SSeessSISIp cmms pespctive

How China's 'privatized' SSI is good and meshes with Communism/Socialism:

From communist subreddits:

Chinese workers rights and social security are better than Americans and  Communism 

Furthermore, there has been some confusion regarding a Monthly Review article and term "privatization" as is used in China. All land in China is owned by the state. All of it. It can only be leased, but never purchased outright. It is 100% publicly owned. Additionally, "While the so-called ‘privatization’ process of allows some private ownership, whether domestic or foreign...this is a far cry from real privatization, as occurs in the United States and other capitalist countries. The state, headed by the CCP, retains a majority stake in the company and guides the company’s path".

The most successful economy in the history of humanity, The People’s Republic of China, is a highly regulated mixed economy with a communist government.

It has grown faster than any free market state, by a margin so wide it is difficult to compare. It will soon be the largest economy on earth.

It seems efficient to me.

http://www.cnfocus.com/china-to-become-first-to-realize-un-goal-of-no-poverty communism reddit from https://www.reddit.com/r/communism/comments/ihs5sr/china_to_become_first_to_realize_un_goal_of_no/:

To clarify, China is eliminating all extreme poverty in the country. There are lots of areas in China that are in remote mountains or valleys or rural centers, where the people live with no running water or electricity and are unreachable by car. This kind of extreme poverty has existed in China for thousands of years, but for the first time in history the Communist Party of China has managed to eliminate it through welfare, resettlement, jobs training, and higher education.

This is not to say there is no poverty in China. China's poverty line is intentionally low in order to give the most extremely poor a better life. The next step in poverty eradication is raising the line and focusing on increasing the socio-economic status of day laborers, migrant workers, and other types of rural poor.

reactionary redead: "Deng destroyed Chinese welfare"

leftist redditor: That's one of the dumbest take I have seen, and basically just a view of someone who has no stake in the development of the Chinese productive forces.

People who actually live in China, who actually has to deal with the material conditions of China will say the opposite, post Deng era was better than pre Deng era (not a criticism of Mao era BTW, they dealt with different material conditions).

In the 70's, the vast majority of people in China had 2 pair of clothes, lived in rural homes with no electricity/running water, ate meat 3 times a year. The minority urban dwellers road bicycles everywhere because the car per 1000 people was less than 1.

That is not "socialist mode of production," just fethisization of poverty.

China has capitalist elements in its mode of production, but it is not capitalist in the sense that the means of production is privately owned.

It is definitely not dictatorship of the bourgeoise, when bourgeoises get executed regularly.

Markets as a mean of distributing resource is not anti socialists. It is just letting supply and demand dictate prices. For certain types of products, like housing and medicine, it is better to not have a free market, for things like watermelons, why not?

There is exploitation, as in there are worker and bosses and workers are exploited in the sense that they won't get hired if they don't produce more than their pay check, but then again, what is more exploitative, someone having a decent job and having running water, electricity, shelter, food, education, ect, or communal farming where everyone lived in poverty?

Leading money to African nations on a mutually agreed upon basis is not imperialism

from futurology reddit

If China is a mighty dangerous and smart enemy, everyone is happy. China is happy. Reseachers are happy. The administration is happy. The defense industry is happy.

It's not particularly good for the average joe, because when there is a strong, and very dangerous China over there... Well, there are more important things to worry about now than higher wages, health care, or social security. We have to catch up to China, and someone has to sacrifice something for that to happen, dear patriotic citizen...

tldr: There are few incentives for anyone with power or money to push "weak China" narratives, and strong incentives for everyone with power or money to push "strong China" narratives. Is a news stroy there simply because it is true, or is it there because many people on all sides have a strong interest in it being there? Hard to say... Especially when it's a stroy which serves everyone.