Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | PeterHolzwarth's commentslogin

"annexed Hong Kong prematurely" ? I'm not sure what you mean here.

Reports I've read are that China was surprised when the UK got in touch a few years before 97, wanting to start the prep work for the handover of HK. China, it seems, just assumed the UK would call HK a historical legacy whose lease agreement was made with a now-defunct country, and leave it at that without a handover.


I've done so. I saw a country that is a mix of third and first, full of wonderful people who the government fear so much they have to cut them off from the rest of the world and run the place as a police state.

Oh my goodness, this is deeply untrue. China is facing a massive population implosion. A lot of their global strategy can be understood through that lens: they are racing to accumulate power, standing, and wealth before the implosion starts to kick in.

Everyone is seeing a population implosion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_world#/med... we are already past peak child.

Some are doing worse than others, and China is doing close to the worst.

China is doing much better than the West. The only thing keeping populations from imploding here is the constant migration from the third world.

I don't understand. You say China is doing better than the West, and then explain why the West is doing so much better than China.

The West isn't doing better.

The West is destroying third world countries to take their human resources. Blowing up the middle east created more uber eats drivers than defunding all the schools in Detroit ever did.


Interesting - the account you mention, and the GP, are both doing replies that are themselves all about the same length, and also the same length between the two accounts. I get what you mean.

Most companies won't hire people with a high degree of notoriety. They may hire those people if they have some degree of fame.


Bypassing a paywall does sound a bit like piracy, if you think about it. This is what the commenter is referring to (tho in this case, I don't see a paywall on the article this end.)


The dot com crash was absolutely expected - today's "cmon, get it over with! crash!" tone we see in regards to the AI bubble is hilariously reminiscent of the late 90s dot com bubble. It was the era that spawned the famous Economist leader "Crash Dammit!"


This is a great question, and one that drives right to the key issue! (oh god, that sounds like an LLM response, sorry)

Like with the implosion of the Japanese economy, people will just not invest, instead parking their money in low-yield bank accounts. It was, in some cases continues to be, an issue for that country.


People, or organizations, but mainly people, can just refuse to invest in stuff, parking their money in low-interest bank accounts, or the old style "stuffed into mattresses."

This was the multi-decade problem Japan ran into after its hot economy imploded, and unleashed the "lost decade" (which became decades). It was not a marginal issue, and for year the Japanese government tried everything it could think of to get people to invest in things - to little effect.


The Economist front page illustration of the 90s .com stock market, with the heading "CRASH DAMMIT!"

Everyone knew there was a bubble. People began to get impatient for what obviously was going to happen, as you say.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: