Ah, YA rules.

‘I wanted them to cast the same actress.’

‘You never step in the same river twice.’

Wha?

Stop downvoting people who treat computers the way they ought to work! Needing to restart shit, with any regularity, is a flaw. Some of us are doing work, god dammit, and having to get things set up from scratch is a pain in the ass.

All the stuff I have open is open for a reason. The fact it all gradually stops working is not excused by the fact it can be unfucked by a hard reset. It’s supposed to keep working.

That’s what this post is about.

They’re your claims.

When I say the state has half the economy - that’s your estimate.

When I say they plan the other half too - those are your words.

When I point out these businesses are so clearly beneath the state, that the business’s leaders can be executed - that’s the only thing this post is about! It is a direct comparison of some guy doming a healthcare exec, and the Chinese government’s rather fucking tight control over that entire economy.

I don’t think you understand how conversations work.

Again, says guy talking about fairies.

You grasped for a comparison to Biden. Biden can’t fire whoever’s in charge of a business. Xi can. Xi can have those people executed. That is the power this entire post is celebrating.

Drawing comparisons to the business executives themselves has a basis and a function, no matter how hard you try to pivot into nuh-uhs and non sequiturs.

Because I’m doing stuff.

Some are real fuckin’ close. It doesn’t have to be all of them, every time.

Yes.

Stop trying to shame people for using their damn computer.

Says the guy talking about fairies.

You’re having a completely different conversation in your head.

CEOs get removed all the time. Fairies still don’t exist.

Do you wanna talk about Xi’s motives for consolidating power, and how money pales in comparison to deciding which rich assholes get disappeared or executed?

Hey look, an argument! Why’d you jerk me around seven times before trying that?

He’s a leader in charge of goddamn near an entire economy. Half of it - by your own reckoning - directly under the state he controls. The other half - as you say - “heavily planned.” How is he not as responsible for those industries as any CEO is responsible for their company? Is it just because he’s even higher up the chain?

Oh sorry, do CEOs not exist on your planet? Are they not in executive control of a hierarchy, with only theoretical means to remove them? Do they not set long-term plans and broad strategic goals, within the context of a global market economy? Y’know - the thing you acknowledge Xi Jinping does, as you try to say he shares no qualities whatsoever with people who do the same thing in the private sector?

Because that’s what it would take for your response to be anything besides empty signalling to people who dogmatically agree with you just because of who you’re defending. Fairies aren’t real. CEOs are. National executives share enough in common, at the best of times, that idiots and assholes think states should “be run like a business.”

What happens when a state does control half of a country’s business, and “heavily plans” the other half?

That’s not an argument. That’s a conclusion. The argument is the “why” part. Why is not not accurate?

You tried arguing why, and missed. That’s what all the stuff about layers of planners is about. If those are the actual reasons you reached this conclusion, it should change.

Dysfunctional diva bullshit is what killed Sega’s hardware business.

And what made Sega spicy was marketing. They noticed how Nintendo countersteered out from the crash by convincing retailers that video games were toys, and instead embraced teen angst and transgressive humor… insofar as one can, using a cartoon animal with an Archie Comics series.

And then Sony did it a thousand times better.

If you can distinctly disagree with it then it’s not word salad. You’re just pulling insults from a hat.

The comparison between shmucks-in-charge is crystal clear. No CEO plans and runs an entire company. They have layers of people under them. They are still in charge. They pick those planners, and tell them what to do, in broad terms.

Your argument against this is that the state only has half the economy… and even that is undercut by acknowledging they “heavily plan” the other half.

Not an argument. You’re just complaining about how there’s multiple words for “some schmuck in charge.” Do you realize that’s incompatible with your prior insistence he is not in charge?

… how directly involved do you think any CEO is?

If the state is making policy and planning decisions for both the public and private sectors, how does the distinction even matter? It’s like if Biden was Jeff Bezos’s boss.

> government runs half the economy

‘But how is dear leader like a CEO, unless he signs every paycheck by hand?’