Forced technology transfer through a Chinese policy requirement that foreign companies that want to establish themselves in select restricted sectors have a Chinese partner in a joint venture diffuses technology to China’s benefit. Those corporations cannot keep proprietary technology secrets from their partners.
Is China’s International Joint Venture Policy Effective in Diffusing Technology? -
Until recently Chinese policy required that the Chinese partner owned 51% of the business. Investing in that climate would actually be selling the corporation or business to China who could do whatever they like with it.
Karl Marx did write that capitalists would sell communists the rope they will be hanged by. Foreign investors realizing profits from Chinese mass market sales dump their technological knowledge to Chinese partners.
It is interesting to consider the Chinese historical background in the deeper sense of thousands of years of virtual public slavery to royals vs the American background of freedom to start with (except for African slaves). The Chinese public sector in control has great distrust of the concentrated wealth of the private sector from which they emerged only through great struggle and the chaotic technological advances of state of the art early 20th century military weapons and struggle.
Because the United States has failed to capitalize on better post-Cold War relations with Russia, a more complex economic neo-isolationism and populist weapons development is developing. Perhaps American leadership is in a race with Russia of a kind for business with the Chinese production medium.
Video of a new, affordible Kamakaze drone by Kalashnikov
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=34&v=fwAiKJEhtWo
The United States grew without royal establishment once it was overthrown so a new nation could begin. Slave importation was quickly outlawed and 43 years later the government was able to eliminate the historical vestigial slave owners from owning people. Today though the concentration of wealth in the United States is about the same as the notorious condition of Mexico though at a higher average level of prosperity. From an initial good fortune of having no upper class of established wealth to repress ordinary pepole in the beginning of the nation besides the British aristocrats, because the people were from so many nations among other reasons, to the present is quite a social devolution.
In theory a nation that starts without an oppressive upper class given enough time will evolve one. They will be self-reinforcing and justifying and forget all about the benefits of egalitarianism within a democratic system and create de facto aristocracy and social stratification statistically.
Probably there are really just three forms of government.
The Chinese idea of public safety differs from that of most Americans. There is an interesting ten-minute video on the subject one may make inferences from.
Is China’s International Joint Venture Policy Effective in Diffusing Technology? -
Until recently Chinese policy required that the Chinese partner owned 51% of the business. Investing in that climate would actually be selling the corporation or business to China who could do whatever they like with it.
Karl Marx did write that capitalists would sell communists the rope they will be hanged by. Foreign investors realizing profits from Chinese mass market sales dump their technological knowledge to Chinese partners.
It is interesting to consider the Chinese historical background in the deeper sense of thousands of years of virtual public slavery to royals vs the American background of freedom to start with (except for African slaves). The Chinese public sector in control has great distrust of the concentrated wealth of the private sector from which they emerged only through great struggle and the chaotic technological advances of state of the art early 20th century military weapons and struggle.
Because the United States has failed to capitalize on better post-Cold War relations with Russia, a more complex economic neo-isolationism and populist weapons development is developing. Perhaps American leadership is in a race with Russia of a kind for business with the Chinese production medium.
Video of a new, affordible Kamakaze drone by Kalashnikov
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=34&v=fwAiKJEhtWo
The United States grew without royal establishment once it was overthrown so a new nation could begin. Slave importation was quickly outlawed and 43 years later the government was able to eliminate the historical vestigial slave owners from owning people. Today though the concentration of wealth in the United States is about the same as the notorious condition of Mexico though at a higher average level of prosperity. From an initial good fortune of having no upper class of established wealth to repress ordinary pepole in the beginning of the nation besides the British aristocrats, because the people were from so many nations among other reasons, to the present is quite a social devolution.
In theory a nation that starts without an oppressive upper class given enough time will evolve one. They will be self-reinforcing and justifying and forget all about the benefits of egalitarianism within a democratic system and create de facto aristocracy and social stratification statistically.
Probably there are really just three forms of government.
- Royal
- Democratic
- Chaos
The Chinese idea of public safety differs from that of most Americans. There is an interesting ten-minute video on the subject one may make inferences from.
No comments:
Post a Comment