You ignored 95% of my comment. I would like you to re-read it instead of repackaging your other, usualy credible, arguments about the need for Chinese economic and trade reoriantation to try and support an immaginary scenario. China may be in danger for all shorts of things, but not from what you are saying. I listed like 8 seperate angles on why the US trying to strangle and significantly disrupt Chinese sea trade roots following a Chinese action against Taiwan is logisticaly nearly impossible, extremely porous, self defeating and apocalyptic to pretty much everyone before it is for China and its plausible stretegic advantages cant come remoetly quickly enough to matter in timescale of a conflict in SCS. And that was on the asumption that the US would attempt an actual cut off and blockade of a sea route. If your hypothetical also has that the US will be achieving that chocking and rerouting of global maritime trade while actively engaged militarily with China in the pacific theater and SCS with like 2 available US subs scouring an erea larger than Europe and doing indiscriminate terrorism (because monitoring and intelligence isnt actualy there) to 1 or 2 out of 500 passing containers per day then this adds more layers of implausibility that drops it bellow r/worldnews tier.

It cant happen, it wont happen and no one on the military or civilian command of either country considers it seriously

A Chinese EV sold in the EU has a profit margin of 10 TIMES the same EV model sold domestically in China

I imagine you are refering to this cause this is the only "10 time profit margin" thing i have come across

Im gonna link this long breakdown of someone that seems to know way more than i (or you i assume) that argues that this figure from this particular research research that, while interesting, understates the amount of variable profit per incremental vehicle sold in China by a notable margin(25%, not 6%). That Incremental onshore profit for each BYD Seal would be €5,395, not €1,306 and also that it overstates the profit margin per unit in Europe by ignoring some additional costs .

Here https://x.com/GlennLuk/status/1809563664615198784

Overall this would mean that European markets , while important, arent nearly a "lifeline" for Chinese EVs and that the vast majority of profit is and will be made in domestic sales and in sales in SEA and 10-20k GDP per capita countries. European automakers are dependent from the Chinese market way way more than Chinese EV makers ever will from the EU market. Let alone the US that isnt a relevant market in the first place.

Hey now OP probably wants all the girl and queer comrades to be ripped and veiny as well

This is somewhat reddit analysis since in the scenario of US-China conflict starting with a Chinese kinetic action or blockade of Taiwan any US initiated disruption or blockade of ship routes from and towards China serious enough to hurt China enough to "back off" will have already completely collapsed the economies and even societies of Japan, Worst Korea and Phillipines (allies whose assistance let alone normal function the US counts on to be able to do any kind of successull defense of Taiwan), those of most of the "non-aligned" SEA countries and of course Taiwan. Not in a "recession" or "inflation" sense. If the US is able to mount any such successfull sea route choking to have China in crisis within idk 1 month ,most of the countries i mentioned will be imploding within 1-2 weeks. There is no way of doing one without doing the other and at that point you have lost both Taiwan and the entire region.

There is a reason practicaly no US military think tank, war game or DoD analysis seriously considers SEA sea trade route blockading and disruption a strategy US is remotely likely to try. If it was a viable approach to "win the engagement" both sides would know it and it wouldnt be any kind of a secret, you would see it being seriously discussed and analyses by credible sources and people, not on YT videos and r/Noncredible defense

Of course China wants to expand its inland routes and of course it wants to maximize its degree self sufficiency in energy , calories etc. In part because of course sea routes will be disrupted in any Taiwan related US-China conflict even if the US takes no action on that front. But it being used as a strategy by the US and being credibly able to hurt China both enough and quickly enough to cause a defeat before other factors do and without it fucking up every single ally and non ally in the erea first to a degree that will mean the US loses the region anyways

If anything Ansarallah forcing the last line of missile and air defence used by US ships and managing at least a near hit or scare on USS Eisenhower with the 2nd tier Iranian missiles shows that in any hot conflict in SCS there would be 4 US carriers and 15 Destroyers in the bottom of the ocean by the time the first Chinese person goes hungry or without heating due to US initiated sea route disruption

