Luke

Yeah, very good point.

So whats at stake here? Oil shock? Are these regions relevant for anything else?

Yeah, it will hopefully stay a regional conflict

Most of cryptomarket is crashing, other coins -20%

Market afraid of more war and general increase in geopolitical turmoil? Assets going down?

Very interesting developments down there... Biden is already in conversation...will be an exciting market open...:)

What will happen to Oil monday?

I will stop posting in this thread from now on, I have written about 400 posts about why I think the view on China is not accurate and why that creates an investing opportunity, it's the same people commenting and disagreeing over and over again and calling me gaslighting, having an agenda etc, at this point our views are clear. I also think the board has pretty much no interest in China as an investing opportunity. My differing view has been made clear over many posts and I am repeating myself, others can post more about why they think China is going to shit etc and you will get more space for your opinions.

Because they industrialized a lot later, rural development is very important to the CCP as visible by their releases and Xis talking. Yadda yadda yadda, you could make similar comments about the US killing the natives or Germany with the nazis, every country has dark sides. Okay, people want to leave China, they wont develop etc its over we all know it.

In fact that happens in capitalistic "democratic" systems where the ruler just buys himself the government. Attached you find a well researched presenting you the flaws: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B#

So if you have a huge amount of money invested in US stocks then you need the US favored policies, obviously since i invested in china i am also betting on their horse

The 70% bottom of the barrel workers who own almost nothing, have mostly debt and maybe a few bucks in a mutual fund will make the same under a Chinese burger king and will also have to pay in the Chinese amazon bottles. The only thing that matters is the people who own the bonds, equity/shares in those companies that will lose wealth, of course the media only focusses on what matters to them...

Interestingly, Putin was also not the neoliberal subservient cog the Russian and US oligarchs thought he would be, he has the russian billionaires under tight control and they are afraid of him, we will see what happens with russia but I wouldn't count them out, especially now with close ties to China. Maybe with china they can accelerate a new form of growth too the coming decades although putin is getting old and maybe after the new guy is up they reorientate themselves, US will 100% follow that closely and fund US supportive governments there as we all know.

China follows basic economic research by OECD policy advise to generate MORE growth for their overall economy but LESS growth for monopolies and concentrated markets. But nobody wants any redistribution in the US and both republic. and democr. basically run the same elite clientele political program, ruin the power of labor, don't regulate monopolies and concentrated markets, sell essential infrastructure to private companies that charge a lot and make their donors rich. Fair enough! Then China engages in the opposite policies which makes them stronger, their businesses stronger and the West and their elite hate it of course. For the average labor worker, this should not be of any concern but the media sector manipulates everybody to believe this is their concern too although it again only affects less than 5% of the population. They can hit china with as much tariffs as they want but they will cut their life supply off since they factories are not in their home countries. Yes, maybe they can reestablish colonies in India or other SEA countries and maybe they will obey the US and don't develop themselves so that's maybe a bet. Still, China is already far enough to be self-sufficient in their own country and their partners are also very wealthy with resources. Russia did the right move, nothing to gain with Europe and US, better focus on China. It will be interesting how India will behave, the best would be to stay very neutral and take the best of both worlds while driving their own high-quality development. Very interesting times, Xi is right to say that there are changes happening not seen in 100 years: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/22/xi-tells-putin-of-changes-not-seen-for-100

https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-en It follows that policies to reduce income inequalities should not only be pursued to improve social outcomes but also to sustain long-term growth. Redistribution policies via taxes and transfers are a key tool to ensure the benefits of growth are more broadly distributed and the results suggest they need not be expected to undermine growth. But it is also important to promote equality of opportunity in access to and quality of education. This implies a focus on families with children and youths – as this is when decisions about human capital accumulation are made -- promoting employment for disadvantaged groups through active labour market policies, childcare supports and in-work benefits.

A philosopher king leader party who enables superb outcomes is IMO preferred compared to a flawed democracy that enables inferior outcomes. Outcomes matter the most, not the process towards the outcomes. Also, democracies run into the threat of becoming capital oligarchies as can be seen in the west, the government is sold to the highest bidder with the deepest pockets and the economy stalls in benefit to the very wealthy. This is an edge the CCP has and why the West is so afraid of them. China will and does have a more competitive and more efficient industrial system, that can produce products for cheaper because public infrastructure is not privatized and monopolized by the financial sector but belongs to the government, banks, energy etc. They are turning more towards SOE owned key infrastructure because they see that the financial sector just wants to monopolize these assets which makes them a lot of money but labor suffers making the overall economy less efficient. Musk said it already, China is a powerhouse next level and nobody can beat them, energy will be a lot cheaper, factories are all next to each other, short supply chains, huge talent pool etc. So who will be happier, the person living in an almost fully automated, highly technological very wealthy society that cares about lifting everybody up in the "navel of the earth" or the highly privatized deindustrialized society that belongs to the financial, insurance and real estate sector that owns the government and monopolies stalling overall growth and development?

https://www.scmp.com/business/china-business/article/3258812/chinas-stock-market-beijing-issues-unprecedented-guidelines-calling-transparency-risk-management?module=top_story&pgtype=homepage China has issued an unprecedented set of policy guidelines to push for transparency, security, risk-management and vibrancy in the country’s US$9 trillion stock market, sketching out a view of what the world’s second-largest capital market could look like by the middle of the century as Beijing solidifies its goal of becoming a financial superpower. The document released by the State Council after the markets closed on Friday evening sets out nine guidelines that formulate a framework to develop the market, demanding a better mechanism for protecting investors’ interests and an improvement in the quality of listed companies over the next five years. By 2035, the market should have achieved “a reasonable structure of investing and fundraising” in which listed companies will have demonstrated a significant improvement in quality, it said. There must also be demonstrable progress in cultivating first-class investment banks and financial institutions. The push highlights the fact China’s state support for its stock market has entered a new stage, with some of the supportive measures proposed by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) now being written into the State Council’s documents. It is rare for China’s cabinet to issue documents directly targeting the stock market, with the two previous such occasions occurring in 2004 and 2014, both preceding a raging bull market. Friday’s guidelines complement four documents issued last month by the CSRC pledging to crack down on fraudulent listings, raise the threshold for new listings and require publicly traded companies to return more to investors through buy-backs and dividend payouts. According to the document published today, companies will be required to disclose their dividend payout policies when they list, and stricter rules on information disclosure and corporate governance will be implemented to restrict stake reductions by major shareholders and push listed companies to boost investment value. The regulators will also work out standards for abnormal trading and manipulation, issue rules to strengthen the supervision of high-frequency transactions, and mete out severe punishments in cases of malicious manipulation and short-selling, it said. The document also called for the fast-track approval of exchange-traded funds, the expansion of index-based funds, and a higher proportion of stock-focused funds in the mutual fund industry.