China’s foot soldiers are hard at work

0

Nobody can underestimate China’s place as a global power. It’s not shy, coy or diminutive about its ability to lead. It’s a veritable leader in statesmanship. And don’t let anyone tell you anything else. Because if you do, you may, or may not remain. Where’s that doctor from Wuhan who blew the whistle on Coronavirus? Where would WHO’s Tedros (no, he’s not a real doctor) be without China. The man leads the World Health Organisation and hasn’t ever taken the Hippocratic oath. On a sidebar, he’s accused of hiding epidemics in Ethiopia. To Soldier #1, a hearty salute. To Tedros we owe the complete lack of accountability on the Chinese regime to shut down Wuhan without letting 7 million people leave the land to infect others around the world. Any doctor worth his name in mud would react with fear when confronted with a highly contagious new virus and alert the health authorities and the government. This doctor told nations to keep their borders open and mouths shut. He castigated nations for drawing “China” by name into all this. Like, virus are all around us and pandemics happen all the time, why blame China. Point taken, Ted. Sowie. Down the army’s ranks, I’ve come across professor Shang Jin Wei, whose column appeared in Business Standard this week: https://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/beating-covid-19-and-the-economic-pandemic-120032700080_1.html . Soldier #… Titled: Beating Covid-19 and the economic pandemic, it could well be China’s notes to itself. Here it masquerades as advice to the world from a former chief economist as the Asian Development Bank. Just like any description of Coronavirus was restricted to likening it to a ‘flu’ while actually it is more like pneumonia. Same difference? Professor Shang is also a professor of Finance and Economics at Columbia Business School and Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. Drumroll. Prof Shang starts with establishing his credentials as to being a master analyst. He says he’d predicted way back in January that the spread of the virus would reach a turning point by mid-Feb. And lo and behold, that’s exactly what happened. He then stresses on the fact that since then, however, there are no new cases in China except those spread by international travellers coming into the country. See? China ended it. Successfully. He then offers an empathic “unfortunately” to describe the wide spread of the virus i.e. pandemic. Putting the global political community softly but firmly into the crosshairs for not managing / containing it as well as China did. Please note, he does not acknowledge WHO’s (failure) role as a watchdog. He certainly says that the US and the EU did not use their six weeks lead time well. Yeah, maybe they were busy listening to Ted? Now comes the money-maker. He says that if domestic supplies of things like masks, alcohol wipes, etc. are limited, these countries should ‘consider’ importing from China, Japan and elsewhere. But of course. When the whole world’s supply chains are in China, people should go elsewhere. Nice try, prof. He offers consolation: After all, these products are not high-tech and can be manufactured anywhere. “Surely you guys, you big, developed, dodos got this?” But, he panders to our common sense, with: China in particular is eager to resume production, and factories there have the competence, and can respond speedily to a surge in global demand. He also lays out the roadmap for contracting “foreign” – read Chinese – companies to help build emergency hospitals. Being the economist he is, he must do his bit to advise us about the economic aspects of this pandemic. He calls upon policymakers to provide rapid assistance to workers impacted. He warns us of the economic shock travelling downstream and mayhem upstream as demand contracts. He is urging countries to make better use of digital technologies. You see, he lives in the US of A and is talking to all of the developed ones in the world, because that’s where numbers are rising exponentially. He’s telling them: BE MORE DIGITAL. He says robust online shopping can offset some of the economic difficulties facing retailors and factories. BUT there is a BUT. He says, BUT this requires broad internet availability, widespread acceptance of digital payment by firms and households, and an efficient and inexpensive delivery system. So he adds, “While China is fortunate to have possess all three, many developing countries do not.” So friends, he started with, import this and that from China, Japan and others. Then compares others to shit and says well, import from China. Now here’s something the Netherlands did: 600,000 masks delivered by China to the Netherlands do not work, offer no protection. Many already in usehttps://t.co/xwoGkrXAST— Bruno Maçães (@MacaesBruno) March 28, 2020 Then, here’s something Spain went through: it discovered that the Chinese test kits they’d just imported had only 30% accurate detection rate. Read here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/27/coronavirus-test-kits-withdrawn-spain-poor-accuracy-rate. Most portentous, however, are his words on an economic stimulus: “As for economic stimulus, an internationally coordinated programme will be more effective in tackling a global recession than isolated action by individual countries. This is especially true in the case of fiscal stimulus. When a government cuts taxes or provides temporary financial assistance to needy households, the increase in domestic demand may “leak” to foreign producers via increased imports. This leakage is especially significant for small and medium-size economies that have a relatively high ratio of imports to gross domestic product (GDP), and may discourage them from pursuing enough stimulus.” Prof. Shang is China is, for wants an internationally coordinated controlled fiscal stimulus. Reason? To prevent demand from “leaking” to foreign producers via increased imports. I don’t understand. How big would the demand from such ‘needy’ households really be? And if it leaked, wouldn’t it benefit China? After all, China is the giant supply chain for the world, isn’t it? What is this subterfuge? He wants international coordination to pre-empt this problem. He wants governments to work together (with China at the centre because it holds your supply) to ensure that while we boost demand without changing the exchange rates too much, aided by reducing tariff and non-tariff trade barriers so Chinese companies can move fast and slick. The good professor wants us to particularly go back with the lesson that raising trade barriers is not a good idea even though governments might be tempted to do so in such times. He explains that’s because it raises both production costs (for China) and reduces domestic households’ real income (hurting their ability to buy more from China) Prof Shang calls for “coordinated trade liberalisation” or in other words, ‘let China win because, what choices you got’. He also decorates it with the cherry on top being: “each country’s concessions to foreign firms will be met with improved access for their own companies to foreign markets”. It;s like this, you buy from China so you can sell in China (efforts to do which, of course, our cheaper products will render unviable). He ends his advice with a rah-rah to the G20 to show some leadership and initiatives: Come on, boys, here’s the brief, now make it happen. The last two paragraphs of this are a good look into the psyche of the Chinese machine, so what if it lives, breathes and earns in America. The COVID-19 pandemic threatens the world with disaster. But the crisis also offers governments a rare chance to undertake policy changes that not only address the short-term public-health challenge, but also boost the global economy’s long-term growth potential. 600,000 infected (as on date March 29, 2020) is a short term public health challenge and boosting global economy is a “but also” point for this academic death-eater. While the Chinese did not actually invent all the interesting sayings attributed to them, it is true that the Chinese phrase for “crisis” consists of a character signifying “danger” and another for “opportunity.” Governments around the world should seize the moment and not waste the COVID-19 crisis. Finally, about the above, you’re not telling us anything new, except betraying the Chinese strategy, which will become clearer as the dust settles. Almost as if the Coronavirus is a blueprint for strategy to dominate. Is it any coincidence that parasite was the most acclaimed film this year in Hollow-wood? My last point, I promise. I’m surprised a salesman for China is allowed to call himself an American. The way I see it, America’s clutching at the very last threads of propriety and integrity. With the big four of socialism running amok and communists taking over, this is stage IV of world domination. You read it here first. Must go look for a non-Chinese made mask and get used to dealing with failure.

