Kanter criticizes China; Celtics games blacked out?

[86MaxwellSmart]

#istandwithkanter   

[jpotter33]

Not a great response to being called a dictator if you goal is to not look like a dictator.

😂 my exact response, too. TP.

Nothing says “I’m not an authoritarian dictator” like…. checks notes… banning a basketball team’s games in the country because a player said some mean things about him?

[gouki88]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

[Mahk E Mahk]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

[gouki88]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

You realise many western companies profit off slave labour too, right?

[gift]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

You realise many western companies profit of slave labour too, right?

You’re out of your element on this one, but proceed if you must.

[gouki88]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

You realise many western companies profit of slave labour too, right?

You’re out of your element on this one, but proceed if you must.

I don't care. It is lazy to imply China profits off of slave labour whereas the capitalist west does not.

[nickagneta]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

You realise many western companies profit of slave labour too, right?

You’re out of your element on this one, but proceed if you must.

I don't care. It is lazy to imply China profits off of slave labour whereas the capitalist west does not.

Designer clothing, athletic shoes, cell phones, some important chemicals, costume jewelry, many types of packaging, etc., etc. The list of American capitalistic companies profiting off slave labor is too long to list, even in today's society.

[gouki88]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

You realise many western companies profit of slave labour too, right?

You’re out of your element on this one, but proceed if you must.

I don't care. It is lazy to imply China profits off of slave labour whereas the capitalist west does not.

Designer clothing, athletic shoes, cell phones, some important chemicals, costume jewelry, many types of packaging, etc., etc. The list of American capitalistic companies profiting off slave labor is too long to list, even in today's society.

Not to mention the vast amount of trafficked labour for certain industries (domestic work and agriculture being the chief offenders). Capitalist ideals of maximising profit can very quickly serve as nourishment for slavery.

[Celtics4ever]

Slavery is wrong anywhere I am sure we can agree on that.

Still who benefits from the business and profits.

I recall this one

Ahead of this, Ma addressed an assembly of high-profile figures with a controversial speech that criticised the Chinese financial system.

He was not seen in public again until late January. In the interim, there were rumours that he might have been placed under house arrest or otherwise detained.

The Alibaba founder had accused Chinese banks of operating with a "pawn-shop mentality". He had also claimed that the authorities were trying to "use the way to manage a railway station to manage an airport" when it came to regulating the new world of digital finance.

These statements angered the banking establishment and reportedly reached the attention of President Xi Jinping.

Soon Ma and his close colleagues were summoned for a meeting with the regulators, and Ant Group's flotation was halted in its tracks.

Shares in Ma's companies fell, wiping nearly $76bn (£54bn) off its value.

After that meeting, Jack Ma was nowhere to be seen.
"That day he apparently crossed the invisible red line for what can be said and done in Xi Jinping's China," says Christina Boutrup, a China analyst who has interviewed Ma in the past.

"I believe it was a big surprise for him. He would never have crossed that line if he had known how bad it could go."

Eventually, on 20 January 2021, Ma resurfaced in the form of a short video address for a charity event.

He was subsequently spotted the following month playing golf on the Chinese tropical island of Hainan.

"Apparently he just kept a very low profile, which was really the best thing he could do," says Ms Boutrup.

The Chinese government is currently reconsidering its approach to regulating the tech giants, launching an anti-monopoly investigation into Alibaba.

"There are [Communist] party committees there to remind the companies... that the party ultimately has power, even over powerful individuals like Jack Ma," says Samantha Hoffman, a researcher at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

This control extends to secrecy, she says.

"Not only is a company responsible to do what the party demands, but they also can't admit to doing that if they're asked."

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56448688

Do we have that here in the USA?

Kanter's family his father has been critical of Turkey and Erdogan

Enes Kanter's father is a free man. Friday morning the former Kentucky Wildcat and current Boston Celtic shared on Twitter that his father has been released after spending seven years in a Turkish prison.

    "Wow! I could cry," Kanter wrote. "Today I found out that 7 years after arresting my dad, taking him through a Kangaroo court and accusing him of being a criminal just because he is my dad. "MY DAD HAS BEEN RELEASED! This is due to the pressure we have put on the Turkish regime. They no longer could keep him from his freedom because of the spotlight that we all put on this case! However! He is just one person, there are still tens of thousands of people wrongfully in jail in Turkey. I will not forget you, we will not forget you! "This proves that the voice of the people will always push Dictators to do the right thing in the end. Don't be scared to stand for what is right, always and always, Stand for FREEDOM Stand for DEMOCRACY Stand for HUMAN RIGHTS"

Kanter has been an outspoken critic of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and that is putting it lightly. The former first round draft pick and NBA star has used his voice to describe Erdogan a dictator, frequently comparing him to Hitler, while spotlighting atrocities committed by the Turkish government. Erdogan struck back in 2017, canceling Kanter's passport while he was abroad in an attempt to apprehend and silence him. A man without a country, Kanter left the United States' borders for the first time since the incident when the Celtics won at Toronto on Christmas Day 2019. Along with the good news that his father is now out of custody, Kanter revealed this week that he is eligible for United States citizenship in June of 2021.

