Hong Kong customs seize shipment of nine armoured military vehicles from Taiwan bound for Singapore

[MULUBJA]

China was supposed to be India 2.0.

Obviously, history worked for you and China quite differently.

I may agree with your post except I quoted above. What do you mea by china was supposed to be India 2?

You can never be india. Just because you opened economy bit early and you have dictotarial regime, you grew fast. We are democracy and can not adopt the way which you took. We can not snatch away farmer's land just to build any damn infrastructure. Our economy is of 8+ Tr dollar size though in nominal value it is it is 2.4 Tr USd. whatever development we did, we did not left our culture and adopted the western culture like you guys. Domocracy has its weaknesses so as the strength. You have reached almost top where as we have the sky as the limit. So many things have changed in last 2 years. Just wait. We have just changed the gear and you will see economical miracles.

You have been totally and utterly brainwashed by Western propaganda.

Chances of containing a China that is capable of the following are extremely remote.

新疆巴里坤县卤水淡化试养对虾首次获得成功

2016-12-06 14:13:00　　中国水产养殖网　　出处：中国新闻网 浏览量： 2405 次 我要评论

(姚建军 邓妍)12月1日，记者在巴里坤县海立德水产养殖专业合作社养殖基地看到，卤水淡化后工厂化养殖南美白对虾首次获得成功，填补了哈密地区对虾养殖的空白，令人兴奋地是，地处内陆深处的巴里坤人在今年在春节可以吃到当地产的海产品。

　　巴里坤海立德水产养殖专业合作社技术总监张建波说，11月12号投的这茬苗，从P5的苗到现在一共是19天了，现在大的能有3公分，小的也就是有2公分吧，应该说试养成功了。

　　巴里坤海立德水产养殖专业合作社理事长盛军先是江苏省连云港市人，来哈密市创业工作已在30多年，涉足过许多行业。当他看到近年来兴起的工厂化海产品养殖项目纷纷获得了良好的效益，而且了解到农业设施化、水产养殖工厂化是当今低碳、环保的国际大趋势，盛军先毅然决定在巴里坤县投资创办海产品养殖。巴里坤湖是咸水湖，盛产卤虫，卤虫是养殖对虾最好的饵料。盛军先提取了巴里坤湖的水样，历时一年多，先后在哈密市环保局、地质六大队、中国水产科学研究院黄海水产研究所等地进行了全项目分析检测，结果显示湖水水质优良，水中的各种微量元素完全适合海产品养殖，而且不含重金属。盛军先邀请专家实地进行了考察，又在国内各水产品养殖基地进行了深入考察和市场分析，与中国水产科学研究院黄海水产研究所签订了合作协议，由黄海水产研究所提供技术支持，实施了“卤水淡化海产品养殖西北示范基地”项目，开始尝试海产品的养殖。

　　巴里坤海立德水产养殖专业合作社理事长盛军先说，新疆的市场是很大的，而且我们养的是纯纯的海鲜，这个海产品的口感和淡水养殖的水产品的口感那是不一样的，所以说我对这个市场很有信心。

　　今年5月，盛军先注册成立了巴里坤海立德水产养殖专业合作社。在距离巴里坤湖1.3公里远的海子沿乡尖山子修建了2座1000平方米的养殖车间以及配套设施，完成投资300多万元。11月12号，合作社放养了第一批南美白对虾苗种。

　　巴里坤海立德水产养殖专业合作社理事长盛军先说，今年这一批虾看这个长势，春节绝对可以丰富我们哈密人民的餐桌，长势良好 。

　　海立德水产养殖专业合作社计划一期项目投资1300万元，除了养殖南美白对虾，还计划养殖多宝鱼、梭子蟹等。

　　巴里坤海立德水产养殖专业合作社理事长盛军先说，明年我大概还要投资1000来万，有3个池子，其中有一个大池子，中间搞一个观光通道，让这个客人来了呢从观光通道可以很直观的看到，就像那个水族馆一样，透明的，可以看到虾、多宝鱼、梭子蟹在水里头游。

　　一期项目完工后，海立德水产养殖专业合作社对虾、多宝鱼、梭子蟹的年产量将预计达到100吨、50吨和30吨。在合作社发展的同时，盛军先还打算带动更多的当地农牧民一同致富，海产品养殖将成为巴里坤农牧民增收的一条新途径。

　　巴里坤海立德水产养殖专业合作社理事长盛军先说，我们这个项目也是个创新，会给我们合作社带来很好的经济效益，但是它将带来更大的是社会效益，就是周围环湖四个乡镇的农牧民跟着我们来做，他就能够实现增收致富。对愿意参加我们合作社的这些农牧民技术指导，或者让他干脆入股这种方式，我们来带着他来走这条路。

What else you can say? If you do not agree out of your wishful thinking than you always rant like this.

 

[TaiShang]

What do you mea by china was supposed to be India 2?

The two countries were roughly sitting on similar initial benchmarks although India was slightly better developed.

You can never be india. Just because you opened economy bit early and you have dictotarial regime, you grew fast.

