I don’t think it’s specific to that though, like I explained. And it’s clearly not enough taxation since people have been able to exploit the workers for an unimaginable pile of money such as that.
Also, USD? I never mentioned USD? Where did that come from?
A socialist society retains capitalist contradictions by its very nature because socialism is the transitional stage of development when the working class takes power, but existing relations of production have not yet been abolished. This is precisely what we see in China today. There are capitalists, they do exploit people, and that is a real contradiction within Chinese society. However, that’s different from saying that these people run the society the way they do in capitalist countries. Saying China is capitalist because it allows a limited form of capitalism to exist because it’s seen as useful for development, is like saying Canada is communist because it has public healthcare.
I’m not sure what your argument is then. If you accept that it is a socialist society, then you also have to realize that it must have these contradictions which are the nature of such a society.
I was saying that it must be disappointing to see to a lot of people. They might not be as well versed in the science of why billionaires are necessary etc.
Nobody here is saying billionaires are necessary to exist. They are a product of specific historic and material conditions China found itself in. They chose to accept the problems opening up would bring because they judged that economic relations with the west would outweigh the downsides. It’s impossible to look at how China managed to develop today and argue that it was a wrong decision. Opening up allowed China to rapidly catch up technologically with the west, and to develop peacefully instead of having to devote huge amounts of resources to the military the way USSR was forced to do.
I was discussing with the other person and I got the impression that billionaires would be necessary to the current Chinese strategy. I’m not entirely sure though if that was their thinking, I hope they’ll clarify.
I already explained why capitalists exist in China, as a dying class used primarily to expedite development of the productive forces in less developed industry. Your response is that they have not been taxed out of existence, but this does not accomplish socialization of the productive forces. Instead, you are making an arbitrary argument based on semi-religious notions of purity. The only conclusion is that you would prefer collective poverty under a more publicly owned system to satisfy your desire for “purity.”
The way to get rid of capitalists is to develop out of relations of production that give rise to them, not to merely tax them out of existence.
As for the point on USD, it’s the international standard for “billionaire.” Do you mean in RMB? If so, this translates to roughly 150 million USD. Why this specific number? Why not 1 billion Francs?
I don’t feel that it’s necessary to have billionaires. I know that China’s strategy of leveraging markets for lesser developed industry works, and the byproduct of this is the temporary existence of billionaires. I also know that this process leads to socialization of production, which leads to the CPC collectivizing these industries gradually. An arbitrary level of taxation will not accelerate this process. The CPC already taxes their capitalists heavily, increasing the taxation quantitatively is not necessarily a bad thing but certainly does not qualitatively change this process of constructing socialism.
Do you have a reason for picking 1 billion USD/RMB/Francs/etc. as a wealth cap beyond vibes? China already taxes them, and I wouldn’t oppose them deciding to increase taxation. I also know that at the rate they are going, the very existence of capitalists and therefore billionaires is being eroded. What would changing the taxation rate do to qualitatively transform China into a country you would be satisfied with?
You’ve dodged most of my questions, I answered the important aspects of your question. Taxing capitalists at a higher rate would not qualitatively transform China’s economy. Do you have a reason for picking 1 billion USD/RMB/Francs/etc. as a wealth cap beyond vibes?Why is the taxation rate in China insufficient?"
You can convert the amount to RMB if that makes it easier to answer. You can even take 1/5th out of it too to make it a different amount. I’d just like to hear the answer to that question, since it is sorta important in understand your point
I don’t think it’s specific to that though, like I explained. And it’s clearly not enough taxation since people have been able to exploit the workers for an unimaginable pile of money such as that.
Also, USD? I never mentioned USD? Where did that come from?
A socialist society retains capitalist contradictions by its very nature because socialism is the transitional stage of development when the working class takes power, but existing relations of production have not yet been abolished. This is precisely what we see in China today. There are capitalists, they do exploit people, and that is a real contradiction within Chinese society. However, that’s different from saying that these people run the society the way they do in capitalist countries. Saying China is capitalist because it allows a limited form of capitalism to exist because it’s seen as useful for development, is like saying Canada is communist because it has public healthcare.
A good read on the subject I can recommend https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/
I haven’t made claims about them running the society or that China is capitalist. I said it’s a mixed economy in one comment though.
I’m not sure what your argument is then. If you accept that it is a socialist society, then you also have to realize that it must have these contradictions which are the nature of such a society.
I was saying that it must be disappointing to see to a lot of people. They might not be as well versed in the science of why billionaires are necessary etc.
Nobody here is saying billionaires are necessary to exist. They are a product of specific historic and material conditions China found itself in. They chose to accept the problems opening up would bring because they judged that economic relations with the west would outweigh the downsides. It’s impossible to look at how China managed to develop today and argue that it was a wrong decision. Opening up allowed China to rapidly catch up technologically with the west, and to develop peacefully instead of having to devote huge amounts of resources to the military the way USSR was forced to do.
I was discussing with the other person and I got the impression that billionaires would be necessary to the current Chinese strategy. I’m not entirely sure though if that was their thinking, I hope they’ll clarify.
I mean I just explained that above, and provided you with a longer explanation in a link in the previous comment. You could try engaging with that.
I thought you were explaining your viewpoint, not theirs
I already explained why capitalists exist in China, as a dying class used primarily to expedite development of the productive forces in less developed industry. Your response is that they have not been taxed out of existence, but this does not accomplish socialization of the productive forces. Instead, you are making an arbitrary argument based on semi-religious notions of purity. The only conclusion is that you would prefer collective poverty under a more publicly owned system to satisfy your desire for “purity.”
The way to get rid of capitalists is to develop out of relations of production that give rise to them, not to merely tax them out of existence.
As for the point on USD, it’s the international standard for “billionaire.” Do you mean in RMB? If so, this translates to roughly 150 million USD. Why this specific number? Why not 1 billion Francs?
Why do you feel it’s necessary to have billionaires? Not even any wealth level below that but billionaires specifically?
I don’t feel that it’s necessary to have billionaires. I know that China’s strategy of leveraging markets for lesser developed industry works, and the byproduct of this is the temporary existence of billionaires. I also know that this process leads to socialization of production, which leads to the CPC collectivizing these industries gradually. An arbitrary level of taxation will not accelerate this process. The CPC already taxes their capitalists heavily, increasing the taxation quantitatively is not necessarily a bad thing but certainly does not qualitatively change this process of constructing socialism.
Do you know if this strategy could work without billionaires?
Do you have a reason for picking 1 billion USD/RMB/Francs/etc. as a wealth cap beyond vibes? China already taxes them, and I wouldn’t oppose them deciding to increase taxation. I also know that at the rate they are going, the very existence of capitalists and therefore billionaires is being eroded. What would changing the taxation rate do to qualitatively transform China into a country you would be satisfied with?
I’m sorry but you didn’t answer my question
You’ve dodged most of my questions, I answered the important aspects of your question. Taxing capitalists at a higher rate would not qualitatively transform China’s economy. Do you have a reason for picking 1 billion USD/RMB/Francs/etc. as a wealth cap beyond vibes? Why is the taxation rate in China insufficient?"
You can convert the amount to RMB if that makes it easier to answer. You can even take 1/5th out of it too to make it a different amount. I’d just like to hear the answer to that question, since it is sorta important in understand your point