Journal zogger's Journal: Investing in Casino banks 3
As opposed to "investing" in stuff like this:
China is in the middle of a £480 billion domestic railway expansion project that aims to build nearly 19,000 miles of new railways in the next five years, connecting up all of its major cities with high-speed lines.
Two governments, two choices on where to dump close to a trillion bucks. I keep looking, and I have yet to see any obvious economic benefit for the nation as a whole to "investing" in the wall street casino banking "industry"..Or in dumping even more money into "going to war" against goat herders, while China is using similar cash to just go around the world and buy up all the juicy bits of real tangible stuff, raw materials, farmland, energy sources, minerals, whatever.
Just security wise, we could have enriched every dude in ashcanistan, helped them build farms and roads and hospitals, etc, for a *fraction* of what we spend on bombing them with the highest tech imaginable, and they would have strung up their 1% mad jihadi nutjob fundies willingly themselves. No war needed.
Nope, can't do that, got to create more and more jihadis with "collateral damage". Kill someone unrighteously, now their whole family is against you forever. Lather rinse repeat, that's our big advanced war strategy. I mean, right off the bat, who wouldn't want to fight against alien invaders in their homeland??
Really annoying, too, I don't like their lack of freedoms in China and blatant one party rule and a lot of other things, but I have to admire their long range planning and obvious intelligence and the ability to grok wealth creation and making friends around the planet over the complete ludicrous foreign policy and economic stupidity that exists in the USA now with our so called "leaders". Dang, just dang it. I mean it's *embarrassing*. And the height of the discourse is the grassroots with the two political gangs pointing fingers at each other claiming everything is the other side's fault.
Well, they are both correct actually. It *is* their fault.
Very good! Way cool! (Score:1)
Thanks for the reference, I never heard that term. I am pleased though that I have been correct, and that there *is* a term for part of this huge economic shift, something I have been writing about. It is emphasizing what I independently have been saying though, this part from the wikipedia page:
In a modern neoliberal economic setting, concepts of common ownership and equal and universal access rights often emerge as exotic or oriental, creating as described below situations of contemporary hydraulic empire and resource control.
Now look at this from the article, emphasis mine :
"We will use government money and bank loans, but the railways may also raise financing from the private sector and also from the host countries. We would actually prefer the other countries to pay in natural resources rather than make their own capital investment."
BINGO! WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP!
I am on record, several times, predicting this for some years now, that the Chinese would be sliding away from so much reliance on pieces
But... (Score:1)
......that's like the same flawed (from POV) argument statists on the Left have been making. They say instead of spending all that money on the WOT/Iraqi war, we could've spent it on more socialism. You're saying instead of spending all that money on the banks and the wars, we/the govt. could've spent it on infrastructure like public transportation. I say, either way it's Leftism and statism, which I oppose, because it's arguing for diverting money from what the federal govt. is chartered to do (national de