this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2025
511 points (93.8% liked)

News

33259 readers
2930 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Despite the US’s economic success, income inequality remains breathtaking. But this is no glitch – it’s the system

The Chinese did rather well in the age of globalization. In 1990, 943 million people there lived on less than $3 a day measured in 2021 dollars – 83% of the population, according to the World Bank. By 2019, the number was brought down to zero. Unfortunately, the United States was not as successful. More than 4 million Americans – 1.25% of the population – must make ends meet with less than $3 a day, more than three times as many as 35 years ago.

The data is not super consistent with the narrative of the US’s inexorable success. Sure, American productivity has zoomed ahead of that of its European peers. Only a handful of countries manage to produce more stuff per hour of work. And artificial intelligence now promises to put the United States that much further ahead.

This is not to congratulate China for its authoritarian government, for its repression of minorities or for the iron fist it deploys against any form of dissent. But it merits pondering how this undemocratic government could successfully slash its poverty rate when the richest and oldest democracy in the world wouldn’t.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] huppakee@piefed.social 81 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Last paragraph basically says it all:

This is not to congratulate China for its authoritarian government, for its repression of minorities or for the iron fist it deploys against any form of dissent. But it merits pondering how this undemocratic government could successfully slash its poverty rate when the richest and oldest democracy in the world wouldn’t.

[–] evenglow@lemmy.world 43 points 1 day ago (2 children)

China's new 5 year plan says it all too. So does all their previous 5 year plans too. Publicly available too.

In USA affordable EVs from China are illegal. Other affordable green tech from China is made unaffordable.

Maybe it's not the government that is the problem. Maybe the problem is the people in charge of running the government. And those people's plan.

Project 2025 is public too. That's USA's plan or at least the Republicans plan.

[–] PeacefulForest@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Sounds to me the left needs a plan

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Yeah it would really help to have a plan like "tax rich people" "decommodify housing" "trade deals that punish outsourcing" "ban medical debt." "College that is so cheap it doesn't need loans" "Corporations posting profits after job cuts and layoffs will have higher taxes" "discourage corporations from selling products in multiple markets" "reduce corporate price fixing through third parties" "force corporations to compete in markets" "disallow investors to buy companies when they hold substantial investment in a corporation that produces any competing product"

One final edit: "Break up regional monopolies"

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 20 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] PeacefulForest@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

The sad part is there is a left, but very few leaders of the left.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 7 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Any government that relies on individuals to uncorruptly weild concentrated power...... is the problem. Society and human nature will see it abused every time.

If your system relies on being run by exceptional people. Success itself is the exception.

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I want to agree, but at the same time i feel the concentrated power at the top is very similar in both countries. The one party system in China is very different to the two party system in the US, but I don't think that is what makes the difference. I think China genuinely wants the poor to be less poor and the US genuinely want the rich more rich. Different goals obviously lead to different results.

But I do agree the system shouldn't allow room for power to be abused. The checks and balances system is definitely broken.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 3 points 6 hours ago

Agree or disagree, it's just a fact.

If China genuinely wanted the poor to be less so. They wouldn't have allowed the wealth disparity. Industrialization has lifted the base standard of living in every country its happened in. China, England, Russia, the US, currently in India. The problem, is that it has always benefited the owners far more. There's always a strong plateau to the benefit of the social base in these systems. And no one has managed to fix it long term, not China or anyone else.

In fact, China's youth right now are facing conditions surprisingly similar to those in the United States and elsewhere. With little economic opportunity for their futures, often jobless. Getting ready to grapple with a level of automation that other countries haven't even come to terms with yet. It's infinitely more likely that the next couple of decades will see massive social struggle and over there long before they will ever see communism.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

Any government that relies on individuals to uncorruptly weild concentrated power…

All governments rely on uncorruptible civil servants to some degree. Nobody seems to know what the threshold for "concentrated power" actually is.

But the Chinese system has this pernacious habit of benefiting domestic Chinese residents. That's the "corruption" westerners can't stand. That's the concentration of authority they object to.

