Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marcher who wrote (177738)	9/4/2021 2:05:41 AM
From: TobagoJack	2 Recommendations Recommended By marcher SirWalterRalegh Respond to of 217752

Yes, China is undergoing REVOLUTION, as compared to that of 1921 - 1949 Revolution, and the 1967 - 1975 Cultural Revolution. In David's words a 'major change', and 'COMMON PROSPERITY' is not exactly communism. The revolution aims to expand the middle class, and is rolled out at the experimental site first, but shall quickly roll, per rolling thunder. 'Economic success is going to serve the people', is the explicit objective. Hard to argue with the sentiment. Given folks are soon supposed to be able to move in and out of the Zhejiang province Hangzhou city, the dastardly CCP is in effect setting up a voting-by-pattering-feet gauge to judge success of the experimental program. Education should be non-profit, and people should be able to afford more children, ... Data should remain a common good, and not for private aggregation and harvesting. Computer gaming hours should be limited. Healthcare and housing out to be basic human rights. Makes for interesting investment scene, and now only question is investing in what? Side issue, and a small issue, that being what if, however and arguably unlikely even if actually valid, ... what happens should CCP China China China be 30-70% (never mind 100%) successful in doing enrichment of people through thriving of SMEs (small medium enterprises) ? IOW, should the CCP be successful, then what would be the spins by DNC and RNC and every other political party on this planet in protection of their actual one-$-one-vote masters ? Very exciting. Planet needs leadership to make it across the coming 2026 / 2032 jarring junctures, and leadership shows up. Might lead us wrong, but inarguably leading. I note that politicians in other lands are keeping mum, and their lap dog MSMs are not digging. They do not and cannot have a response. For if they go thumbs down, what would their population think? and if they go thumbs-up, unthinkable happens. 'They' do not want to talk about 'Common Prosperity' and certainly not Common Prosperity across the planet encompassing all civilisations. 'They', if I were part of 'they', want the entire subject to go-away. Love it :0)))) this Team Xi move is even better than Belt & Road. Masterful Game of Go move. A single pebble setting the scene around which the future might rise, becoming a Master Piece. Unclear the obvious but complicated move would succeed, but should it be slightly successful, the electorates would demand another helping, and re-fill, and and and, as they say, success begets success. Should it fail, the planet might be doomed. I can see how gold might help to calm the nerves :0) There is no obvious military answer to the socio-political one-up, and Team USA and like-minded should actually pay attention but cannot. 'They' cannot afford the debate.

To: marcher who wrote (177738)	9/4/2021 4:32:10 AM
From: TobagoJack	2 Recommendations Recommended By Haim R. Branisteanu marcher Respond to of 217752