Chinese state taking a larger and larger role in the housing sector and various public affortable housing initiatives in various levels and models have been openly and officialy stated by the CPC as actions to be taken going forward. Most western coverages even of sales like the one we are talking about specificaly mention them being part of those policies

How do Chinese households borrow to consume if both their savings growth, their income growth and the consumption growth have been comfortably and sustainably larger than HH debt growth. HH debt can also be a bunch of things not related to most aspects of consumption so unless we have some ready to go data we cant know where that debt went and its a huge leap to call China's consumption growth "debt fueled". Like HH have to borrow to be able consume but also HH savings are at the same time growing faster and higher than HH debt ? They get in debt to be able to sustain their consumption but also they are able save up more than the debt they get into ? Doesnt pass the smell test.

Also the aggregated debt figure compared nominaly against the GDP may tell us absolutely nothing about how distressed the average household balance sheet is given the income and regional inequalities in China in the last decade and the economic activity of different groups. Its much more likely that upper middle housholds and individuals leveraged too much on the property market and speculation (irregardless of their returns) and on the average household level i would imagine most debt figures have accumulated from the explosion of car purchases and payments that foundementaly add a bunch to HH debt calculation no matter how healthy peoples balance sheet is. So Its less of an issue if HH debt going up mostly as a function of mortgage penetration for higher income earners but not coming at the expense of savings or consumption (but also not financing those things) for the average houshold.

Vietnam with the cinge anglophilia once again...

And i say anglophilia because this isnt really just a case of "we dislike or distrust both parties but i guess Chine less because history or SCS disputes or whatever". There genuinely is a very positive public opinion towards the US there and US cultural hegemony seems very entranched. To score similarly to the phillippines in such a study something is really wrong with the perception of the US among the population.

Why do you repeat the redditor-YT thumbnail tier "China has built enough housing for 6 billion people" thing in that comment. Its a completely unserious claim that comes from no credible source or analysis, domesticaly or abroad and is diectly contradicted by any actual numbers of Chinese construction. Its for redditors to circlejerk over in the comments when watching some demolition video of high rises in China and pretend China has ovebuild by 100% or more. Latest vacancy numbers show that residential Vacancy rates are between 7 to 23% with an average of around 13%. Higher on low tier cities and lower in Tier 1 cities. There is overbuilding but if you wanna aim at a "healthy" 5% that means that China has overbuilt by 8% and thats some dead GDP of idk a 4 trillion over a decade or whatever. But again China still has a lot room to go in urbanization rates , especially now that growth is concentrated in tier 2 and bellow cities so unless you believe that China tops out at 65% urbanization rates - of which 20% are still not even full urban hukou holders, even that overbuilding isnt as definitive in the "will never be occupied and used" territory

You make these well thought out comments and analysis but you sometimes include something so non-credibly anti-china tabloid slop that it sours the whole thing . Do you actualy believe that like of 70% of all residential buildings in China right now are empty housing or some unfinished high rises?. Be real

idk if i would read into a couple of purges and changes of personel with such negative and "china observer" like analysis.

We know the long standing issues of the PLA and how it improved and modernized a lot under Xi's tenure (often with purges like this) and we know there are different wings and interests inside the CPC. Whose to say that this isnt a case of Xi consolidating a more loyal and competent comand. Or that its indeed a corruption case which extremely realistic given PLA in the last 20 years and so despite a very widespread and successfull anti corruption campaign you can still find big names lacking. Or that they were found out to have a mistress like a couple of big officials in the last few months.

"Political shake up that has not occured since the cultural revolution" seems like a quite overblown take at the very least given the things you listed. China had self contained political crises in the 80s ,90s ,00s and 10s that saw "shake ups" much more dramatic and in scale. Hell the anti-corruption campaign that i mentioned saw like 500k mid, low and high level party officials and army officers purged. The "shake up" during zero covid and before the party's congress also seemed much more important than whatever this is.

In the end of the day under Xi the biggest shake up has occured. That in a way "Politics are in command" in much more real sense than they have been in 40+ years. That new reality foundementaly makes staff changes, purges and shake ups in positions much more common than they were in lets say 90s-early 10s .And that shouldnt immediately be thought of as a negative or as a measure of instability, or that Xi positions is more precarious than ever. I simply dont see it.