That's a rather simplistic and even childish proposition. Opening up economy would make you a dirt-shop if you are unable to move from that lower base into innovation. There are many opened-up economies (much earlier than China did) in Latin America. Yet, their conditions remain the same.

Many dictatorial regimes failed to develop whereas in Korea and China's Taiwan, 30-40 years of authoritarian governments ensured explosive and quality development. Your simplistic deduction does not hold against empirical evidence.

We are democracy and can not adopt the way which you took.

You are "Indian" democracy, not simply a democracy. Democracy is not a universal model. Your style of democracy has malfunctioned.

You have reached almost top where as we have the sky as the limit. So many things have changed in last 2 years. Just wait. We have just changed the gear and you will see economical miracles.

Future tense does not help. Over the past two years, China-India GDP difference has grown larger, not smaller.

 

[DCS]

People from the outside looking in always mistakenly attribute China's rapid development to this or that policy. They try to condense everything down to a few key macroeconomic indicators. The truth is that the foundation of China's success has always been the high quality of its human capital, and not any specific policy.

If India wants to converge, it will have to elevate the quality of its human capital and institutions to the level of developed nations. If you look at the top universities in Asia, it is dominated by China, this is among Asian tigers like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore.

The misinformed always rationalize China's development as a result of efficient top down totalitarian control, that results could be achieved by some Politburo guy smacking the table hard and yelling slogans. That couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[terranMarine]

The two countries were roughly sitting on similar initial benchmarks although India was slightly better developed.



That's a rather simplistic and even childish proposition. Opening up economy would make you a dirt-shop if you are unable to move from that lower base into innovation. There are many opened-up economies (much earlier than China did) in Latin America. Yet, their conditions remain the same.

Many dictatorial regimes failed to develop whereas in Korea and China's Taiwan, 30-40 years of authoritarian governments ensured explosive and quality development. Your simplistic deduction does not hold against empirical evidence.



You are "Indian" democracy, not simply a democracy. Democracy is not a universal model. Your style of democracy has malfunctioned.



Future tense does not help. Over the two years, China-India GDP difference has grown larger, not smaller.

Economic miracles coming from India very soon....... now that i gotta witness. Seeing is believing is it not?
Fact is India already missed the boat and it's not gonna match China let alone surpass China. Each year the gap is growing bigger and they wanna dream about surpassing China

 

[MULUBJA]

The two countries were roughly sitting on similar initial benchmarks although India was slightly better developed.

Yes.

That's a rather simplistic and even childish proposition. Opening up economy would make you a dirt-shop if you are unable to move from that lower base into innovation. There are many opened-up economies (much earlier than China did) in Latin America. Yet, their conditions remain the same.

You took a narrow view. Small countries open their economy which is allow easy import and it does not apply to economy like india and china. We open means we want to be hub of global manufacturing.

Many dictatorial regimes failed to develop whereas in Korea and China's Taiwan, 30-40 years of authoritarian governments ensured explosive and quality development. Your simplistic deduction does not hold against empirical evidence.

So what Many democracies have also failed. Any system can fail. What do you try to prove?

You are "Indian" democracy, not simply a democracy. Democracy is not a universal model. Your style of democracy has malfunctioned.

Future tense does not help. Over the past two years, China-India GDP difference has grown larger, not smaller.

No model is universal. Every model have their pros and cons. It is for you to choose what do you value more. We value human rights and emotions more. Economic development comes much letter. We have hanged only 3 person in last 2 decades where you guys line up the people and shoot them in their heads. Here one guy commits suicides and government rethinks on the whole policy. So there cannot be any comparison. Inspite of your so called very good system, agitation has taken place in your country for democracy where in our whole history, nobody has demanded communism of Chinese type. This is the difference. We cannot play with basic human right just for economic development. Democracy needs a time to mature. Ours is maturing very fast. I can take this discussion loat further but this should suffice.

 

[GeraltofRivia]

People from the outside looking in always mistakenly attribute China's rapid development to this or that policy. They try to condense everything down to a few key macroeconomic indicators. The truth is that the foundation of China's success has always been the high quality of its human capital, and not any specific policy.

If India wants to converge, it will have to elevate the quality of its human capital and institutions to the level of developed nations. If you look at the top universities in Asia, it is dominated by China, this is among Asian tigers like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore. The misinformed always rationalize China's development as a result of efficient top down totalitarian control, that results could be achieved by some Politburo guy smacking the table hard and yelling slogans. That couldn't be further from the truth.

Cannot agree more. I suppose China's development policy after 1980 is largely a hands-off one. The government stepped out from playing role in making specific economic decision and only played a supporting role (e.g. building road, railway, power plants, maintaining order etc). Instead it lets citizens/entrepreneurs make the best decision for themselves. It could borrow some ideas from a traditional school of governance thought - 无为而治 (achieving prosperous with little state interference).

 

[TaiShang]

You took a narrow view. Small countries open their economy which is allow easy import and it does not apply to economy like india and china. We open means we want to be hub of global manufacturing.