Re <<do you agree with david's comments?>> heart-warming, how the rich are so for-the-greater-good generous, and instead of trying to build dynastic fortunes, opting to create a better and fairer society, knowing full well that they were luckier as opposed to smarter Core Comrade clearly running for third term, and is very popular for reasons of greater-good. Am not fussed about any rich person trying to decamp, for China shall not run dry of entrepreneurs. To get rich is glorious. To give it away is smart. Should Xi be running for POTUS, in a fair election process, can he win? :0))))) bloomberg.com What ‘Common Prosperity’ Means and Why Xi Wants It Janet Paskin 3 September 2021, 15:19 GMT+8 Chinese President Xi Jinping is on a campaign to remake the world’s second-biggest economy with an emphasis on “common prosperity.” The hope is that a mix of policy moves, market forces and philanthropy will address the country’s wide and persistent wealth gap, which could become a political threat to the ruling Communist Party if left unchecked. Regulators have targeted some of China’s most successful private enterprises, the data-rich tech sector in particular, alarming investors. They’re also trying to rein in what the government sees as the excesses of civil society, including rabid celebrity fandom, academic cram schools and video gaming. 1. How big a problem is inequality in China? China’s richest 20% earn more than 10 times the poorest 20%, a wider gap than in the U.S. or European countries such as Germany and France, and one that hasn’t budged since 2015. Though the number of people living in extreme poverty has dropped dramatically over the past decade, more than 600 million people -- about half of China’s population -- live on an annual income of 12,000 yuan ($1,858) or less. At the other end of the spectrum, rapid economic growth and market-based reforms created tremendous wealth: China has 81 billionaireson Bloomberg’s ranking of the world’s 500 richest people, more than any other country after the U.S., and there are thousands more billionaires and multimillionaires who don’t crack the top 500. 2. Is ‘common prosperity’ a new theme? Not at all. The idea was introduced into party documents by Mao Zedong to reflect the pursuit of a more egalitarian society. It fell out of frequent use under Deng Xiaoping, who shifted the focus to developing an economy that would allow “some people to get rich first.” Common prosperity, he said, would come later. Xi made it a central part of his 2017 speech at the party congress to mark the start of his second term, and the messaging really took off in 2021. The slogan has since been adopted by state agencies and private companies as a way to signal their allegiance to this Communist Party priority. SloganeeringNumber of times the term 'common prosperity' appeared in speeches by President Xi Jinping Source: Bloomberg analysis 3. Why is this happening now? It’s hard to know. One theory is it’s part of Xi’s ambition to serve a third term as president, a possibility now that the decades-old system of term limits has been overturned. That’d be easier if he’s popular. Another possibility is that these measures have long been on Xi’s agenda, but other things got in the way. After his 2017 speech, China became embroiled in a broad trade war with the U.S. Then once a deal was reached, the pandemic hit. Now he’s got a clearer path to put the ideas into action. Ahead of its 100th anniversary in July, the Communist Party declared the completion of a long effort to create a “moderately prosperous society.” That opened a door for Xi to set the pursuit of common prosperity as a new guiding principle. ( Forecasts from Bloomberg Economics suggest China could become the world’s biggest economy as soon as 2031.) Also, several of China’s tech behemoths are now bigger than the largest state-owned enterprises, and their founders have amassed incredible wealth, which may seem politically threatening to the Communist Party. 