I think the important metric here is fuel burned: how much fuel do we burn just to ship fuel to where it can be refined, and then to where it’s needed?

It would probably use less water too. Crops require a lot of water, and biofuel crops more than most. I’ve heard it’s putting a massive drain on the available water in some places.

You mean coke futures?

Read what I wrote. I am considering other perspectives right here. Are you? You seem to see this as a contest that needs to be won by condemning your opponent, instead of an honest exchange of information and views.

I said I’ll look into these issues you raised, and I will. But a claim is not proof, and I’ve explained why I’m skeptical about some of your claims, while also expressing the possibility that you might be right. What more do you want? Are you here for an honest conversation at all?

Look who’s being deceptive.

I go out of my way to point out I’m no expert and don’t know much beyond what’s common knowledge, and yet you start out with this piece of nonsense:

You should do research on topics before speaking with any kind of authority on them

I’m not claiming any authority, so don’t pretend I did.

Overall the people working in these terrible 996 conditions has been a fraction of the overall worker population

So what you’re saying is that I’m right. This does happen. And also:

This is probably one the areas I need to look more into overall,

So you don’t actually know as much as you’re trying to claim.

My point is that this 996 schedule would be unimaginable anywhere in Europe. We’ve got labour protections that China apparently doesn’t.

And of course it’s great that China is moving in a better direction, I’m not denying that, but as long as abusive practices like these can happen in major corporations, you can’t really claim to take better care of your workers than Europe. (Europe is also still far from perfect, and varies wildly per country of course, but I’d say we’re doing this a lot better than the US and China.)

the US is probably one of the best analogs in terms of the economic size

Wait, is this a “we’re too big to do it right” argument? I usually hear that when people defend America’s lack of healthcare, labour protections or abundance of murder. It’s a bullshit argument. There’s no good reason why a large country couldn’t do this. Sure, individual European countries aren’t that big, but the EU as a whole is half a billion people with an economy comparable to the US and China, and despite having all these diverse different countries with their own laws, none of them allow these sort of labour conditions. Though I must admit here too enforcement is sometimes lacking and real slavery has happened. But not by major corporations, because it gets punished harshly when discovered. It’s usually people taking advantage of migrant workers.

What is demonstrably provable is that the workers within China are becoming more and more satisfied with their labor conditions year over year AND the Chinese governments is very serious about investigating and resolving labor disputes.

That is awesome news, and I look forward to the time when China’s labour conditions surpass those of Europe. But it’s not there yet.

And developing? It’s pretty industrialised, and has a lot of high tech industry. Keep in mind that the EU has a lot of former Soviet-bloc countries that were dead poor when the USSR collapsed, and are now doing much better. Or look at the development of Finland or Ireland over the oast century. Those weren’t colonisers, but colonised.

The numbers show that more and more of the businesses within China are falling under state control - which is quite literally how that would work in a socialist system. The people control the government, the government controls the corporations, therefore the people control the corporations.

That’s only true if the people actually do control the government. I never hear about elections in China, and elections don’t mean a lot when the government controls all information. And Chinese leaders often seem to have that cult of personality thing that you often see in dictatorships.

Personally, I’d rather see companies controlled by the workers rather than by the state.

The Nordic model is actively failing because of growing privatization in these countries too.

Failing? Last I checked they’re still topping all the happiness, freedom, equality and lack of poverty charts.

Of course they have problems; no country is perfect and there’s always room for improvement. And social democracy is a compromise between socialism and capitalism.

Just because there are regulations on corporations doesn’t mean you are safe from the intrinsic need of private corporations to grow as the parasitic entities they are

That is true, but with strong labour rights, antitrust enforcement and progressive taxation, it seems to be working quite well, actually. You do need constant vigilance of course, but show me a system where that’s not the case.

China has an extremely robust democratic process

You’ve pointed this out several times already, and I have to admit it’s the first time I’ve heard this. As far as I can tell, China has taken away democracy in Hong Kong. I never heard about elections there. All media seem to be under strict government censorship. From what I’ve heard, you can’t even talk publicly about Winnie the Pooh, because that’s taken as mocking Xi.

I’ll try to read up on China’s democratic processes, but for now I remain skeptical.

I’m not trying to deceive anyone. From what I can tell, China’s labour protections don’t seem to be any better than those of the US. Wasn’t Alibaba known for demanding employees work 12 hours per day, 6 days per week? The infamous 996 schedule.

I’ve also heard of iPhone factories with nets to catch employees trying to commit suicide. I’d love to believe these are rare extremes, but these are also very large companies, not some fringe outfits.