If the Chinese economy was run out of a board room at JP Morgan or through a series is military based commanded by NATO Generals or via a client state like Israel or Japan, we wouldn't hear any complaints

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

If the Chinese economy was run out of a board room at JP Morgan or through a series is military based commanded by NATO Generals or via a client state like Israel or Japan, we wouldn't hear any complaints

Western markets would still be overrun by cheap products (partly because of subsidies and partly because forced labour), Chinese residents would still be supressed by heavy surveillance, Taiwan would still be threatened, Russia would still be supplied with technology to invade Ukraine.

Until 15 years ago China wasn't considered a hostile state, just an increasingly powerful competitor. All nations benefit their fomestic residents, or at least their domestic corporations.

The real situation in which there wouldn't be complaints would be when the Chinese benefitted their residents while at the same time didn't do anything the west didn't like. But since they've become pwerful, they can now do whatever they want (just like other powerful countries) - and some of the stuff they want, is bad for the west.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Until 15 years ago China wasn’t considered a hostile state

Well...

The War on Terror set our efforts to crank up hostility against China back by a decade.

The real situation in which there wouldn’t be complaints would be when the Chinese benefitted their residents while at the same time didn’t do anything the west didn’t like.

American politicians made a big show of hating Japan during the 90s for "stealing our jobs" during their economic boom. Being a lapdog of the West didn't save them from sanctions or racial animus or unfounded accusations of market manipulation.

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 5 points 5 hours ago

If China was treating the west back then like it does now, it would definitely not have been as desirable to move production there. Afaik there hasn't been a single event that changed everything, so the number 15 is a bit random; but the attitude of the west towards China and vice versa definitely shifted. Also Russia was for a short moment not seen as an enemy state (although Russia might have considered the west as their enemy all along)

Japan is a good example of how this doesn't have to be a two way street. Could also be that US and Europe (where I'm from) don't always have the same perception, so could be i wrote the west where Europe would've been more accurate.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

All governments rely on uncorruptible civil servants to some degree.

This is flat-out false. Systems like anarchism explicitly expect it,and structured accordingly.

But the Chinese system has this pernacious habit of benefiting domestic Chinese residents.

Tanky say what?! Go ask the Uyghurs or the Tibetans or the Hong Kongers or any non-han ethnic group. It's not an east west thing. It's a "western nations did identical things to my family that China is doing over there. And I'm not an immature ideology blinded campist" thing. It's a don't be a hypocrite thing. But name a more iconic strawman for an ML than not just bigotedly lumping an entire ethnic group, but vast diverse groups as one. Just because they loosely share geopolitical ties.

If the Chinese economy was run out of a board room at JP Morgan or through a series is military based commanded by NATO Generals or via a client state like Israel or Japan, we wouldn't hear any complaints.

You're literally projecting. Because I'm here to tell you that's just as bad. Fuck that shit whoever is doing it. Grow up and stop being an enabling hypocrite.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Systems like anarchism explicitly expect it,and structured accordingly.

Speak specifically. Which anarchist government are you referring to?

Because I can point to plenty of anarchist communities - from Chaz in Seattle to the 1930s Spanish Anarchists - who were as plagued with corruption and abuse of authority.

Never even mind the Anarcho-Capitalists that have been central to the modern era of human trafficking, war profiteering, and environmental pillaging.

Tanky say what?!

collapsed inline media

Go ask the Uyghurs or the Tibetans or the Hong Kongers or any non-han ethnic group.

Michelle Bachelet got screamed at by the NatSec crowd when she came back from her tour of China and failed to find the litany of atrocities that Christian Nationalists in the NATO block had alleged

Something of a joke over the last few years that the Israeli genocide in Gaza and the civil war in South Sudan has eclipsed the UN's attention, in large part because the "anti-genocide" voices on China have had to rapidly pivot to being genocide-denialist across North Africa and the Middle East.

If you can find me the equivalent of hospitals being bombed, populations starved into submission, and children with brains blown out by sniper fire as they were carried by terrified parents, I'd be genuinely curious to see it.

