Yeah, there are many FOSS organizations in the U.S. like the Open Source Lab by the Oregon State University, the Open Source Software Institute, and many others. I guess they could do it, possibly if some join forces.
I agree in principal with that view, but there was pressure from VW’s top investors (Union Investment, Deka) to clarify the situation in Xinjiang. An audit turned out to be extremely flawed which put further pressure on the management. It’s hard to tell how much this contributed to the decision, but at least some shareholders weren’t indifferent about the situation.
The USA can certainly do this, they have all what it takes. Public investments for such stuff will be hard to get in the next four years I guess, but there could be some private initiative?I don’t know the U.S. good enough in that respect, though.
Strange. Here is the Reuters news about it: https://www.reuters.com/world/eu-proposes-sanctions-against-chinese-firms-helping-russia-bloomberg-news-2024-11-25/
This has long been done :-)
deleted by creator
I am afraid they already did:
Commission concludes that online social networking service of X should not be designated under the Digital Markets Act – (October 2024) Please see the comment by @[email protected], I am mistaken here.
I would have loved to see the initiators to go the official way for the petition as I agree that change.org won’t change much. Here we go: https://commission.europa.eu/get-involved/engage-eu-policymaking/petition-eu_en
Having read the thread and all the numbers which are very interesting, I can’t help thinking that whatever the economic output is in whatever country or bloc, China must face higher cost for backing Russia in Ukraine.
No one talks about Ukraine losing. Any peace deal can only be reached according to Ukraine’s terms, this includes that Russia will have to leave the whole of Ukraine.
Just a reminder that World News on Lemmyworld is not the only community packed with whataboutism.
I didn’t miss the point, but this is a different topic. We need to provide housing, end homelessness and possibly the right to a bank account for everyone. These are different things.
Affordable housing and the threat by malicious actors to attack digital payment systems are two different things. Homelessness has to be addressed, of course, but we are dealing here with something else.
This is maybe a devastating example why centralization and central planning is a bad and dehumanizing act for individuals in a society. There is a good documentary about China’s so-called “Ghost Children”. These are those who were born as younger siblings during China’s One Child policy.
The documentary was made in 2014. It shows how quickly things can change, and how people suffer now and then due to bad politics.
It’s really worth your time.
China’s Ghost Children – (video, 36 min)
Second or third children born illegally during China’s One Child Policy - implemented between 1979 and 2015 to curb the country’s population growth by restricting many families to a single child - are banned from marrying, having children or simply boarding a train. Condemned to a non-life, these ghost children do not officially exist according to the Chinese state. ARTE Reportage goes in search of these ‘Haihaizi’, those children who should not have been born.
[Edit typo.]
This is maybe a devastating example why centralization and central planning is a bad and dehumanizing act for individuals in a society. There is a good documentary about China’s so-called “Ghost Children”. These are those who were born as younger siblings during China’s One Child policy.
The documentary was made in 2014. It shows how quickly things can change, and how people suffer now and then due to bad politics.
It’s really worth your time.
China’s Ghost Children – (video, 36 min)
Second or third children born illegally during China’s One Child Policy - implemented between 1979 and 2015 to curb the country’s population growth by restricting many families to a single child - are banned from marrying, having children or simply boarding a train. Condemned to a non-life, these ghost children do not officially exist according to the Chinese state. ARTE Reportage goes in search of these ‘Haihaizi’, those children who should not have been born.
[Edit typo.]
Yes, I too find that irritating. Maybe what he means is that Microsoft was innovative in the very beginning of the company’s history, before PCs were part of everyone’s household. But Gates’ Microsoft soon started to pursue a very monopolistic policy. And it has been doing so to this day. (I can’t compare that to Carlos Slim’s conglomerate, though, due to a lack of knowledge about that.)
Income equality is just one of many other factors to assess a just society as we know. But as many focus on China’s GDP growth in its recent history, here are just numbers:
Between 2014 and 2022, in China the share of the bottom-50% income group (pre-tax) in the national income fell from 14.4% to 13.7%. In the same period, the shares of the top-1% and top-10% income groups rose from 13.7% and 41.5% to 15.7% and 43.4%, respectively. In a nutshell: the Chinese rich got richer, the poor got poorer.
For Western-style democracies, the numbers are diverse:
In European democracies like Germany and especially Norway, top income groups lost while the bottom-50% gained, while in countries like Finland all three mentioned groups gained, suggesting that the ‘middle class’ paid the bill. In other countries like Sweden, Denmark, and the U.S., the numbers show gains for the top at the cost of the bottom half.
And in Australia, top income groups lost significantly more than the bottom-50% gained, suggesting the middle class benefited, while in countries like Canada and Japan there appear to be only slight or even no significant changes in the period between 2014-2022.
But as I said, we must also focus on other factors that make a good society (the four freedoms come to my mind: freedom of speech and expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, freedom from fear). Given the fact that some in this thread cite China’s growth of GDP and national wealth as a factor of societal success, it is clear that this argument does not hold, though.
[Edit typo.]
@Che
Who says that?