What I would expect from an actual socialist system is the workers controlling the factories and receiving the profits, the people having a vote in everything, and not having an untouchable ruling class that’s above accountability and can draw more power to themselves.

How well that would work, I don’t know, but a better compromise between that and capitalism would be the Nordic model with strong labour protections and strong unions. In any case, the US is a very poor model to emulate, unless you want cut throat capitalism.

I’m sure there are a billion things I don’t know about China, and with China being such a closed society and censored internet access, there’s a lot I can’t know. I’d love it if you could set me straight on the details around these an other issues. I’m just here pointing out what little I know, and why that gives me the impression of state capitalism instead of socialism. It seems to be combining the worst of both worlds.

China does seem to be good at getting competent leaders to the top, though. I’m frequently frustrated by the amateurs and clowns dominating global politics, and often China seems to be the only one capable of a constructive long term vision. It’s undeniable that the mix of democracy with cut throat capitalism and extreme inequality leads to corruption, as we’re seeing in the US and Russia.

But you can’t really say you represent the people if you deny them a vote.

Ever since the early days of the Syrian civil war, the Kurds of northern Syria have been a spark of hope, fighting not just for themselves, but for every oppressed minority, empowering women in a part of the world where women are often second class citizens, fighting for freedom and equality.

I really want to see them succeed, but the odds are stacked against them, and Erdogan hates all Kurds.

It’s more like a state controlled capitalism. They do tons of business, have plenty of billionaires, exploited workers working ridiculous hours, hunger wages, etc., but without the ability to vote or access information freely.

It’s not a model to emulate.

Mixed feelings. As much as I’d like to see the US lose its way too dominant position in the global market,

issue more common debt in order to provide investors with an alternative safe asset to gold and US Treasuries

I’m not sure providing investors with another asset to invest in, is the right reason to do it.

Yeah, this is just lies. Blatant lies, because again, anyone can watch the video and see what happened.

I can’t help but notice you’re very careful not to say anything negative about Russia, despite their illegal invasion, their war crimes and their utterly brutal and inhuman tactics.

Exactly what I said: not like this. Not with his VP in charge. It should become a democracy where the mineral wealth is used to help the people.

You’re absolutely right. War costs everybody. That money would be better spent to improve people’s lives instead of destroying it. But when someone attacks you, not defending yourself may end up costing more. And helping (and gaining) an ally is better than losing them.

But more than that: the EU showing its strength can discourage further aggression from Russia. And maybe the US.

Do you enjoy submitting to bullies?

It’s Russia that threw the rules out of the window. The EU and Ukraine have been the most rules abiding powers here. The only ones, arguably. It’s hamstringing them, and en helping the aggressor that doesn’t respect any rules. Sometimes you just have to hit back. And this is still very mild.

The US still gets an exception for everything it does. But maybe it’s time to reconsider; if the US is willing to punish international judges and make their life impossible simply for prosecuting Netanyahu, what risk is there still for the ICC to also open investigation into American war criminals. They have plenty.

The USSR also got a second front. Western allies were also fighting Germany, even if they could have easily stayed out of it. The EU knows some of their members are next on the Russian menu, and still they refuse to fight for their survival.

I honestly think the EU can only win by helping Ukraine. Russia and the US see the EU as weak abd indecisive, which is why they think they can take advantage of it. If the EU shows itself to be strong and a major power in its own right, they’re likely to back off. Both Putin and Trump only respect strength and force, and Ukraine is the best opportunity for the EU to show that.

On top of that, they’ll gain a valuable ally with the most effective and creative army in the world.

There is too much to win for the EU, and nothing to lose. Just end this war by liberating Ukraine.

Kidnapping foreign presidents is also bad. Maybe not quite as bad as 4 years of bombing and killing, but still bad. I’m no fan of Maduro, and I think Venezuela will be better off without him (but maybe only if it’s also without his VP and her family’s extensive control of the government apparatus), but this is not a good way to accomplish that.

So reality is complicated and nuanced, and media doesn’t handle that very well. Especially not when they’re increasingly becoming propaganda outlets for a fascist regime.

The difference is that the US is beating up someone who was sitting quietly in a corner, while the EU is beating up someone who has been beating Ukraine to a bloody pulp for the past 4 years.

There’s a difference between seizing oil tankers because you want their oil, and seizing them because they’re funding an illegal and needlessly destructive war. The first is as explicitly piracy as you can get, the second might be justifiable as sanctions, though definitely in a grey area that most countries would have preferred to stay out of.

But I’m all for seizing the entire shadow fleet and sending the profits to Ukraine.

Also, if the military is all Trump loyalists, that will increase the chance they’ll obey illegal orders that pit them against Americans.