4. What has the government done to companies? China has announced a sweeping overhaul of the $100 billion for-profit education industry, banning tutoring companies from making a profit and teaching the school syllabus on nights and weekends, among other restrictions. It’s announced a reform plan for health-care costs in public hospitals designed to keep prices from rising too quickly, having already tackled excessive chargesfor drugs and medical supplies. It’s leaned on ride-hailing and food-delivery companies to improve conditions for their low-wage workers. China’s top court issued a long essay detailing how the pervasive culture of excessive overtime -- known as “ 996” -- may violate the law. 5. And society? The government seems to be trying to mold model citizens. It extended limits on online gaming for minors, allowing just three hours a week, and used accusations of sexual misconduct at Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. as an opportunity to warn against business drinking. Authorities have vowed to increase investigations of tax evasion among high earners and made a prominent example of actress Zheng Shuang, who was ordered to pay 299 million yuan in overdue taxes, late fees and fines. There’s also a broader effort to weaken stars’ influence among their fans, which is seen as unhealthy and “ Western.” Regulators have directed TV and movie studios to cap actors’ salaries and shun those with “ incorrect politics” or “distorted aesthetics,” using a derogatory term for effeminate men. Fan sites are no longer allowed to post celebrity rankings and must block access for minors. Zhao Wei, a popular actress with her own business interests, has been mysteriously erased from the Chinese internet for reasons as yet unknown. 6. Is there more coming? China has been trying for years to make housing more affordable, particularly in the biggest cities, and often blames speculators for driving prices up. There are mounting signs that it’s preparing to move on an idea that’s been discussed for a long time: imposing a residential property tax to deter speculation. The municipal governments in Shanghai and Chongqing have been conducting trials since 2011, levying a tax on second homes or high-priced ones. 7. How far will this go? The central government hasn’t set any specific goal, leaving everyone to speculate about massive wealth redistribution and the nationalization of private companies. But some investors have also noted Xi’s comments about paying equal attention to enforcing regulation of companies and supporting their development. A pilot program suggests change will be gradual, rather than radical. In June Beijing designated Zhejiang, the wealthy coastal province where Alibaba and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co. lead a thriving private sector, as a “demonstration zone” to test common prosperity initiatives. The plan calls for more access to education and health care, encourages investment in rural areas and nudges rich people to be more philanthropic. The actual targets, though, are incremental improvements over the status quo, ones Zhejiang was on pace to hit without any policy changes at all. Meanwhile, at least one prominent economist has defended the market economy as the best way to provide opportunity for the masses, arguing that too much government intervention would result in common poverty instead. 8. How are billionaires taking it? They’re opening their wallets, in line with the government’s call for individual distributions of wealth driven by “moral obligation and social pressure.” Seven billionaires directed a combined $5 billion to charity in the first eight months of 2021, a sum that exceeds all giving nationally the year before. Still more is coming from the private sector. Automaker Geely said it plans to enrich its employees with stock awards. Tencent Holdings Ltd. earmarked about $15 billion for social responsibility programs, and Alibaba pledged $15.5 billion. Pinduoduo Inc. set aside $1.5 billion in future profits for agricultural investments. The flood of donations will accrue primarily to state-backed initiatives. The Reference Shelf - QuickTake explainers on China’s billionaires, the “996” work ethic, the property tax idea and the crackdown on tech giants. - The Jamestown Foundation looked at the Maoist roots of the slogan. - Bloomberg Opinion’s Tim Culpan describes Xi as the ultimate tiger mom, and Shuli Ren looks at what the crackdown on fan culture means for Alibaba’s Jack Ma. - The Financial Times thinks China wants to redraw the social contract.— With assistance by Daniel Ten Kate Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE

To: marcher who wrote (177738)	9/4/2021 4:37:27 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217752

denigrators showing up, for 'they' must not let the 'common good' meme run wild with Team Bloomberg lined up as it is, could it be that CCP China China China is on to a good thing :0) Love it bloomberg.com A Didi Nationalization Would Put Xi Firmly in the Driver's Seat From data to fintech, Beijing is starting to assert itself across industries as the Chinese president marches down a path toward greater state control. Tim Culpan 3 September 2021, 23:26 GMT+8 Just three months after going public in New York comes the real possibility that Didi Global Inc. could fall under Chinese state control. We shouldn’t be surprised. Beijing’s municipal government has proposed taking a stake in the Chinese ride-hailing giant through its Beijing Tourism Group and other companies based in that city, Bloomberg News reported Friday, citing people familiar with the matter. While the deal may never come to pass, the very fact that it has been considered shows how the $45 billion company really is in the doghouse. Among its alleged infractions is the fact that it went ahead with a U.S. initial public offering despite pushback from the Cyberspace Administration of China. Nationalization of an otherwise free-wheeling and robust private sector is only in its incipient stages, but the government of President Xi Jinping is marching down that path as a way to protect privacy, control data and rein in profligate billionaires. Ant Group Co. may have its credit-scoring business fall under state control while Beijing ByteDance, a local unit of news and video aggregator ByteDance Ltd., already had a government representative installed on its board. There’s more to come. Here’s what Bloomberg Opinion columnists have been saying about the recent crackdowns, nationalization, and increasing government assertiveness in all areas of Chinese society. Nationalization Is Coming to China's Data Centers: Anyone in China who creates, collects, stores, processes or sells data should consider themselves on notice. The transference of data into state hands is part of Xi’s broader neo-Cultural Revolution that will give him more control over content, culture, capital and commerce. For its part, the government has explained its crackdowns as being part of efforts to protect consumers and create "common prosperity" — meaning a more equitable distribution of wealth. — Tim Culpan Jack Ma's Famous Friends Will Cost Him Billions More: Billionaire Jack Ma seems unable to move beyond his controversial past, after regulators pulled Ant’s $34 billion IPO within weeks of his open critique of Chinese state-owned banks. While he once enjoyed the limelight, that soft spot for attention now comes with a price. As China cracks down on “ fan culture,” what the government sees as a toxic obsession with celebrity lifestyles, some of Ma’s glamorous associates and friends are in the crosshairs. — Shuli Ren Xi Is Forgetting What Made China Great Again: China’s latest intrusions on business show that the Communist Party seems to have forgotten what drives economic success — not the state, but its absence. Bureaucrats’ hands are again tightening around China’s neck. Xi needs to realize his people, not his party, transformed China. Until he does, stock investors won’t be the only ones gasping for air. — Michael Schuman Xi Jinping Shows China He’s the Ultimate Tiger Mom: China’s latest tightening of gaming rules for minors is much ado about nothing. Underage consumers are a small part of the business for games providers. By strictly limiting such “spiritual opium,” Xi is forcefully prescribing what he thinks is best for today’s youth. What’s likely to follow will be a greater emphasis on sports and recreation, physical skills, and group activities. —Tim Culpan How Wall Street Lost Sight of Didi's Risks: Investors who recently bought into multi-billion-dollar Chinese tech listings in the U.S. may have thought they’d be enjoying the riches of some of the most hotly anticipated IPOs of the year. Instead, they’re staring at headlines churning about Beijing-led regulatory probes and watching their gains vanish. It’s a glaring example that the types of risks once relegated to boilerplate language, deep within company prospectuses, are now front and center. — Anjani Trivedi The Tiger Who Came to Tea — Didi-China Style: Many children love “The Tiger Who Came to Tea,” the story of an uninvited carnivore who decides to spend an afternoon with a little girl named Sophie and her mother. Though ostensibly polite, the animal consumed everything in the house and never showed up again. This fable isn't unlike China. The government, always keen to have a good party itself, does not care if it crashes those of others. The latest data security probe on ride-hailing giant Didi Global Inc. is an example of behavior by a plus-size, self-absorbed feline that doesn’t take overseas market niceties into account. — Shuli Ren For Didi, the U.S. Is a Wonderland of Amateurs: The U.S. has tried very hard to deter Chinese companies from going public there, even threatening delisting procedures. Yet they keep on raising fresh capital, simply because investors have the appetite, regardless of the risk. By now, China’s antitrust stance is fairly well understood. But with Didi’s cybersecurity violations, we are entering a world of known unknowns. U.S. investors are on their own. — Shuli Ren It's Easy to Make Tech Titans Kneel. Ask China: U.S. trust busters could be forgiven for turning green with envy. Their counterparts in China levied a record fine on Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. in April, which responded with a display of humble contrition and compliance. Days earlier, the Federal Trade Commission was back in court in Washington, battling to stop Facebook Inc. from having its action against the social-media giant thrown out. It might seem that the home of antitrust could do with some enforcement lessons from Beijing. — Matthew Brooker This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. To contact the author of this story: Tim Culpan at tculpan1@bloomberg.net To contact the editor responsible for this story: Rachel Rosenthal at rrosenthal21@bloomberg.net Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE

To: marcher who wrote (177738)	9/4/2021 4:47:54 AM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By marcher Respond to of 217752