Parasite. If you love it, you should do something about it.

0

If Hollywood had their way in real life, the posh four should give up their homes to the grubby six and live like the grubby six. But since they can’t do that and make these movies – because, silly, making movies takes money, looking good takes money, hosting the Oscars takes money – they’ll leave that job to their elected politicians. But, they will help the politicians market their ideas better. Through films like parasite.

Why the name change to Disha and other thoughts

0

Yesterday, I woke up to a new social media trend #DishaCase. The prospect of another rape similar to that of Dr. Priyanka Reddy horrified me all over again. Until I discovered that this was the same case. Same MO. I refer to the MO of police / people changing the name of the victim to protect the dignity of her family. Wait. What? How and at what point did her family lose dignity? Are you, as a society, trying to say that when a man rapes a woman, it is she who loses her dignity? Do you see anything wrong with that logic? The four assholes who raped her, they and their families have lost dignity. The media is yet to drag its spine and brains from medieval era of thinking into the true Indic era of thinking. And time is running out for that. Dear media and their connivers, please, since it’s unfair to expect you to evolve at a rate faster than rapists themselves, let me introduce you to this new thought. It might seem difficult to digest at first, but allow this thought to settle: When a man rapes a woman, he AND HIS FAMILY lose dignity. Not the woman AND HER FAMILY. I can’t believe that the edict to call her Disha and not her real name came also from Mr. Sajjanar, the same hero being lauded for the encounter. Sir, if you have any respect for the lady and her family, you’ll let her memory be. Stop rubbishing the real identities of these brave women AND THEIR FAMILIES, who do so much even in this world to bring up strong, determined women who contribute positively to the society.