<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: After Copenhagen, would &#8220;The Chinese Century&#8221; be such a bad thing?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/postright/2009/12/19/after-copenhagen-would-the-chinese-century-be-such-a-bad-thing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/postright/2009/12/19/after-copenhagen-would-the-chinese-century-be-such-a-bad-thing/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=after-copenhagen-would-the-chinese-century-be-such-a-bad-thing</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 20:49:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/postright/2009/12/19/after-copenhagen-would-the-chinese-century-be-such-a-bad-thing/comment-page-1/#comment-3073</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:25:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/postright/?p=1453#comment-3073</guid>
		<description>Well, David, the Chinese actually produce tangible goods.  They also respond to deep recessions/depressions by public works projects which employ people to produce something (typically long-lasting infrastructure) and we redistribute our income upwards to parasitic banks (while attempting to tax production and necessary energy consumption).  Whatever any of our libertarian friends here rightly or wrongly have to say about govt waste, the crux of the problem the relative superiority of the Chinese solution is obvious.  

The PRC is still viciously capitalist, they are just more intelligent, less decadent capitalists.  Their social problems resulting from increased individualism are expanding rapidly, but Chairman Hu makes much more positive notes than Jiang Zimen had on how to doeal with them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, David, the Chinese actually produce tangible goods.  They also respond to deep recessions/depressions by public works projects which employ people to produce something (typically long-lasting infrastructure) and we redistribute our income upwards to parasitic banks (while attempting to tax production and necessary energy consumption).  Whatever any of our libertarian friends here rightly or wrongly have to say about govt waste, the crux of the problem the relative superiority of the Chinese solution is obvious.  </p>
<p>The PRC is still viciously capitalist, they are just more intelligent, less decadent capitalists.  Their social problems resulting from increased individualism are expanding rapidly, but Chairman Hu makes much more positive notes than Jiang Zimen had on how to doeal with them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