Re <<do you agree with david's comments?>> Oops, some are suggesting a deeper think Trouble ahead if so, as more start to ponder ft.com China’s children are not the only ones addicted to video games All of us should worry about the control gaming and social media companies exert 14 hours ago Children in London play computer games. Perhaps the Chinese crackdown on gaming inadvertently poses a useful test for free-market capitalism © Malcolm Park/AlamyThe writer, a former head of the Number 10 Policy Unit, is a Harvard senior fellow Is it really so extreme? China’s crackdown on video gaming by under-18s seems to signal another attempt by the communist regime to grip family life. But in the west, some of us parents would be mightily relieved if we had a “big brother” who was willing to play bad cop. Because we ourselves are failing. When our youngest started primary school six years ago, I started to notice how many visiting children would ask “where’s the console?” Not only did their faces fall when our lack of gaming equipment was revealed, but some were reluctant to do anything else instead. Since then, phones have become consoles and lockdowns have made online games a part of social life. My desire to keep my child out of it feels increasingly hopeless. Many loathe communism because it removes autonomy and exerts control. But what if we applied the same critique to Silicon Valley? I know the makers of Fortnite don’t want to invade Taiwan. But they do want to invade our kids’ bedrooms. Advertising-driven revenue models prompt social media and online games companies to seek more and more of our attention. When half of all five to seven-year-olds play video games, and the World Health Organization has classified gaming disorder as a medical condition, we should ask ourselves: who is controlling who? I don’t deny the brilliance of some of these products. One of our sons has learned chess by playing online with people all over the world. Many families only got through lockdown by entering fantasy worlds. Yet that only reinforces the point that video games are the “ spiritual opium” described by Chinese state media, where choice is in fact an illusion. We can assume that Xi Jinping is not simply trying, as he asserts, to protect Chinese children from exhaustion. Coupled with a ban on private tutoring, the gaming restrictions look like an attempt to extend the surveillance state, purge Chinese youth of supposed foreign cultural corruption and address the demographic legacy of the one child policy, which threatens to make China old before it gets rich. Nevertheless, China has a history of worrying about tech addiction. In 2000, it banned gaming consoles and arcade player machines. In 2018, it imposed time limits on the mobile game Honor of Kings. China’s leaders seem to believe that gaming is a threat to productivity and mental health, as well as their vision of a surveillance state. Yet in the west we are strangely quick to suspend judgment about the online world. We regulate gambling and working time, but we struggle to demand that gaming or social media companies set automated time limits, even though one recent study found English 10-year olds playing games for an average of two to three hours a day. I don’t want to be naive. If we followed the Chinese lead and restricted gaming to three hours a week, I’m sure some children would simply switch to TV or social media or porn. But others might be saved from addiction, or relieved of peer pressure. Three years ago, when a 10-year-old boy needed bowel surgery after playing World of Warcraft for days without going to the toilet, his doctor said she was increasingly seeing children who are addicted to gaming, some of whom had dropped out of school. One response is to blame the parents. The mother of a 15-year-old Welsh boy, who missed a year of school after becoming addicted to Fortnite, was criticised as lazy. But most parents feel powerless — especially when schools send homework online and require children to check email, from where it’s a short flick to YouTube, Instagram or Call of Duty. Another is to hope that transparency will solve the problem. If we explain to children how algorithms work, we imagine they will be better armed to resist temptation. But even tech executives are trapped. One of the most electrifying moments in the documentary The Social Dilemma, is when Tim Kendall, an ex-Facebook and Pinterest executive, describes locking himself in the pantry to keep scrolling on his phone despite his two young children needing him. In a survey by the Children’s Commissioner for England, many 10 to 16-year-olds reported that their friends’ behaviour became more aggressive and bullying when playing online. Some children admitted they felt addicted; others said they felt compelled to play longer than they wanted to, because the games had become so interlinked with their social lives. The commissioner recommended that “parents should talk to children about the importance of balancing time online with time spent offline”. But such homilies are no match for an industry which has perfected ways to steal our attention. Perhaps the Chinese crackdown on gaming inadvertently poses a useful test for free-market capitalism. If we can’t save kids from becoming addicted to their smartphones, developing mental health problems and spending hours gaming instead of doing schoolwork, how are we going to outcompete China?

To: marcher who wrote (177738)

9/4/2021 7:04:14 PM

From: TobagoJack

Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217752

Re <<do you agree with david's comments?>>

am struggling w/ the idea that at some stage, and likely soon, Tencent and Alibaba are buy-buy-buy

but am also suspicious that the current set of would-be investors as well as hodlers are underguessing the drubbing still to be

the opportunities going forward might not be god-sent, but we take what we can get, black or white cats, no matter who sent it

P/E 10 is better than PE 15-25

A newly and deadly focused Tencent / Alibaba, instead of financial engineering, would make for awesome competitors in staked space

bloomberg.com

Alibaba, Tencent Look Cheap Even With China Crackdown Risks, NYU Professor Says
Ishika Mookerjee
3 September 2021, 15:17 GMT+8
Some of China’s bellwether Internet stocks are undervalued even as risks of further downside from Beijing’s regulatory clampdown persist, according to a finance professor at New York University.