Also repeating the completely and utterly unsubstantiated submarine incident rumor as something that even remotely can lend more merit to your analysis makes it more flimsy.

The source (Lude media) has no credibility and then the guy who originaly (and only) put the story out in western twitter claiming he also veryfied it ,H I Sutton, isnt a particularly trustworthy figure in the PLA watching sphere. He run with the "there is a coup against Xi" and "China is hiding 20 million covid deaths" stories last year and the manner in which the story broke was at best shaky. For example Lude media has written a rather defensive follow up tweet stating that the supposed incident occurred in the Yellow Sea and nothing occurred in the Taiwan strait, and that people saying it happened in the Taiwan strait are 50 cent shills, essentially claiming it is disinformation. Of course, it is rather confusing, as it was Lude media himself who first stated so confidently that he had top secret information, and that among other details he had access to, that this happened in the Taiwan strait ("在执行台海任务时出事"). And both had follow up tweets walking back on the claims saying that it is unconfirmed and to treat with great caution (and if im not mistaken they later delete dtheir original posts). And then nothing . There here's been no other news sites reporting this, even anti-china ones , and had the Chinese somehow lost a sub in the Taiwan Strait or SCS, the ereaand the skies above it would be full of Chinese ships and aircraft on search and rescue missions, and all of the traffic and survailance on the erea would see it and report it. There's no way such an effort could go unnoticed in such a busy water ways. Nothing came out of it an dnothing was reported.

But lets ignore that the submarine thing as a misstep. I see little reason to think Xi is going to meet biden from a position of weakness even if there is relative weakness in some apsects of the economic sphere as you claim.

The collapse of Ukraine’s offensive against Russian forces , its commander’s admission that the war is a “stalemate” and the slow but certain shift in narrative is a setback for America’s strategic geopolitical position and a gain for China and the end of the war seems to be shifting towards a net loss for the US and a net gain for China. And Russia itself isnt a market or economic hub that can be handwaived as easily as you think. China has doubled its exports to Russia since the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, has increased their coordination with Moscow in almost all foreign actions and have secured or are in the process of securing energy and food security configurations they could not expect some years prior

The US tech war on China has mostly flopped, with even western think tanks and pushers of the sanctions admitting deffeat or panicking to double down. America’s restrictions on high-end chip exports to China failed to prevent Huawei Technologies from offering a new smartphone as well as Artificial Intelligence processors with performance comparable to or close to what’s achieved by the products of Nvidia and other US designers. Huawai is expanding both domesticaly and worldwide and so do other chip and tech companies America tried to strangle. Chinese and SEA market is increasingly being caprtured by China and so is the developing world and the lead in 5g tech and applications only grows larger . The mate60 came out of no where and Chinese AI firms buy fast Huawei processers in place of chips from Nvidia and other US producers. US,japanese and Korean tech firms lost and are losing markets of ~2 billion peope and they are in a positionf of weakness right now, many begging the US regime to change approach and course

The Isreili war on Gaza and the US response gives China a free option to act as the de facto leader of the Global South in opposition to Israel, an American ally even by simply not doing much and simply watch the US losing their hold in PR and public opinion in lot of the developing world. US prob spend tens of billions in worldwide media and NGO campaigns to undermine China's image and postive attitudes towards it but all that effort has been at the very least counteracted it by the last month;s impact on West's and US's image for billions. Also China now exports more to the Muslim world than it does to the United States and more to the developing world than they do to US+EU+Japan+Korea+Canada

Also the US military ,despite what the political hawks are pushing for, really wants to avoid confrontation with China in the Northwest Pacific region as well as its home waters in the South China Sea, where the PLA’s thousands of surface-to-ship missiles and nearly 1,000 fourth- and fifth-generation warplanes give China an overwhelming home-theater advantage in firepower. By most credible voices ,both official and unoffical, China holds a distinct advantage in the erea and can achieve right now a ,costly for itself but even more costly for the US in more way than material, win in a military campaign against Taiwan.ANd that will become increasingly more true over the next decade

LA Rocket Force “is the largest ground-based missile force in the world, with over 2,200 conventionally armed ballistic and cruise missiles and with enough anti-ship missiles to attack every US surface combatant vessel in the South China Sea with enough firepower to overcome each ship’s missile defense,” Major Christopher J. Mihal wrote in 2021 in a US Army journal.