Because I’m here to tell you that’s just as bad.

That's always the game isn't it? "How dare you defy my political orthodoxy! You're the real criminal here!"

You can't stomach the most tepid opposition. The slightest whisper of defiance to the fascist narrative sends you into spirals of invective. When you're presented with a simple request for clarification, all you can do is scream Red Scare tropes and pound the downvote button.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 3 points 3 hours ago

I never said it eliminated it. Just that it accounted for it. Keeping governance flat and small. So it doesn't produce corruption on a national level. Or export it.

And in the end, what does it matter. Every ML government has been corrupted and pushed it's corruption at a much larger scale. That's the point. The scale and mass of those

And as to your linked investigation, that's not particularly convincing one way or the other. If China was good as you pretend, they would have a free press. Instead they repress. Foreign press have where they can go severely restricted often accompanied by minders to make sure they don't get close to what they're looking for. And finally, it's very common for those that are abused to deny their abuse as long as they are vulnerable to their abuser. Here's a link to an interview. Where at one point family and activists confront a CCP rep about the disappearance of their friends and family. Where he convincingly screeches "OnE cHiNa!!!" In response to not having the power to disappear. I know you deny these peoples existence. I bet you'll even resort to old trusty. CIA or NATO conspiracy!

But the fact is secrecy and suppression is not the hallmark of the innocent.The leaders of ML governments are human just like everyone else. They aren't divine or infallible. No matter how much ideology blinded campists like yourself, claim otherwise.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Well, anarchism isn't the absence of governance. It's the answerability of governance. We need to abolish unanswerable calcified institutions of power. We can still have governments as long as they are smaller and answerable to the individual's they govern.

[–] MangioneDontMiss@feddit.nl 9 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

At this point, Chinas goverment may be no more authoritarian than the US government. And China has a lot more social welfare programs than the US. Honestly, when I was in China i felt substantially more free than I did in the US. Far less policed. Far less restricted. Maybe that jsut my experience, but the feeling was real.

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 7 points 9 hours ago

Haven't been to either but authoritarian doesn't have to mean suppressive. And in both cases it might matter a lot where you go and who you are (as in your wealth, skin colour, connections etc).

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Nah, my existence was illegal. I'm the second son in my family. I'd feel very rejected there.

Hukou was also another form of rejection. To them, I'm just a filthy peasant from some village in Taishan. Doesn't matter if I was born in a hospital in Guangzhou, I get Taishan Hukou. They didn't me in Guangzhou Oublic schools. We didn't belong there, just migrants, second class residents. By the start of highschool, the migrants kids have to go back to where their hukou actually is because Gaokao has to be taken there.

Westerners have their privilaged passport to shield themselves because the PRC authorities won't dare to touch a western citizen. Too much trouble and bad international press. (I mean as long as you don't actually cross their "red line", you're immune) That' probably why it feels so free.

I mean, even an American Citizen of Chinese descent don't get that privilage, since they "look Chinese" they get treated like a Chinese national.

[–] MangioneDontMiss@feddit.nl 3 points 7 hours ago

interesting point about not wanting to go after westerners. I knew the big no-nos so I stuck well clear of those, but there we so many minor offenses that I would be fined to death on in the US that I know China would have just completely ignored.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

This is not to congratulate China for its authoritarian government

Dizzying to see what constitutes "authoritarian" in Evil Foreign Country relative to what is "sensible national security policy" at home.

Almost feels like the complaint isn't with the policies themselves, but who authors and enforces them.

[–] clot27@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago

authoritarian when you refuse to sell out to world bank and IMF and refuse to give up your resources for foreign corporations to exploit.

[–] SlartyBartFast@sh.itjust.works 5 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I like how fast they build infrastructure. I'm still waiting on a subway that was planned to be built 40 years ago

[–] CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world -4 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

I like how fast they build infrastructure

You mean collapsing within a few years? Three of their largest bridges recently built just collapsed. And a lot of structures over there collapse within a few to several years.