The constraints brought in by recent Chinese government actions on tech behemoths are “reasonable” and any potential ban on firms using shell companies for foreign listings will unlikely be retroactive, Aswath Damodaran wrote in a blog post Wednesday.

Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. is the most undervalued -- by 12.7% compared to its fair value -- followed by Tencent Holdings Ltd. at 8%, while Didi Global Inc. and JD.com Inc are close to being fairly valued, he wrote. The Stern School of Business professor said he prefers Tencent over Alibaba, noting the former’s more “rounded” business mix as one of the reasons.

Beijing’s crackdown on the sector is more about “exercising control over both companies and data” than concerns about consumers or competition, Damodaran wrote. That said, “there is substantial downside if the government becomes openly and actively adversarial, with Didi dropping to becoming almost worthless, if that happens.”

China’s battered Internet stocks sprang back to life earlier this week, delivering a four-day gain as investors stepped up bets that the worst of the regulatory assault on the sector might be over. But the rally lost momentum as the week draws to a close, amid Beijing’s fresh criticism of the nation’s ride-hailing giants.

Read more

China Tech Stocks Drop as Alibaba’s Donation Worries Investors

China to Ban Celebrities With ‘Incorrect’ Politics, Limit Pay

China Tells Meituan, Didi to Fix ‘Misconduct’ by Year-End

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.
LEARN MORE

To: marcher who wrote (177738)	9/4/2021 7:27:34 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217752

