don't actually have a counter argument anymore. They know their position is one of smug ignorance, and they're just too pathetic to admit they might be wrong about something.
I'm saying your China hate isn't going to make you happy or wealthy. No one on Hexbear here hates China with you, and you just come off as a nihlistic anti-intellectual loser.
You're probably a troll, but it still bears worth typing out why I - and others who share my view or are malleable to it - don't waste our time scapegoating a country for a decline in quality of life here in the West.
You're smelly. You have poop running down your pants and piss making squishy sounds on your shoes. I, and all humanity, cringe at you.
That's really rude, you asked a question, someone gave you an answer, and then you dismiss the answer as propaganda without reading it because it's difficult to read. This isn't what Bernie would do.
Yet you've spent hours posting bs in this thread. Go read a real book or something you milquetoast social democrat.
2.5% is the hunger rate of China according to your source. So I decided to look up the US and see how it compares. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-security-and-nutrition-assistance/
10% or in other words china is currently 4x better at feeding the hungry than the US is. 10% of 300+million is also around 30+million, so a comparable number but just out of an incomparably smaller population.
So you, following the advice of people who cannot get hunger below 10%, in a country with enough food waste to solve the problem, think that people on the other side of the world, whose hunger problem is only a quarter of your neighbors, should fix their hunger by growing LESS FOOD in favor of cash crops? Is that correct?
If I'm misrepresenting you please let me know
An unnecessary comparison. I'm talking about 1 in 40 Chinese people facing hunger, this has absolutely nothing to do with America.
It does because you're claiming that the system that America is the best example of: letting the free market run food security, is superior to what China is doing. This is an incorrect statement as proven by statistics.
It does because you’re claiming that the system that America is the best example of: letting the free market run food security
Putting words in my mouth.
Also you used a different metric from the metric I used. China and America have the exact same (2.5%) hunger rate using the same source. Typical Hexbear lying.
Ok but why are you so angry about people so far away from you when your neighbors are suffering more (at the hands of the people telling us what it's like 'over there's)
Nah it's pointing out how the approach you suggest (let the free market decide what's profitable to grow for food security) is inferior to what China is doing.
China, state whose economic decision you disagree with, hunger rate of 2.50% in a country of 1 billion people.
America, state whose free market approach to food security you generally agree with, hunger rate of 10% in a country with 1/3 the population.
but the poverty line in China is much less livable than the poverty line in America
The poverty lines are calculated using the same formulas to determine livability for each country. Everybody should theoretically have a somewhat similar standard of living at the poverty line across countries
The poverty line for USA is a 14500 salary. 80% of Americans live in a city. How many cities in USA exist where you can live well on a 14500 salary? Not to mention a single healthcare incident will instantly wipe out whatever scraps you can save off a 14500 salary
People who make 2.3USD a day in China live in a place where it is possible to live on that cheap salary
Not to mention similar homelessness rates to America
Can you link a source? The most recent data I found dates back to 2011
https://data.oecd.org/conversion/purchasing-power-parities-ppp.htm
Purchasing power parity of China is 4.022. So let's look at the overall poverty line of $2.30 in China. That would be equalivent to $9.25 a day in America, or $3,376 a year.
China makes their poverty rates appear so low by making their poverty line absolutely ridiculous and actually much lower than comparable countries.
Of course I couldn't any PPP rates for just rural China (although it's pretty obvious $3,376 isn't going to suddenly becoming $30,000 because it's rural), but see this:
Our results indicate that the mean subjective poverty line of the rural households is 8297 yuan per capita, which is far higher than the national poverty line (2800 yuan). Statistically, 29% of the surveyed rural households who are not objectively poor feel subjectively poor.
29% of people who are not objectively poor feel subjectively poor?
I said that amount is livable in China. That study is about people's feelings. Hardly related
Not to mention I work in Silicon Valley as a software engineer and it's literally common for people here to be making 200-400k to complain about being poor and not saving much all the time
How many people living in the Midwest or the south on a 20k salary do you think would feel subjectively poor?
Conveniently ignoring the fact a $3.3k salary isn't livable anywhere in America.
Spoiled middle class westerners complaining about being poor is totally different LMAO. Americans will complain about being poor when living in a decent house in suburb, being poor is seen totally different in 2nd and 3rd world countries that are, yknow, struggling much moreso.
Conveniently ignoring the fact a $3.3k salary isn't livable anywhere in America.
Well that's why the American poverty line has been calculated to be 14500
14500 is the poverty line in America and 845 is the poverty line in China
PPP isn't a perfect comparison between every single combination of all 200 countries in the entire world
But the poverty line is specifically calculated for every single country
Lol. $845/yr is the number the CCP conveniently made up to make poverty rates seem lower than they actually are. If the poverty line was the same as comparable countries to China, it would be almost double ($5.50 a day instead of $2.30, or adjusted for PPP $8k/yr instead of $3.3k).
Despite the fact that China is classified as an upper-middle income country, China’s official poverty line is only a little higher than the universal global poverty line. Applying the World Bank upper-middle income poverty line of $5.50/day to China would mean almost a quarter of Chinese still live in poverty.
Applying the World Bank upper-middle income poverty line of $5.50/day to China would mean almost a quarter of Chinese still live in poverty.
13% = 25%? (from a very biased source too btw)
Despite China "still being poor" or whatever, the fact of the matter is that povery line go sharply down so China is becoming more gooder by the year. While in the country whose policies you support, poverty line stay same, not become gooder.
rice farmers complaining about profits are definitely not going hungry
poverty in china nowadays is pensioner age old people whos kids have left for the cities for better economic opportunities because their village is located inside a literal cliff 18 hours and a mule ride from civilization and the only viable occupation there is subsistence barley farmer/part-time chicken keeper
poverty alleviation isn't about making sure these people can turn a profit, it's about relocating them to places where they can be made less hostile to the concepts of electricity and running water, because otherwise they would just be content to stay inside their cliff and head into town once a year to collect their poverty check/trade in their moonshine for ibuprofen