Made in Bangladesh.........

[SteadyMercury]

too stupid!!! all know it began in about 1980!!!!

Yet you attempt to frame something that started in 1980 as the only option to a famine the great famine of 1958-1961.

That stupid indeed.

dear, so what???? In 1980 they bought 5000 cars, under capitalism they buy 17 million today, more than we do!!

An intelligent man would look at cars/capita if they were attempting to use car ownership as a barometer of a successful economy. Here is a list of vehicles per capita: List of countries by vehicles per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hey there is China at #111, after countries like El Salvador, Honduras, Namibia, Algeria, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Venezuela, etc.

So you keep using total cars as some great measure of economic progress, and remember you believe Pakistan is ahead of Luxembourg.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So you keep using total cars as some great measure of economic progress, and remember you believe Pakistan is ahead of Luxembourg.

too stupid as usual!! All projections are the China will be the number one economy in the world, after starting from last, in less than 10 years thanks to the introduction of Republican capitalism. Wen Jiaboa came here to say they learned it from Smith and Friedman!!

 

[SteadyMercury]

too stupid as usual!!

Aww how cute, the forum half-wit is sing songing his usual drivel. Dear! Too stupid! Too slow! La-la-la-la!

All projections are the China will be the number one economy in the world, after starting from last, in less than 10 years thanks to the introduction of Republican capitalism.

Ahh so you believe some projection you might have read about China's economy validates this bizarre logic you've put forth that some free market reforms in the 1980s were responsible for ending a famine that went from 1958-1961. How do you say? Oh yeah.... too stupid!

Wen Jiaboa came here to say they learned it from Smith and Friedman!!

Who knows, you were already caught before in these forums lying about Wen Jiaboa said.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Ahh so you believe some projection you might have read about China's economy validates this bizarre logic

what projection dear?? The fact is Republicans eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty by introducing capitalism to China in 1980.

Do you dispute this???? Yes or No???

 

[Truthseeker420]

What you buy equates with poverty more and more every day. Some on here should really like that.

we should all be very thankful that globalization gives dirt poor folks all over the world a chance to earn a living rather than to starve to death.

There is the difference between the left and right wing. The left believes food is a human right to life and the right wing believes food has to be earned.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The left believes food is a human right to life and the right wing believes food has to be earned.

which is better and why?

 

[SteadyMercury]

Ahh so you believe some projection you might have read about China's economy validates this bizarre logic

what projection dear?? The fact is Republicans eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty by introducing capitalism to China in 1980.

Do you dispute this???? Yes or No???

Too stupid! Too slow!

You were implying capitalism ended the great Chinese Famine, but that makes no sense because the famine ended in the early 60s while market reforms didn't start taking off until the 1980s. So you made no sense, as usual.

You then defended your lame famine/capitalism thing by pointing at projections of China's future growth. I realize you are the forum halfwit, but try to understand: one doesn't validate the other regardless of whether it is true.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Ahh so you believe some projection you might have read about China's economy validates this bizarre logic

what projection dear?? The fact is Republicans eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty by introducing capitalism to China in 1980.

Do you dispute this???? Yes or No???

Too stupid! Too slow!

You were implying capitalism ended the great Chinese Famine, but that makes no sense because the famine ended in the early 60s while market reforms didn't start taking off until the 1980s. So you made no sense, as usual.

You then defended your lame famine/capitalism thing by pointing at projections of China's future growth. I realize you are the forum halfwit, but try to understand: one doesn't validate the other regardless of whether it is true.

for fourth time:
what projection dear?? The fact is Republicans eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty by introducing capitalism to China in 1980.

Do you dispute this???? Yes or No???

 

[Osomir]

for fourth time:
what projection dear?? The fact is Republicans eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty by introducing capitalism to China in 1980.

Do you dispute this???? Yes or No???

I'll dispute it. Much of China's modern poverty reduction came from its green revolution and advances in farming. Now of course this was in part due to two things: genetically engineered crops, particularly rice, and land reform (aka private ownership of land).