Re <<do you agree with david's comments?>> I think comparison per below between what is now happening vs the cultural revolution is right and wrong. Cultural Revolution was firstly destructive and stayed destructive, even if arguably sets up for opposite 'to get rich is glorious / black cats & white cats' counter-force move, that was shaping up in the late 50s early 60s before the cultural revolution got tee-ed up mid-60s. What is happening now seems, to me, like an effort to also social transform, but to set scene for more and higher quality growth based on interesting premise that growth ought to be more equitably shared, and equity not based on capital or connections, but being a stakeholder of society. The move is just getting announce, not even rolling, and by past track record, the staging should take ~24 months, w/ contending grassroots proposals aggregated by and by, and multiple experimental domains selected based on arguable merit and stability considerations (a phuckup must not turn into a PHUCKUP, therefore phasing important), and sometime ~2026 we get to look back and look forward and utter "interesting" and ~2032, "whoa", hopefully. The success of the initiative would change the world as we know it. The failure would be regrettable. Definitely investible, just not in any hurry at all. In the meantime, how the 'common prosperity' shall interact w/ rural land reform should be fascinating. All that capital to be spread around, for the greater good. Remember when Henry Ford increased the wages of his workers so that eventually they can become customers? That was brilliant. The pundits might be missing somethings. bloomberg.com Could China’s Crackdown Be a Second Cultural Revolution? Andrew Browne 4 September 2021, 23:05 GMT+8 It’s no coincidence that an edict barring kids in China from playing online video games for most of the week came as the education ministry introduced a new subject to the national curriculum: Xi Jinping Thought. As the academic year gets underway, students from primary schools through colleges and university are immersed in lessons from “ Grandpa Xi.” The message could hardly be clearer: the Chinese Party-state wants to mold young minds with correct ideology, not distract them with online fantasies. To underscore that point, authorities are cracking down on “ fan culture.” All mention of Zhao Wei, a billionaire actress, has been scrubbed from the internet. Is this a new Cultural Revolution? President Xi Jinping addresses party officials at the CPC Central Committee National Academy of Governance on Sept. 1. Photographer: Xinhua News Agency This Week in the New EconomyRussia has a serious gas problem, and winter is coming.Eskom’s CEO says carbon capture is being considered in South Africa.India’s state oil company excluded by Norway’s wealth fund.Fraying relations with China are hurting Australia’s economy.Turkish inflation unexpectedly quickens on food prices.What began as a regulatory takedown of Jack Ma, the flamboyant Alibaba co-founder, quickly grew to an assault on tech platforms–including those, like Tencent, that offer online gaming. Now, as the campaign picks up speed, it’s adopting some of the iconography of the Maoist era. Along with the cult of personality, the effort is building a militant commitment to “struggle” against domestic and foreign enemies along with a “rectification” campaign to instill socialist values and combat decadence. Authorities are also challenging the extravagant pay common in the entertainment world. And in a more sinister vein, they’ve called for a boycott of what the government has described as effeminate male celebrities. What many foreign investors have yet to understand is that a regulatory crackdown that’s erased $1 trillion off Chinese equities goes well beyond reining in digital monopolies and forcing delivery companies to pay gig workers more. Xi is arguably unleashing political forces that haven’t seen the light of day for decades. In a widely published essay, a leftist blogger who goes by the name Li Guangman writes that China is in the throes of a “ profound revolution.” A video recording of Jack Ma, co-founder of Alibaba Group Holding, on Jan. 20. His takedown was just the beginning of Bejing’s wide-ranging campaign. Just over half a century ago, Mao plunged China into a decade of chaos by launching an attack on “ capitalist roaders” within the Party who he believed had hijacked his revolution to restore the old society. Xi is assailing actual capitalists, some of them party members such as Ma, as symbols of yawning wealth disparity. Billionaires are being squeezed for charitable contributions to uplift the rural poor left behind by China’s fast-faced growth. Alibaba has pledged to donate $15.5 billion to charity through 2025. Some of this is about raw power. Mao attempted to destroy his own Communist Party–“bombard the headquarters!” he instructed his young Red Guard zealots–to preserve his own legacy. Many China experts believe that Xi is laying the groundwork for a bid to remain in office indefinitely. There is a crucial difference, though. The Cultural Revolution was a bottom-up movement that set loose popular fury against the establishment. In the end, rival Red Guard factions were blasting away at each other with machine guns, mortars and tanks, and Mao had to bring in the army to restore order. Xi’s revolution is top-down: the last thing he wants is chaos on the streets. What does he intend, then? As my Bloomberg colleague Malcolm Scott reports, the pilot project for the economic future Xi imagines is Zhejiang province, one of the wealthiest parts of China (incomes there are approaching levels in southern Europe) and a hotbed of private enterprise. Zhejiang is also Xi’s power base; he was party secretary there before ascending to higher office in Beijing. The Ningbo-Zhoushan port in the Zhejiang Province of China. Photographer: VCG/Visual China Group The evidence from Zhejiang suggests that on economic matters Xi is not Mao, in the sense that he wants to redirect the energies of entrepreneurs, not eliminate them as a class. The emphasis is on state control. Xi is focused on manufacturing over online services, and labor over capital. Expect the state to have a greater say in setting prices of goods and services–and how profits are distributed. The latest crop of corporate earnings reports are replete with references to Xi’s “common prosperity” slogan. Nor does Xi fully embrace Mao’s egalitarianism. On welfare, his top lieutenants are closer to neo-liberals than socialists; in their view, handouts to the poor only promote indolence. As for the cult of personality, Mao’s was of a different order altogether. At its height, writes the historian Frank Dikötter, demand for plastic to cover Mao’s Little Red Book forced toy factories to scale back output, and the production of billions of Mao badges exhausted the country’s aluminum supplies. Still, as the Economist points out, the last time hundreds of millions of Chinese school kids clutched books devoted to one man was during the Mao era. In that sense, at least, the Cultural Revolution lives on. The day's biggest storiesGet caught up with the Evening Briefing. Sign up to this newsletter Bloomberg New Economy Conversations—China’s Tech Crackdown: Join New Economy Forum Editorial Director Andrew Browne on Sept. 8 at 10 a.m. as he analyzes the sweeping regulatory crackdown underway in China. The private sector helped power China’s economic rise, but President Xi Jinping seems determined to rein in what he sees as its excesses. Is this transitory or a game-changing shift? Joining Andy are Keyu Jin, Associate Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics & Political Science, and Kevin Rudd, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Asia Society. Register here. __________________________________________________________ The fourth annual Bloomberg New Economy Forum will convene the world’s most influential leaders in Singapore on Nov. 16-19 to mobilize behind the effort to build a sustainable and inclusive global economy. Learn more here. Download the Bloomberg app: It’s available for iOS and Android. Before it’s here, it’s on the Bloomberg Terminal. Find out more about how the Terminal delivers information and analysis that financial professionals can’t find anywhere else. Learn more. Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE

