Incidentally, any developed nation have a black majority?

Would it ever be possible for right-wingers on this site to respond substantively? Can you please explain the world in which corporations are motivated not by making money, but by promoting a "liberal" agenda? However, you can't rebut the facts I have presented, so you respond with substance free posts like this.

 

Absolute nonsense,

 

So it is disingenuous to say Trump hasn't done much to influence the economy, but you then said Obama did nothing to influence the economy!!! Do you not see the contradiction in your post from one second to then next? I don't think the US economy recovered specifically because of Obama and the economy now is not doing well specifically because of Trump. Any influence presidents have on the economy is felt in the long term.

Next up, the nonsense about the business environment. The most highly regulated, high tax regime in US history also coincided with the period of greatest economic growth. From 1944-1971, with the Nixon Shock, the American economy grew rapidly and the growth was shared equally. That was a time dominated by Keynesian policies, high taxes, heavily regulated banking, etc. It was a period that was extremely labor friendly and not friendly to capital. With the fall of that regime following the Nixon shock and the inflation that came after it, neo-liberalism swept in and led to a far more "business friendly" environment. This is the result.



"Business friendly" environments help corporate profits, bond holders, and the wealthy. They don't help regular people. We need labor friendly environments like we had during the golden age of capitalism. However, Republicans and the Federal Reserve both oppose that.

PS. I don't want to sound conspiratorial with the federal reserve comment. The position of the federal reserve is that unemployment can be "too low." When that happens it drives up wages, which causes inflation. In those instances the Federal Reserve raises interest rates to increase unemployment. That is a fact. In the mind of the people running our economy at the moment, higher wages for regular people are bad. That is a problem!!

PPS. I was just critical of other posters for failing to include any substance, which makes it entirely pointless to debate them. However, you put effort and thought into your posts. I think you are wrong and I disagree with you, but that is a normal part of a political discussion site. However, I appreciate the thought and effort you put into your posts.

 

Good luck with that, we have plenty of examples to your question right here in the U.S..

 

I see you had a comma at the end, sort of like you were going to explain why! But it looks as if you searched your data base and got a return "File not Found" LOLOL

 

I dunno, they seem to claim differently

Then again, they may want to be considered something altogether different tomorrow

 

No, sort of like a typo.

 

What they say about themselves is one thing, what they are is another. Actions speak louder than words; surely you've heard that. Hitler's gang called themselves socialists; they were fascists. The Soviet Union called itself communist. It was a dictatorship. Surely you have the brains to realize Korea cannot be trusted, not on pretty much any level, and certainly not in being what it claims to be. It's like Trump saying he isn't a racist: it's obvious to the entire world that's just what he is.

 

This is a hugely laughable attempt to make something out of a typo. Desperate much? On my keyboard, which may be different than a US keyboard, the comma key is next to the period key, and, as an older person,I have stiffness in my hands. You are a sad sack.

 

In urban settings Chinese women work outside home not so much as an economic necessity but as a new culture norm and it has been that way for half a century now. There is still an expectation in China women should shoulder most of the housework in addition to their jobs but that is not so different from the US or Europe. It is Japan and Korea where stay at home wives are much more common place, though they are changing as well.

To the leftover women topic, my point is it is commonly depicted that the Chinese government made up the “leftover women” phrase and caused gender related adversities faced by Chinese women today and that is incorrect. The root cause is deeply rooted in the culture and exacerbated by the the fact China is practically an early capitalism state and laws and regulations that protect women and children are still in developing stage and far from complete and mature. There were state run shows that questioned the leftover women phrase and examined the situation. I do not see anything that can be classified as concerted manipulation, at least no more than giving tax breaks to married couples and large families in the US. The desire for family and children by young women is likely rooted in tradition and culture and even more likely and simply, human nature.

Thank you for the book suggestion and I looked into it. After reading the reviews I tend to agree more with the one to two star reviews which are almost all from reviewers who have first hand knowledge and experience and challenged the book’s facts and presentation. Some of the four or five stars reviewers have blatantly wrong facts (one states only men are allowed to have names on bank accts, for example, which has never been true), so I would guess they do not have much if any first hand knowledge and experience. I do appreciate that they are taking an interest in the topic and learning.

One reviewer pointed out that it is Chinese women themselves who are giving the book low reviews, which to me, is very telling. And of course his urging Chinese women to embrace their foreign savior is also very interesting.

 

Two entire nations comprising tens of millions of people refute your allegation.

That there are not more speaks to the exploitation of those nations rather than any inherent inability to loot and pillage for their own enrichment.

And I provided a link to the IMF, World Bank and CIA ratings proving that there were 2 nations meeting your ORIGINAL OP criteria in the top 30 rankings.

 

As far civilizations go in sub Saharan Africa go there has not been much in the way of serious research done to find any. The Zimbabwe ruins were obviously from an African civilization that must have existed but it was not in the interests of the imperialists to admit to what it actually was. The other findings of ancient bones indicating mathematical abilities dating back 35,000 years is evidence of civilization too. Hunter gatherers don't need math so there must have been some civilization. There are some caves in the southern parts of the continent indicating that fire was used 2 million years ago.