It does not matter a country is physically small or big. It could be a curse as well as a blessing.

Small economies can assume a critical sector and become leaders. Taiwan, under authoritarian KMT government for 30 or more years adopted this model. China's Taiwan, however, concentrated on IT and computers, became the "Computer Kingdom." It did not become a "space tech kingdom" for instance, due to its smaller size.

Same goes a country like Korea or Japan, both were under authoritarian governments for decades until they completed development. Even today, their model is far from being called a Western-style democracy.

So what Many democracies have also failed. Any system can fail. What do you try to prove?

I prove that it all comes down to management (business-economy) and governance (politics). The reason India failed and China (still incomplete) "succeeded" is not because they adopted different elections systems. It was and it is because Indian system was/is inherently inefficient and malfunctioning while China was able to construct an indigenous model of development.

Like @DCS says, it all comes down to human capital and good governance.

We value human rights and emotions more.

We do value more, if we are going to be simplistic in our analyses. China has less poverty, better hygiene, cleaner cities and better urbanization. China has a better record of human rights although it is not at the desired levels.

We have hanged only 3 person in last 2 decades where you guys line up the people and shoot them in their heads.

Yet, you have been killing millions of kids every year due to curable diseases and malnutrition. China had to suffer from Opium Wars, which made about 90% of the population in the coastal areas drug addicts. From that bitter lesson, China developed no tolerance against societal ills.

If you had a better management, you would not have the widespread rape and killings problem, for one thing.

Inspite of your so called very good system, agitation has taken place in your country for democracy where in our whole history, nobody has demanded communism of Chinese type.

You have insurgencies that demand a different system. Agitation took place in US, also. It takes place everywhere. The question is whether it represents the common will and whether there is foreign interests involved.

We cannot play with basic human right just for economic development. Democracy needs a time to mature. Ours is maturing very fast. I can take this discussion loat further but this should suffice.

In fact you are mentally making circles around the same fuzzy idea of democracy as if it is a universal concept. It is not. And your model of democracy has failed so far. Whether you will succeed from now on or not depends on whether you can adapt and progress.

 

[艹艹艹]

Old dys were good days because china developed at a very high rate it has come down significantly. Foreign exchage reserve is down and many predictes china's dwnfall.

I know what you mean, the Chinese economy will collapse, India will be the next super power

滑稽

 

[TaiShang]

From the beginning, I though I was talking to an intelligent person, hence I valued your posts and responded. I am now disappointed and will be ending our conversation.

 

[AndrewJin]

From the beginning, I though I was talking to an intelligent person, hence I valued your posts and responded. I am now disappointed and will be ending our conversation.

Save your words bro.

He is the one using a Chinese bridge photo to fake India's. When the lie was debunked, he lied again, he claimed he misused because they looked "similar" when two bridges have completely different colors!

There are some honorable Indian members in this forum with whom you could argue logistically. But not this ill-educated one who lacks integrity and the basic courage to confess an ill-fabricated lie.

 

[TaiShang]

Save your words bro.

He is the one using a Chinese bridge photo to fake India's. When the lie was debunked, he lied again, he claimed he misused because they looked "similar" when two bridges have completely different colors!

There are some honorable Indian members in this forum with whom you could argue logistically. But not this ill-educated one who lacks integrity and the basic courage to confess an ill-fabricated lie.

Thank you, brother.

I remember the very constructive debate you had over that thread. But I forgot it was the same member. I must have been swimming against the current, then.

A change of debate direction from development to cockroaches and other insects had been very telling, though.

 

[TaiShang]

中国的喷子！！

I agree and I should learn this practice to avoid unnecessary loss of time.

And your English is just fine, my brother.

 

[艹艹艹]

I agree and I should learn this practice to avoid unnecessary loss of time.

 

[WhyCry]

It does not matter a country is physically small or big. It could be a curse as well as a blessing.

Small economies can assume a critical sector and become leaders. Taiwan, under authoritarian KMT government for 30 or more years adopted this model. China's Taiwan, however, concentrated on IT and computers, became the "Computer Kingdom." It did not become a "space tech kingdom" for instance, due to its smaller size.

Same goes a country like Korea or Japan, both were under authoritarian governments for decades until they completed development. Even today, their model is far from being called a Western-style democracy.

Most of you said is true but their size actually matters for the business to be bigger and successful, since most of it concentrated for at-home consumption. Your question pretty much answers itself. Japan and korea got success in their own way they didn't had to replicate the western model and its not needed. The indicators can show that. So china or india have to find their way of improving those indicators. In china's case they are so called after-effects.

We do value more, if we are going to be simplistic in our analyses. China has less poverty, better hygiene, cleaner cities and better urbanization. China has a better record of human rights although it is not at the desired leve

Lets not fool ourselves on this. Just to give you an example, I use to tell my father that I didn't got the 'Desired' marks in a subject where I actually failed miserable. So I can relate.

 

[Keel]

The Singaporeans are trying to save their PM's blunder on SCS against China - a bit too late!