To: marcher who wrote (177738)	9/6/2021 10:20:44 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217752

I wish doc doom Marc would tell us that everything will work out okay, and all shall be well "Central Bankers Are Criminals" Marc Faber Warns "Once COVID Is Over, The Elites Will Go To War"Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com, Legendary investor, economist and market forecaster Dr. Marc Faber thinks central banks (CB) are not going to cut back the money printing. Just the opposite. [url=][/url] He predicts CBs are going to print even more money at a faster pace to hold the failing economic system together for a little while longer. Dr. Faber explains, “What is perceived to be safe, namely cash, isn’t safe anymore. It is unsafe. You ask me what is safe? I don’t know what is safe anymore when you have money printers who print money indefinitely. I don’t think they can stop. I actually think they have to accelerate their money printing. So, stocks may go up, but in real terms, it doesn’t mean your standard of living will go up. Maybe the standard of living of the 50 richest people in the world will go up, but not the standard of living of the typical American . . . or the average American. That standard of living will go down. . . . All the money printing is a desperate measure to keep the voters from rebellion.” Dr. Faber predicts that not only are we going to see more asset inflation, but dramatic wage inflation too. Dr. Faber, who holds a PhD in economics, says, “What I think will happen, and most people have not really considered, we will get wage inflation. For the first time since the late 1970’s, we will get accelerating wage inflation, and in some cases, quite dramatic. In some states, the minimum wage is $15. I could see that going up to $30 per hour very quickly. I don’t think inflation is ‘transitory’ (as the Fed proclaims). We will not have stagflation. We will have something worse. We will have rising prices and a depression in the standard of living of most people.” Dr. Faber says the U.S. stock market is “overpriced and over-owned.” He likes stocks in foreign countries, real estate “far outside the cities” and physical gold, silver and some cash. Faber also likes some crypto currency in one’s portfolio. Dr. Faber is less worried about the economic picture and more worried about the rise of socialism and communism in the western world. Faber contends socialism destroys economies and liberty. Faber points out, “I can tell you one feature of all the socialist countries I have visited in my life, and all of them had less freedom, less happiness than we have, and the standards of living were substantially, not a little bit, but substantially lower than they are in the free capitalistic world. . . . I am sorry to say that I think the western world has gone down a very dangerous path where essentially, through zero interest rates, everything is free. Then you get the unintended consequences.” So, with inflation going up and the standard of living going down in the West, is the possibility of war going up? Faber says, “Correct. I think once this Covid19 thing is over, the elite, the ones who make the money, will go to war. That is the last recipe to keep the population together.” Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with Dr. Marc Faber of the “Gloom, Boom & Doom Report.” 9.4.21 To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here * * * In an additional interview, this time with Wealthion's Adam Taggart, Faber blasts Bernanke, Yellen, and Powell "as the lowest-grade bureaucrats I've seen in history." "These people will continue to print money." "The academics will say we didn't print enough." "Central bankers are criminal." As Mike Shedlock notes, Faber's portfolio is 25% precious metals, 25% real estate, 25% equities, and 25% bonds. Faber predicts cash will vanish, but will be replaced by "equally bad" central bank cryptocurrencies. "Who do want to control your money," asks Faber. "The beauty of gold and silver is nobody controls it." Also, Faber says " don’t forget: the Fed will always lie, the same way US generals misrepresented the hapless conditions in Afghanistan to the world in order to keep the war-profiteering machine going." And reminds readers to remember the words from Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy "In all history there is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful."