Carl Pilkington in Chinese market.

Sponsored Links
Between 1958 and 1963 about 40 million people died of starvation in China as a result of the "Great Leap Forward" program introduced by the communist government planners. Starving people got used to eating anything that was edible, that survival mechanism is still deeply embedded into the Chinese food "ethic". Hence the "exotic" foods sold in the wet markets are seen as being acceptable. It will be a long time before that is changed,

Quoting from this ARTICLE about Yang Jisheng who survived the program.

A teenage orphan kills and eats her four-year-old brother. Forty-four of a village's 45 inhabitants die; the last remaining resident, a woman in her 60s, goes insane. Others are tortured, beaten or buried alive for declaring realistic harvests, refusing to hand over what little food they have, stealing scraps or simply angering officials.

When the head of a production brigade dares to state the obvious – that there is no food – a leader warns him: "That's right-deviationist thinking. You're viewing the problem in an overly simplistic matter."


The book written by Yang Jisheng is available from Amazon https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tombstone-Great-Chinese-Famine-1958-1962/dp/0374533997
 
Sponsored Links
Does it bring any revenue? Can they afford not to have their own SP?
Who does the Space programme bring in revenue for.
If having a space programme brings in revenue why doesnt the British government have one.
 
Who does the Space programme bring in revenue for.
Those that own it? I believe the commercial income is driven by launching satellites etc. I'm not sure whether it is profitable or not.


If having a space programme brings in revenue why doesnt the British government have one.
The same reason we don't have much of a manufacturing base anymore and China does.
 
The yanks used a space programme for posturing, defence capabilities, and the innovation spin-offs.

As the Chinese are not shy about pilfering other peoples' ideas and patents, innovation seems not a huge priority. That leaves the other two. Possibly?
 
I agree. They are a particular disgrace when a country that suffers famine and starvation has an active space programme wouldn’t you agree? India is no different.
you should see where India and China are on the healthcare per capita league table

UK $4,000 per annum
India $209
China $688

Covid is going to go through India like a tsunami
 
Mottie rams it home...






..then goes quiet when asked...


Typical mottie behaviour.

I have no idea whether a space programme brings in more revenue than it costs. You give the impression you do so how about you giving us a clue.

Ok. Replace 'space programme' with 'Nuclear weapons' and tell me whether they bring any comfort or full bellies to the starving millions in those countries.
 
you should see where India and China are on the healthcare per capita league table

UK $4,000 per annum
India $209
China $688

Covid is going to go through India like a tsunami

Are those figures equalised though? By which I mean, if we a pay nurse £25k, and the Indians pay £2k, they wouldn't need the same per capita figure to achieve equivalence.

And no , I'm not defending the figures either way, just asking.
 
Mottie makes a statement....

But more so when they are running a space programme.
And again...
But more so when they are running a space programme.
Then oddly says this...
I have no idea whether a space programme brings in more revenue than it costs

Explain why it is a disgrace mottie when the space programme India are running is profitable, please?
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top