Help support TMP


"Economic dissection of China" Topic


12 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Miscellaneous Discussion Plus Board



278 hits since 14 May 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo StoneMtnMinis Supporting Member of TMP15 May 2017 5:03 a.m. PST

A very short, but very incitfull look at the Chinese economic paper tiger.

link

Who asked this joker15 May 2017 6:05 a.m. PST

Reading the source and the comments within, I suspect we can take this one with a huge pinch of salt.

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP15 May 2017 7:08 a.m. PST

Joker,

Lol. Right, because there are just so many reliable sources when it comes to what our great friend China is seriously up to and how it's really doing.

Dan

GarrisonMiniatures Supporting Member of TMP Inactive Member15 May 2017 7:24 a.m. PST

'President Trump with his current economic team understand the weakness better than all international adversaries.'

Yes, a statement that fills me with confidence.

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP15 May 2017 7:27 a.m. PST

We will all need to learn Mandarin soon enough: :)

link

This I googled up might be one of the first phrases to learn.

我明白 (Wo mingbai) I understand

And this will probably become the word we end up saying the most:

是 (Shi) yes

Or maybe they'll let us keep our phones and we'll just need to click in our replies:

picture

Dan
PS. Everyone is so wrapped up on dismissing every bit of news when it doesn't come from one of their favorite sources, that we are missing the point in what is or isn't* being conveyed in the articles.
I learn more about China by reading multiple sources, because they all have one thing in common: they all do such a lousy job explaining to us why they are our great friend and ally, and because they're always trying to portray China as having inferior military capabilities.**

* And, most importantly, the "why" we are really being given that information.
** When the time comes, we might find that we don't have enough ammunition and conventional bombs for all the bodies being thrown at us,

Who asked this joker15 May 2017 10:57 a.m. PST

Lol. Right, because there are just so many reliable sources when it comes to what our great friend China is seriously up to and how it's really doing.

Reuters. Associated Press. About as close as you get to a raw news feed. All the others are just feeding you what you want to here. YMMV of course. wink

Who asked this joker15 May 2017 10:59 a.m. PST

Everyone is so wrapped up on dismissing every bit of news when it doesn't come from one of their favorite sources, that we are missing the point in what is or isn't* being conveyed in the articles.

It's pretty easy to dismiss any news organization that regularly run opinion pieces and talking heads programs to cater to their audience.

Once upon a time, their were news organizations that simply gave the news and they let YOU form an opinion.

I look at everything with a dubious eye, even if it supports my world view. Chances are, it came from somewhere that knows its audience.

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP15 May 2017 2:24 p.m. PST

Even what Reuters and AP news we get from US networks (all of them) is already adulterated and "massaged"/sanitized. Or they post the original story with a commentary carefully grafted at the end, just to make sure you understand the facts the way they want you to. It's sad because you can get so disgusted that you begin to discard some good core material within.

Their unethical practices in news media are just too blatant. That's why I usually read pieces from unrelated sources all around the world, compare what they have in common and usually discard the rest. In a way, despite so many online tools, some people find it harder to get news from reliable sources today than it was 30 years ago.

There have been a few AP stories that sounded fabricated or misleading to me, until I tracked down where the story originated and got the real scoop. Reuters is either still adhering to some sort of professional code or they have simply gotten even better than AP at obscuring traceable stories.

Then again, there are still too many in the public who can't distinguish between what is supposed to be a journalist and what is a commentator. The problem comes when the journalists themselves no longer understand what their job is supposed to be. Almost everything becomes an opinion piece. That's why so many people call each other' favorite networks "fake news".

Me? Well, for the last couple of years I've begun with the assumption that all "news" is fake until proven otherwise. Just like everything that comes out of the mouth of politicians.

Dan

Patrick Sexton Supporting Member of TMP16 May 2017 9:19 a.m. PST

"I look at everything with a dubious eye, even if it supports my world view."
" I've begun with the assumption that all "news" is fake until proven otherwise."

Very wise sentences indeed.

Ed Mohrmann Supporting Member of TMP16 May 2017 10:50 a.m. PST

For a long time I used to listen to 3 sources. The
BBC's North American service, Radio Beijing and
Voice of America.

Same stories, of course. You could usually come up with
what was what by analyzing the stories as reported by
each source.

Joker's right – there are NO reporters anymore, just
'Op-editors' looking to make a name for themselves as
opinion leaders.

Tumbleweed Supporting Member of TMP12 Jun 2017 12:31 p.m. PST

I agree with Dan. The problem with most city newspapers like the Richmond Times-Dispatch is that they use sources like AP too much.

skinkmasterreturns17 Nov 2017 2:06 p.m. PST

Since it has always been the Middle Kingdom,Beijing is simply waiting for the West to wake up and give it the recognition it knows it richly deserves.All else is incidental.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.