142
Young Chinese are getting paid to be 'full-time children' as jobs become harder to find | CNN Business (www.cnn.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
101 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A thread yesterday had a variety of people asking if the unemployment is lower because the youth are well cared for.

Please click through and read for additional context. Families are helping. Parents age and are not a long-term plan except for the most unusually wealthy.

Please remember: China is nominally communist. Functionally, they are capitalists with an usual side of excess infrastructure spending. A strong central government doesn't make a country communist.

Their land use rules... that makes them communist-ish. But that's a small part of a far larger picture.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

If you don't like them being called capitalist, then your quarrel is with a whole heap of people (and academics).

The question, like I alluded to earlier, isn't whether they are capitalist, but a question of how much. And many, after careful study, have determined them to be capitalist.

Those determinations are based on measurable things and philosophy (somewhat).

Also: you are clearly not my original intended audience. In the referenced thread I was getting low-effort, glib comments that snowballed upvotes.

Not unlike the person who deemed me to be a republican. It's easy to look at my post history.

I'm not a republican. But glib is easy. And glib, low-effort posters were the primary intended audience. Know-it-alls.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I'm going to make a glib comment; So they're 25% capitalist and 30% socialist and 10% communist and the rest something else. It doesn't mean they're a primarily capitalist economy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -1 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    I get that you're having a bit of fun. On a separate branch here, I make a similar point.

    What people argue about is how much of one makes it "x." They can seldom say it's not capitalist, socialist or even communist.

    We quibble over which side of a line it lands. And googling this lead to about a 50/50 split between capitalist and socialist.

    I didn't pull the idea that they're capitalist out of my ass.

    And all of the side stuff is people completely missing the article. It's pedantic and cheap intellectual points and so rarely thoughtful or insightful.

    Is lemmy usually this wannabe edgelord?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •