Water, which used to be a free good, is now an asset and a financialized one in addition to real.
How long before air is capitalized?
CNN Business
Investors can now trade water futures
Anneken Tappe, CNN Business
CNN Business
Investors can now trade water futures
Anneken Tappe, CNN Business
See also
This Week in Asia
Kunal Purohit
15 comments:
It costs more to build a dam than destroy it, so hopefully the economics will be an incentive to reach an agreement acceptable to all.
China
https://youtu.be/tK3OVoqAAWo
Matt,
The video you posted is from "The Epoch Times". They're Falun Gong and constantly demonizing China.
The Epoch Times is a far-right international multi-language newspaper and media company affiliated with the Falun Gong new religious movement, based in the United States. The newspaper is part of the Epoch Media Group, which also operates New Tang Dynasty (NTD) Television. The Epoch Times has websites in 35 countries but is blocked in mainland China.
The Epoch Times opposes the Chinese Communist Party, and promotes far-right politicians in Europe, and backs President Donald Trump in the U.S.; a 2019 report by NBC News showed it to be the second-largest funder of pro-Trump Facebook advertising after the Trump campaign. The Epoch Media Group's news sites and YouTube channels have spread conspiracy theories such as QAnon and anti-vaccination propaganda. The organization frequently promotes other Falun Gong affiliated groups, such as the performing arts company, Shen Yun.
Wikipedia - The Epoch Times
Here's what they were doing in Canada:
The Epoch Times, a newspaper that has polarized people over its content, is coming under fire for advancing a conspiracy theory about the origin of the coronavirus — and having it delivered straight into people's mailboxes unsolicited.
Some Canadians who received it by mail and a postal carrier who says he is forced to deliver it are angry over a special eight-page edition of the paper exploring the idea that the virus that causes COVID-19 was created as a biological weapon and arguing it should be called "the CCP virus," a reference to the Chinese Communist Party.
Check out the article linked below and the pictures of what was mailed out.
Some Canadians who received unsolicited copy of Epoch Times upset by claim that China was behind virus
Matt has posted this video before.
“The video you posted is from "The Epoch Times". They're Falun Gong and constantly demonizing China. “
Ahmed I know... I also watch Steve Bannon stuff all the time he is rabid anti CCP too... (he and Bass probably short China)...
Doesn’t mean their observations are not accurate and interesting...
BTW I’m also constantly demonizing China as the commie USD zombie pos nation that they are.... I have zero respect for that nation ....
Matt,
This from Wikipedia on China's form of government:
Democratic centralism
The CCP's organizational principle is democratic centralism, which is based on two principles: democracy (synonymous in official discourse with "socialist democracy" and "inner-party democracy") and centralism. This has been the guiding organizational principle of the party since the 5th National Congress, held in 1927. In the words of the party constitution, "The Party is an integral body organized under its program and constitution and on the basis of democratic centralism". Mao once quipped that democratic centralism was "at once democratic and centralized, with the two seeming opposites of democracy and centralization united in a definite form." Mao claimed that the superiority of democratic centralism lay in its internal contradictions, between democracy and centralism, and freedom and discipline. Currently, the CCP is claiming that "democracy is the lifeline of the Party, the lifeline of socialism". But for democracy to be implemented, and functioning properly, there needs to be centralization.
To join the party, an applicant must be approved by the communist party. In 2014, only 2 million applications were accepted out of some 22 million applicants. Admitted members then spend a year as a probationary member.
In contrast to the past, when emphasis was placed on the applicants' ideological criteria, the current CCP stresses technical and educational qualifications.
This is how democracy is supposed to work, i.e., rule by smart people. Contrast that to what you currently have in the US, what with dumb voters electing demagogues.
Here in Canada, the Green Party elected Elizabeth May who campaigned against the radiation coming from smart meters, this while she was holding a cell phone against her head all day, which is about a billion times more radiation:
The Green Party is waging war against WiFi pollution, and Elizabeth May is leading by example.
Ms. May, who was the first Green candidate to win a seat in the House of Commons in the last election, took to Twitter on Wednesday lay out her concerns over "electromagnetic frequencies." The Green Party's main targets are so-called wireless "smart meters," which are set to come into use in British Columbia to monitor the use of electricity.
BC Hydro recently received its first shipment of smart meters, which transmit information about energy use several times a day. The smart meters will replace electro-mechanical meters in every home and business in the province by the end of 2012.
You can't make this stuff up.
More on Elizabeth May...
