Please click through and read for additional context. Families are helping. Parents age and are not a long-term plan except for the most unusually wealthy.

Please remember: China is nominally communist. Functionally, they are capitalists with an usual side of excess infrastructure spending. A strong central government doesn't make a country communist.

Their land use rules... that makes them communist-ish. But that's a small part of a far larger picture.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I don't know about lost , but you do seem high-strung.

"As a practical matter, what you extracted is what makes sense."

Yes, that's why I extracted it, to clarify for you the 70-year real-estate law I had mentioned.

Chill out.

[–] APassenger@lemmy.one -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I remain a bit lost on why you think quoting my citation helped, but I have a theory. I see a lot of glib on lemmy. Are your usual sparring partners here that inept or clueless?

Honest question: are they? I'm still getting the hang of lemmy and so far it seems like a lot of self congratulatory wannabe-edgelord stuff.

Like it's puffery with just enough citations for posters to think they're smart?

And along the way, no citation is the right citation. I'm not lumping you into all this, I'm wondering if that's what this is right now.

I don't see people having discussions. I see people correcting each other on secondary points and missing the forest for the trees.

Edit: I didn't need my citation clarified to me. That you think that's what you did by quoting it is odd. If you added context, a link to why you think it's a richer topic, I'm good with it and I enjoy learning.

But I had read it and did not need it read back to me.

The parenthetical part that you didn't address was the key part. Being and staying in good graces is likely key to a seamless transition into the next 70 years. That's different from eminent domain.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I asked for your take on real estate law as you understood it in China.

You provided a third-party tl;dr layman's guide to Chinese real estate, indicating you were unable or unwilling to provide the personal take I asked you for. Which is fine, maybe you aren't in the mood for conversation.

I pointed out the 70-year individual property leases I had mentioned as a matter of clarification and left it at that.

As for lemmy, I have had pretty good conversations with people here about music, video games, tech, the communities in general.

Easy to rile; I'm going to hazard a guess that it is your defensive, nervous and rude attitude that is inviting the edgelords to rub elbows with you.

Take a beat.

You don't see the unnecessarily detrimental and argumentative hypocrisy of lamenting the masses "missing the forest for the trees" and then 1)harping on a subjective and contextually irrelevant parenthetical excerpt and 2)arguing against eminent domain existing in Chinese real estate as if you weren't the one to bring up eminent domain in Chinese real estate and are not the only person making the case for or against that concept?

If not, you might be missing the forest for the trees.

[–] APassenger@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One of the themes I've seen here is people saying someone said something they didn't then taking issue with what they heard/inferred.

I didn't say they don't have eminent domain, as an example. I'm saying that the closest thing I've seen to their model is eminent domain - and even then, it's different.

It's as if people here are so keen to land a point that they invent one. I've been on a variety of fora for decades. The frequency of misrepresentation and zero fucks about making it right is... I've never seen it so prevalent. People act like they aren't talking to people.

Straight Dope, people cared. Giraffe board (after the switch), people cared. StumbleUpon, Reddit... people cared that they were seen "arguing" in good faith. They curated their reputation by listening and if they fucked up, many (not all) would try to reset and some would apologize.

I'm not simply describing my experience. I'm describing threads or branches where all I do is read comments.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

It's definitely your own attitude that has you seeing this community manifesting the misrepresentation and lack of argumentative accountability so common on reddit. I stayed on lemmy specifically because I don't often have to deal with conversational misrepresentation(that you're currently engaging in), and even when arguments arise, people here(relative to other social networks)seem to accept when a fair or incontrovertible point is made.

You're used to those types of communities and you are importing that sort of misrepresentation and argumentative irresponsibility to this thread and to lemmy.

You are projecting your own insecurities, learned from your decades of fora, into the relative dearth of deliberate miscommunication on lemmy, shoveling dirt into your own toybox and throwing a tantrum about your soiled playthings.

Rather then approaching this conversation with mutual respect and assuming the other party is trying to genuinely connect, you immediately and repeatedly lash out, become fixated on whichever part of my reply you can narrowly contrive as opposing your own dearly-held perspective, and ignore the rest of a comment.

For instance, I just explained to you that this thread started out as a question on your personal take of a situation that you impersonally responded to, attacked the Lemmy community, and then became fixated on your own specific and contextually irrelevant take that eminent domain is different than Chinese real estate law; your direct response to that comment is to ignore that original context, attack the lemmy community, and reiterate that eminent domain is different than Chinese real estare law.