If you think this is just a "please give us money" and not the realistic analysis a lot in the US military are having you are mistaken.

We got a taste of the Biden-Xi discussions from Newsom's visit (who is also the likeliest 2024 Democratic presidential candidate should Biden withdraw for health reasons) . Newsom has been quoted as saying that he had “expressed my support for the One-China policy … as well as our desire not to see independence” of Taiwan. Clear rejection of Taiwanese independence contrasts with the approach and statements of the last few years of almost all US officials including Biden who will likely echo such retorical pull back in the next few months. It doesnt mean too much materialy but its an important point of where the wind is shifting and with teh upcoming Taiwanese elections in mind and the weakening of the DPP positions.

Thats all to say that yeah (de)dolarization matters, yeah US financial capital hegemony and capabilities matter but they dont come or exist from without. Their strength and usability is at some point a function of the material,political and social base and on the ground contradictions both domesticaly and abroad matter more long term. Each global or geopolitical crisis or event of the last few years has "trickled down" much more instability and rot in the US political and social fabric than it did for China and provided much more fertile ground for counterhegemonic developments in the developing world , even if one can say that China and Russia didnt take advantage of them as much as they could. US financial hegemony doesnt exist outside of politics or (geo)politics in "people" centered sense even if we might still be far from the US domestic contradictions and global crises having significant impact on the ability and effectiveness of it to act and react in the way it needs to to "win" (but we also might be closer than we think). US might have gotten a lot of economy related "wins" already in Ukraine for example but in a long term PoV im not sure "putting EU back in its place" and having them on a geopolitical and economic leash is enough considering the changes it kickstarted and accelerated domsetcialy and abroad and especially their consolidation given the likely outcome

Hasan has some great takes and has done a great job covering this issue but i wouldnt give to much weight to some geopolitical speculation he made during a stream. This one is easy to prove how unlikely it is. Any world war involving China and the US will see them in opposing sides. Israel will de facto be on the US side. SO China will be on the opposing side of Israel. SImple

Trans people in sports isnt complicated. Let them compete in whatever league or category they want and identify as. Thats perfectly duable right now in the current sports scene. No gender segregation in sports altogether is very complicated and would need a serious advance into a socialist society and population cultural mindset for it to be able to be implemented without hurting most the existing hundreds of millions of women athletes at all levels imo.

Under a socialist system of mostly amateur,well founded sports scene and the equivalent education i agree thats the ideal. In our current system i feel the realities of founding and way the sports ,especially competitive sports, are structured and approached would have a vast majority of female athletes understandably not wanting genderless sports league and any suggestion or movement towards that policy before or without prioratizing complete reform of how sports and sports leagues are structured wont go anywhere.

Why would women track and field athletes want genderless sports rn if that would 100% translate to them constantly losing and being left out of competitions, losing sports scholarships let alone financialy supporting themselves and having little chance of proffessional career or any international or national success. Even if they got payed all the same, there still a want and need for athletes to compete and have a chance to win on some level of the sport against their peers. So even in the amateur scene. If the best performing woman in t&f can only hope for in any competition, be it town,city, college, state or national , to with the 20th best time or throw or jump with everyone ahead of them being men then they wouldnt take that deal and even more so the others.

Same with team sports. At any level the team will be looking to win and will chose the players that will make that more likely. So you will end up with segregated leagues any way where even in amateur leagues 98% of the rosters are male. A solution would be to enforse a quota that every team must have X woman players on the team and they must play at minimum Y minutes but that would still lead to huge issues and idk if again the women athletes would want that

As far as i have seen property prices have been dropng like a rock in Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities and are dropping a bit even in tier 1