Elizabeth May warns us about electromagnetic radiation … from her BlackBerry
"I doubt I am the first person to notice this — but I’ll post it anyway: Yesterday, Green Party leader Elizabeth May attracted critics aplenty when she Tweeted a stream of messages advancing the junk-science idea that Wi-Fi computer networks are bad for your health. On close inspection, it seems that the one Tweet that set the whole thing off was Tweeted from her BlackBerry. (See the fine print in the image above.) This ordinarily would be of no consequence — except for the fact that cell phone signals (such as those emitted by a smart phone) are orders of magnitude more powerful, from your head’s point of view, than the weak radio output emitted by the wi-fi router in the next room.In other words even if it were the case that Wi-Fi was dangerous (which it isn’t), the leader of the Green Party would be bragging about her shunning of this technology with a device many, many times more dangerous. It’s the equivalent of a teetotaler bragging that he never touches beer, even as he chugs down a 40oz bottle of hard stuff."
China is very performance oriented. China is run like a US corporation, that is, as a meritocracy based on performance. It's based on the mandarin system of governance that is traditional in China. The new mandarins are engineers.
Moreover, the Chinese replaced the emperor with a president that is chosen by his or her peers in government based on performance. They ditched the hereditary emperor which led to nepotism rather than perpetuating effective government. That was the biggest weakness of the traditional system.
Now a "strong man" occupies power temporarily, shares power with the senior administrators (politburo), and is succeeded by another strong man chosen by the senior leadership functioning like a corporate board of directors.
China is not a republic in the sense of electing representatives through a popular vote. This is a Western tradition.
China's governance more closely reflects the desires and aspirations of its people than countries that are plutocracies, owing to the constant polling the government does, using it to adjust policy. So while not democratic, it is responsive governance.
The Chinese government therefore has an extraordinarily high approval rating.
Harvard Gazette, Taking China's Pulse
A reason for this is the tradition notion of "the mandate of heaven." That is, a government only lasts as long as there is satisfaction with governance. They use polling and have a feedback system for handling complaints to retain the mandate of heaven and stay in power.
So far it seems to be working pretty well for them — while the US crashes and burns and blames China and Russia for it.
Responsibility for reigning in corruption in China rests with the elites - just as in the West. It's not a model I would recommend for anyone, but that is what the peasantry is faced with.
Accountability is another issue. When the people do not have the means to hold their leadership to account, or when they behave as sheep and do as they are told, elites are only accountable to themselves.
What could go wrong?
Things are different in the West? Really?
The level of corruption is off the charts and there's nothing that "the little people" can do about it with the choices they are presented with by the elites.
Actually, this is an aspect of what the Trump revolutions was about. Didn't work for several reasons, some having to do with Trump himself and the GOP elite factions and some having to do with the elite factions that opposed him.
The big difference is that in the West you can say what you want, as long as it doesn't make enough waves to threaten the power elite. Really blow the whistle and they lock you up.
The West, the supposed bastion of democracy, are a society of sheep. The pandemic has revealed the extent to which the flock is willing to follow. Elected officials can display criminal incompetence and not be held accountable. Power grabs and corruption, are the inevitable result.
The little people can do nothing if their effort is limited to casting a vote now and then. Democracy requires an informed electorate with a focus on policy. We obviously don't have that, and are doing little to cultivate it.
We're reaching a point where we need a new society. A nanny state for the majority, and an alternative for the minority who belong elsewhere. I'm talking voluntary segregation.
Quoted from a post by Alex Tabarrok (Marginal Revolution University):
The Negative Externality of Voting
How other people vote is my business. After all, they make it my business. Electoral decisions are imposed upon all through force, that is, through violence and threats of violence. When it comes to politics, we are not free to walk away from bad decisions. Voters impose externalities upon others.
We would never say to everyone, “Who cares if you know anything about surgery or medicine? The important thing is that you make your cut.” Yet for some reason, we do say, “It doesn’t matter if you know much about politics. The important thing is to vote.” In both cases, incompetent decision-making can hurt innocent people.
Commonsense morality tells us to treat the two cases differently. Commonsense morality is wrong. - Jason Brennan
The Negative Externality of Voting
Jason Brennan's article is linked below in web.archive.org.
The Ethics of Voting
Further to my comment...
In an earlier post, I used the term "dumb voters". While there are dumb voters, the correct term to use is "low information voters". These latter voters can be highly intelligent in their own fields but do not keep up with issues in economics, military affairs, etc., and yet they vote on these issues.
Wikipedia - Low information voter
A properly functioning democracy depends on an informed electorate. If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed.” —Thomas Jefferson
The problem of low-information voters
The liberal position is
1) every citizen is qualified to vote on reaching maturity regardless of anything else, even mental impairment unless disqualified by a probate court
2) every citizen is automatically qualified to hold any political office if chosen by the electorate. The only requirement is an age requirement for some offices.
Conservatives disagree and hold that standards should be imposed to disqualify the "unqualified."
There are good arguments on both sides of the debate, but the debate is settled law in the US based on the US Constitution.
The weakness is that there is no corresponding law regarding preparing voters to become informed other than compulsory education until age 16 (17 or 18 in some states). There are also no legal measures to prevent disinformation or otherwise bias the vote, e.g., campaign finance.
Low-information voters are one problem; citizens who don't care about democracy are another.
Post a Comment