529
Spot the difference
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
529 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
46206 readers
1249 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Did you get that info from the same dudes insisting that killing Brian Thompson was, like, not okay guys? Businessmen in China are scared shitless of the party, and so should they, the party has 87 million members and a 90+ approval rating.
There's no CEO in china wielding one tenth of the influence that weird nazi Elon Musk has, or Bill Gates' vaccine privatizing ass.
Elon Musk openly daydreams about being Ma Huateng. What does that tell you?
Elon Musk is an idiot.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_billionaires
You will note that china has 406 billionaires.
So way fewer billionaires per capita with a way smaller fortune than the ones in the US, despite having a bigger economy? Oh no, this is a disaster.
Also https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/
Oh ok, i guess its ok for billionaires to exist as long as they simp for your dictator of choice.
Getting a liberal to read is borderline impossible. They can't even stomach short articles anymore.
Maybe we can find a way to write a really long headline and trick them into it
Maybe .ml should learn to read past simple platitudes of "billionaires are ok because we need to do business". Just because castro said good things about xi, doesnt mean workers havent been locked up in factories.
Xi executed CEO's that poisoned babies with lead.
What did the US do to the CEO that poisoned American babies?
Nothing.
I just dont like billionaires in any form wether or not they work as "adapters".
The article is just long form "the west has them, so we should have them". Billionaires arent under the peoples control. they're under the control of a dictator.
It isn't, actually. It attempts to examine why the PRC has them in the first place.
They skimmed it for talking points, ain't no way a person with such surface level opinions can analyze that article in 5 minutes lmao
Of course, hence my pointing out their mistake.
Sure. Read my comment going over why that is, and why that doesn't mean China suddenly isn't Socialist.