bet taken.
So you are taking some new, unspecified bet? Another one that needs new constraints? In what sense is the bet taken?
please pick the wagers that give full expression as determined by objective market,
I don't have any examples of an "objective market" to select from. I wouldn't choose the Hang Seng Index or other suggested proxies for the CCP because they are too easy to manipulate, and there is no real functional relationship with the CCP. I could wait for Muddy Waters to identify another accounting fraud from a Chinese company and short that, but I couldn't extract any money from you doing that. Where would be the fun in that?
can be monitored by all,
Everyone can monitor Caranza's good judgement, and I'll accept his judgement as final. Why won't you?
and w/o custodian issues over such a long time span. make the bet material.
These two issues are linked in my mind as well. You are a person who flaunts his wealth at every opportunity, but has serious difficulty in parting with an immaterial amount of money. You want the bet to be "material" but you consistently prevaricate on the conditions and the custodian. It appears that the size of the bet is already significantly "material" to you.
I stated before that you have no way to trust me anymore that I would trust you to pay off the bet. This is why I want a custodian. Given the level of your prevarications so far, I can imagine even more of it when it comes time to pay off the bet, should you lose.
In a sense, I am spending money, more than making a bet, since I want my winnings to go to Amnesty International. I want the satisfaction of a moral victory in seeing the demise of the Chinese Communist Party, and I wan't to pry $1000 from your wallet and give it to AI. This is the sum total of my motivations for the bet. I did not lure you into this bet. I originally stated that "I predict that the CCP will implode between 2018 and 2026" to mock your teowawki time span, if that's what it really was, and to show my disdain for the CCP. Then you replied with "bet taken - how much?"
We are all prone to bluster from time to time. I may have been unfair to call your comments about Japan and the Philippines as possibly racist or nationalistic - they could have just as easily been bluster. With your "bet taken - how much?" reply, my first reaction was that it was mere bluster. I became curious to see if was more than that, hence the bet.
be a reasonable man but be a man.
I wonder if you know what it means to be reasonable or to be a man. I believe that Fang Lizhi was "man" in the way that you might intend the term. en.wikipedia.org He has my highest respect as a man, along with George J. Mitchell.
It may not be possible for you or me to be a man in this sense. You would have too much to lose and I'm not in a position to face down a ruthless political organization. You may be a communist on the outside, but you appear to be a capitalist on the inside. This is very likely a necessary image to project in order to survive, but OK.
FWIW, I don't seek validation for my manhood from external sources. I know what kind of man I am from my friends, from my accomplishments, and from the people I have been able to help. I have been blessed with the best attributes of my political and economic system, and I suppose that I'll live and die in it. So, let's pull this "but be a man" rhetoric off the table and put it in the trash where it belongs.
Since I have a willing custodian whom I trust, I will not be altering the bet at this point. Either accept the bet "as is," or decline the bet as unacceptable. If you explicitly decline the bet, I won't mention it to you again.
I will leave the bet open for a year, so that anyone can accept the other side, or if you happen to change your mind. |