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

for fourth time:
what projection dear?? The fact is Republicans eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty by introducing capitalism to China in 1980.

Do you dispute this???? Yes or No???

I'll dispute it. Much of China's modern poverty reduction came from its green revolution and advances in farming. Now of course this was in part due to two things: genetically engineered crops, particularly rice, and land reform (aka private ownership of land).

dear, you're talking about the technical advancements they employed to reduce poverty not disputing whether they in fact eliminated 40% of world poverty with saintly Republican capitalism.

See the difference?

 

[Osomir]

dear, you're talking about the technical advancements they employed to reduce poverty not disputing whether they in fact eliminated 40% of world poverty with saintly Republican capitalism.

See the difference?

How is utilizing new technology exclusive to capitalism?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, you're talking about the technical advancements they employed to reduce poverty not disputing whether they in fact eliminated 40% of world poverty with saintly Republican capitalism.

See the difference?

How is utilizing new technology exclusive to capitalism?

the USSR and Communist China had 15% of our standard of living because under liberalism they could not utilize technology even when they stole it wholesale.

 

[Osomir]

the USSR and Communist China had 15% of our standard of living because under liberalism they could not utilize technology even when they stole it wholesale.

That doesn't make any historical sense.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the USSR and Communist China had 15% of our standard of living because under liberalism they could not utilize technology even when they stole it wholesale.

That doesn't make any historical sense.

please say why or admit you didn't because you lack the IQ to do so.

 

[Osomir]

please say why or admit you didn't because you lack the IQ to do so.

The Soviet Union beat us to space with Sputnik. that rather blows your theory that communist countries can't utilize technology out of the water.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

please say why or admit you didn't because you lack the IQ to do so.

The Soviet Union beat us to space with Sputnik. that rather blows your theory that communist countries can't utilize technology out of the water.

dear, we were talking about technology in general, not one tiny aspect of technology, especially not an aspect of technology that in both countries was mostly managed by the government in a non- capitalistic way.

 

[Osomir]

please say why or admit you didn't because you lack the IQ to do so.

The Soviet Union beat us to space with Sputnik. that rather blows your theory that communist countries can't utilize technology out of the water.

dear, we were talking about technology in general, not one tiny aspect of technology, especially not an aspect of technology that in both countries was mostly managed by the government in a non- capitalistic way.

How was sputnik a tiny piece of technology?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Soviet Union beat us to space with Sputnik. that rather blows your theory that communist countries can't utilize technology out of the water.

dear, we were talking about technology in general, not one tiny aspect of technology, especially not an aspect of technology that in both countries was mostly managed by the government in a non- capitalistic way.

How was sputnik a tiny piece of technology?

obviously it was or they would have achieved more than 15% of our standard of living!! Also, its a bad analogy as I said anyway since their non capitalist military and our non capitalist military ran the space programs. Better luck next time.

 

[Osomir]

dear, we were talking about technology in general, not one tiny aspect of technology, especially not an aspect of technology that in both countries was mostly managed by the government in a non- capitalistic way.

How was sputnik a tiny piece of technology?

obviously it was or they would have achieved more than 15% of our standard of living!! Also, its a bad analogy as I said anyway since their non capitalist military and our non capitalist military ran the space programs. Better luck next time.

So your misunderstanding of the historical tech race between the US and the Soviet Union aside. It doesn't take much tech know how to plant a genetically modified seed into the ground and cover it with fertilizer. So I don't even see how your argument is applicable to China's ability to utilize GM seed products.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So I don't even see how your argument is applicable to China's ability to utilize GM seed products.

dear, Wen Jia Boa came here and said they switched to capitalism in 1980, thanks to Smith and Friedman, not that they switched to new seed.

Did you see how stupid you are being now?

the 2 most famous book to get you up to speed: [oh, and they are not about seeds]

"Capitalism With Chinese Characteristics"

"How China Became Capitalist"