So no surprise here, he has done it before.

[Mahk E Mahk]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

You realise many western companies profit of slave labour too, right?

You’re out of your element on this one, but proceed if you must.

I don't care. It is lazy to imply China profits off of slave labour whereas the capitalist west does not.

you’re the one being intellectually lazy. no one stated that the capitalist west does not profit from slavery. in your previous post you made the claim that slave labor “is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.” this is patently false and was the claim i was refuting in my post.

[gouki88]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

This is where American culture is supposed to influence China toward more tolerance. Unfortunately, too much of American culture has become $$$ culture and with those motivations it's easier for China to influence American culture toward intolerance.

American culture isn't going to change the Chinese government or the Chinese people in any meaningful way.  Chinese government has perfected controlling their people without doing so in a heavy handed way to most of their people.

Hate to say it but when it comes to economics, they probably do capitalism better than we do right now.  They're run like a company in that at the end of the day the CEO/Chairman Xi lays down the law and not following the company line/culture just isn't tolerated.

The political scientists and economists among us would know better than me, but I think what you described sounds more to me like communism than capitalism.  Total government control of the economic system without private ownership and without encouragement of private enterprise.  Maybe Xi runs a tight ship with his company of a billion workers (?), but it's not capitalism.

That doesn't accurately describe the Chinese economy. It's become a lot more open in recent decades, definitely not "total government control".

I do chuckle at China's economy being labelled "not capitalistic" because it profits off of slave labour. That is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.

glad you’re amused but you’re making an erroneous and lazy correlation, as slavery was a feature in many places and times around the globe, in capitalistic and non-capitalistic economies. when slavery originates, it is typically due to a totalitarian or imperial nation bringing slavery into existence from war and conquest. The US was no different. In fact, slavery was kept alive by cultural considerations, rather than economic and capitalistic considerations in the economy. essentially, what had reduced the use of slavery within the 19th century was not legislation such as the atlantic trade ban of 1808, but the culture of capitalist societies.

slavery and capitalism are completely incompatible in nearly every way, and specifically, slavery cannot be associated with capitalism because capitalism has many traits which obstruct the laws of slavery (and vice versa). one example is the accumulation of capital via the means of savings, which in turn is the engine toward productivity growth. the productivity growth results in increased efficiencies of resources, the diversification of labor, the increase of wages, increase in technological outputs, and the general wellbeing of the labor force and economy, which in turn, continues such a cycle in a sustainable and voluntary way.

slavery does not accumulate capital (other than investment returns, but no savings are acquired), which in turn cannot accumulate and introduce new productive techniques or technologies. this leads to efficiency reductions, and a lack of labor diversity, which altogether cannot advance technological output, wages, and the general wellbeing of the labor force of the slave economy, hence why capitalist societies actually reduce the amount of slave use over time. not surprisingly, the US experienced consistent pre-civil war declines in slave rates as the economy grew.

as the fledgling US economy expanded, the workforce expanded due to the need of more productive, skilled labor rather than slave labor, as that’s what’s needed for a growing, progressing, capitalistic economy.

You realise many western companies profit of slave labour too, right?

You’re out of your element on this one, but proceed if you must.

I don't care. It is lazy to imply China profits off of slave labour whereas the capitalist west does not.

you’re the one being intellectually lazy. no one stated that the capitalist west does not profit from slavery. in your previous post you made the claim that slave labor “is almost inherent in any newly capitalistic state.” this is patently false and was the claim i was refuting in my post.

What capitalistic state, newly so or not, doesn't or hasn't profited from slave labour?

[SHAQATTACK]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

+1

[SparzWizard]

Watch the NBA fine and suspend Kanter and demand an apology to China cuz it's affecting their business and revenues.

[tenn_smoothie]

I support Kanter.

Will Chinese government block out Celticsstrong too??

I’d be surprised if it already isn’t blocked, but I’m definitely with Kanter on this one.

Someone has to stand up to China.

We did have someone who was standing up to China.
Joe Biden sure won't do it.

God Bless Enes Kanter.