[–] Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com 7 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Cope harder. China has the most vast high speed rail network in the planet and it works, for all intents and purposes, flawlessly, as do the immense metro rail systems in big cities.

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

886 gigawatts of solar too, adding about 250GW a year lately. They’re building solar at a rate that outpaces most countries entire capacities

US has about 200GW (estimated, no official number) and until 2020 was adding about 20GW a year. This number increased significantly and about 120-130GW was added between 2020-2024. This was record growth for the US mainly due to economic policy (which came to a screeching halt in 2024, surprise). But even before 2024s return to coal times China was outpacing us by 2x the growth we saw in a 4 year period in a single year

This does not cover most of the other key quality of life metrics people complain about in America that China has made strides on: poverty and wealth inequality (which the article is obviously about), housing access, healthcare reforms, as you’ve mentioned significant public transit investment. Are these things perfect? No, but considering where China was in 1990 or even 2005 they’ve made significant strides because of active investment in their populace and infrastructure.

In that same time America has spent basically 0 time and money on its populace or land. Income inequality has worsened by 2-4x, our infrastructure crumbles, our healthcare system is failing while mortality rates and prices climb, etc

But point this objectively true data out and you’re a “tankie”. Just let the neolibs handle it, they’ll do the same thing they’ve been doing since 1992: taking bribes from corporations, insider trading, and convincing fucking dummies that they’ll fix it in a few more years if just a few more people vote, because it’s the voters fault you see. Don’t google the increase in my net worth since I took office 5 years ago please!

[–] Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Regarding solar, you're forgetting one thing: not only is China the highest installer of solar power, they manufacture 93% of the total world production of photovoltaic panels. Every solar power installation in the west relies on Chinese solar panels.

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The USA had every opportunity to be the manufacturer of panels here as well. Funny you mention this. This is one industry that made tons of sense for the US to keep within America as the green energy boom was starting to take hold. The first solar cell was made here. It is a labor light industry, overall.

But starting in the 1990s as it was becoming clear this was necessary what was our response? To mock green energy, political gridlock, and to push the concern to private industry who mostly ignored it in favor of chasing fossil fuels a bit longer. Then US did what it does best and offshored production of panels it did make, weakening manufacturing capability even further (while strengthening China by starting to develop their supply chains, which they later invested billions in)

[–] Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com 3 points 3 hours ago

I feel you. I'm a Spaniard, and for 10ish critical years in the 2000s-2010s, we had a so-called "sun tax" that made people pay taxes for solar energy their home installations output to the electric grid. This essentially killed the solar industry in the largest country in the super sunny southern Europe. We have no fossil fuel deposits, no intention of opening up nuclear plants, and no geothermal energy possibilities, and we killed our best chance at solar.

Goes to show how China's socialist government model blows anything in Europe and America out of the water.

[–] CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

What am I coping with exactly? I don't live in the US and I'm not a US citizen.

[–] Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com 3 points 8 hours ago

You're coping by lying about Chinese infrastructure

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 hours ago

One of their largest bridges collapsed because of a weakness in the bridge's foundation that I think involved a landslide. You know, landslides, which can be seldom predicted ahead of time given climate change changing rainfall patterns that challenge engineers' "100-year records".

The Chinese also figured out that the bridge was going to collapse ahead of time, so they evacuated all motorists. Don't think there were any casualties.

When was the last bridge collapse in the US? IIRC, it was the one near NY/NJ where a tanker/barge ran into a foundation column. How can you predict that? And how many people died as a result?

These things happen. The difference between China and the US is how well both governments react to adversity.

[–] SlartyBartFast@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 hours ago

Maybe, but when they collapse, it's cheap and quick to put up a replacement!

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 points 9 hours ago

I haven't noticed any more shit quality building in China than Korea or Vietnam. Slightly less than Japan, but there's a reason most buildings there get torn down in like 20 years.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 1 points 7 hours ago

Exactly. Authoritarianism sucks. I wouldn't want to live in China. But the US (and Canada) can do a fuckload better. In Canada they are also dismantling and privatizing everything and it sucks. Basically paying a lot more to get a lot less.