The evidence it there but it doesn't suit the narrative to admit that Africa was more than just the place we evolved from our fellow apes. It was also the place where we tames fire, learned how to make tools and do math. I suspect that there is more to come in the future so it best to keep an open mind.

As far as genetics goes there is no difference of any significance. Africa is a harder place to survive in and termites would destroy evidence of wooden structures. Clay is washed away by rain and wind. Rocks are only needed if you want to protect yourself from being attacked by other humans and given the vastness of the continent it was not as likely to occur as it did in more highly populated areas like Europe.

 

It was a joke, smile a little more

 

Ya as a Conservative I hear that BS all the time from the left And we all know, their opinion always Trumps what anyone else thinks

 

If you understood what communism and soicalism are, you would not be so ready to believe what Korea or other countries that call themself socialist or communist say.

 

I don't believe anything I'm just stating what they consider themselves as But I'm sure you know better than they do

 

They don't consider themselves true communists or socialists. It's propaganda. Propaganda is a fundamental aspect of dictatorships and fascism. They aren't stupid. They know what they are doing.

 

Goody, thanks!

 

There was one CNN report a while back showing clean and orderly streets in Rwanda. I don't recall what the piece was about, but I believe it was either about the government and policies of Paul Kagame or about coffee. They called Rwanda the 'Singapore of Africa'.

I think the best way to see what African countries really look like is to just zoom in and look at images on Google Maps.

Edit: OH! Better yet, just look up Kigali in Google Images! Tell me if THAT does not look developed to you!

 

Like numerous other contributions to this thread, this is either incredibly ignorant, racist or both. Why do people who clearly know nothing about Africa & can't even be bothered to do a quick google search insist on making sweeping & wildly inaccurate statements?

There was a civilization in modern day Ethiopia/Eritrea during the time of the Pharaohs. It built one of the largest structures in sub-saharan Africa, ruled parts of modern day Saudi & Yemen and continued on in various guises down to the modern day.

The civilization of Kush, on the upper Nile, was contemporary with Ancient Egypt though not as developed. This changed over time & Kush eventually became strong & advanced enough to conquer much of Egypt in the 7th century BC. The Kushites/Nubians built pyramids, fought the Romans & continued on in some form until the 6th century AD - a life span of a millenium

There were a succession of great civilizations & empires in West Africa on the southern fringes of the Sahara from the 7th to the 16th century. They left great buildings & libraries.

Nigeria has produced numerous civilizations from the Nok culture which arose around 1000 AD to the yoruba, Hausa & Ibo cultures contemporary with Middle Ages Europe and the great Benin Empire of the 15th century.

Further south the Kingdom of Kongo was a powerful state that existed from the 1300s until the 19th century and fought repeated wars with Portugal before eventually being overwhelmed.

There were numerous great kingdoms and empires on the upper reaches of the Nile & around Lake Victoria & modern day Uganda.

Further south the Luba Kingdom ran for 300 years until European incursions in the 1880s brought it down.

The empire that built the huge stone walls of Great Zimbabwe existed for 400 years until it collapsed in the 1500s.

This isn't a comprehensive list. There were more.

These empires & kingdoms came in different shapes & sizes, but they were large trading, agricultural & resource extraction civilizations. They raised cattle & crops, worked metal, mined gold, iron & other minerals, traded across vast distances & sometimes constructed impressive buildings. Your characterization of Africa as a continent of 'mostly hunter gatherers' free of civilizations is simply wrong.

 

Nigeria.

 

I think our stumbling point the is going to be over the meaning of 'developed'. Of the BRICS I only consider two properly 'developed' (C & R) with the rest 'partly developed'. Nigeria is in the same category, though in worse shape - its a big category. Size of economy doesn't interest me so much as quality of life, infrastructure, government etc. While it isn't the only measure I'd use, any assessment of these things needs to look at the Human Development Index. Here is the African subset with overall rankings included.

It isn't a pretty picture. Whether or not you could classify any sub-Saharan nations as 'developed' is questionable. Some, like Ghana, Botswana, Swaziland & a few others are fairly well run. Some like Ethiopia, Equatorial Guinea & Kenya have booming economies. Others like Sth Africa & Nigeria have large economies. I wish I could say with confidence that some of them combined enough positives to be what I would call 'developed', but I can't. Maybe my definition is too tight.

 

I know people that live in Mexico...where they cater to Americans that is. I think they know nothing about where the average Mexican lives.

 

Whether it was intended as a joke or not, it was damn sure funny! I got a good laugh when I say that one!

 

The truth, as in almost all things, is complicated. Korea is politically Leninist, so you can deny Lenin was a Marxist, but most people aren't going to accept that. Many Marxists believe that Lenin distorted Marx in a way that led the the failure of 20th century communist revolution, which is fine, but it doesn't change that Lenin was a Marxist.

However, Korea is also a super weird political culture. There is a mixture of Leninism, Monarchy, old-school Roman Imperial Cult style stuff, and military dictatorship. They don't fit neatly into one box.

Economically it is hard to say. I have read a few books about North Korea, and I got a good sense of the political situation, but the biggest take away I got was that we really know very little about the daily functioning of their society. They really truly are closed off to the world.