Chinadaily BBS - Chinese economy

Guest: Login | Register | Search | FAQ

Chinadaily BBS » News Talk» Chinese economy» Tax the rich?

Last Thread

Next Thread

china4life
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 87651
Digest Posts 0
Credits 105
Posts 76
Registered 2005-12-18
Status Offline

Tax the rich?

Are you crazy? That can't be done.

the poor need to stay in their place don't you know? 5,000 years of great history can't be wrong.

5,000 years of total freedom...................ahhhhh china is the great Motherland...for all...............

didn't Deng Shaoping say that some people gotta get rich first????

then the rest will follow?? great idea...............................the economic wizzard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!............................

2006-1-19 11:47 AM

matt605
Senior Member
Rank: 4

UID 30468
Digest Posts 0
Credits 2226
Posts 2185
Registered 2004-6-5
Status Offline

Ah, tax policy.

Attempts to tax the wealthy in the USA often result in the rich altering the organization of their assets in order to avoid taxes legally.  There's a huge amount of money to be made providing tax advice to the wealthy.  If you can show a wealthy businessman or widow how to keep hundreds of thousands of dollars, then they will reward that advice.

As for taxing the poor, this is very easy to do also.  In the USA, many states and localities use sales taxes, real estate taxes, gasoline taxes, and car tag taxes.  Most of the things the poor spend their money on, like rent, grocereis, gasoline, and clothing, are all taxed.  So you can't buy anything without paying the tax as you go.  Same with the car tags and rents.  Rent levels are very often determined in part by the landlord's need to pay real estate taxes, and car tags are very easy to police.

Who pays a higher percentage of their income out in taxes, a wealthy Amreican or a poor American?  I honestly don't know.  What I do know is that as incomes rise, the percentage of income that's spent on food, clothing, and shelter decreases, but the marginal income tax rate increases.

Tax policy is important for China.  China has to figure out how to share the costs of building up the country's infrastructure in a way that assures the economic growth trajectory doesn't stall out.  Good tax policy will benefit all.  Bad policy can create tremendous disadvantages to all.

2006-1-19 12:33 PM

freeman (freeman)
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 10197
Digest Posts 1
Credits 305
Posts 277
Registered 2003-8-19
Status Offline

support taxing the rich people

I support heavier taxation on the rich, the tycoons, esp. as a measure to effectively control the enlarging gap of the haves & have-nots in China. The rich are the first group of people who garnered windfalls from Deng xiaoping's brilliant reform policy of letting some getting better-off First. now, 28 years later, it is the rich' s turn to make their contributions to the unprivileged, the underdeveloped, the poor.

How about government hiking the sale tax on luxury cars that are above 3 litres of emissions? (from present 8% to at least 30% ?) and raising the consumption tax of plush villas, of 5 million yuan or more apiece, from present 2% to at least 10%? and, higher tax rates on more luxuries, say, golf courses, yachts, etc.

The proceeds from the hiked rates should go to state coffers, to be used for the poor's welfare, for rural education, for the job training, for the handicapped persons' facilities.

2006-1-21 05:01 PM

greendragon
Super Member
Rank: 6

UID 53124
Digest Posts 0
Credits 15665
Posts 15209
Registered 2005-1-13
Status Offline

Enhance intra-rich competition...

...avoid letting the rich influence the MANDARINATE...

...keep the GENTRY active in support of a fair society.......

Avoid a EXTRAVAGANT STATE...encourage PAY-AS-U-USE society

...that would be the key, 5,000 years of history..

pay attention to MOUNTAIN BRIGANDS, PLAIN HORDES, FRIDGE STATE INSTABILITY, sea pirates in times of "bubble burst".....

That's how it is done....prevent the FEUDAL fringe state from terrorizing the MOTHERLAND.

cheerios!

fm
Green Dragon

2006-1-24 11:48 AM

hanlei (Magic)
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 10008
Digest Posts 0
Credits 474
Posts 450
Registered 2003-8-17
Status Offline

However, the tax

By the time the central authorities decide to levy a higher taxation on the super rich, those cunning tycoons will start to divide their wealth to different heads of his or her kins, his kids, his brothers and sisters, his in-laws. Some could even move their assets to overseas.

2006-1-24 01:31 PM

theshepherd (theshepherd)
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 25423
Digest Posts 0
Credits 499
Posts 491
Registered 2004-3-24
Status Offline

They earn more and build up a big fortune, they are obligated to pay more tax, that's why the personal income law is enacted.

The government needs to set a reasonable threshold for tax payment so that low income family could make ends meet.

When the government decided to raise the threshold from 800 yuan to 1,600 yuan last, an out-of-tune voice from one national people's congress deputy (as senator in the United States) was heard: Raising the threshold would deprive the glorious rights of the low income families from paying tax. What a point! What is PEOPLE'S DEPUTY!

2006-1-24 03:22 PM

chinadaily (chinadaily)
SuperModerator
Rank: 8

UID 9672
Digest Posts 3
Credits 2432
Posts 1661
Registered 1970-1-1
Status Offline

Rates should be raised now!

I agree the tax rates on the rich boys must be raised, immediately, now.

The money recovered as a result ought to be used to improve the livelihood of the impoverished residents, esp. in China's western poor provinces.

As a first step, tuition fees of farmers' children attending schools must be exempted.

2006-1-24 10:41 PM

deananash (Professor Nash)
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 26644
Digest Posts 0
Credits 487
Posts 465
Registered 2004-4-11
Status Offline

Whatever you do, just DON'T tax productivity...

Whenever something is taxed, it is the same as 'raising' the price (of it). We should all know by now, courtesy of the law of supply and demand, that when the price rises, people 'purchase' (read pursue) less.

2006-1-25 12:24 AM

matt605
Senior Member
Rank: 4

UID 30468
Digest Posts 0
Credits 2226
Posts 2185
Registered 2004-6-5
Status Offline

We tax alcohol and tobacco heavily in the USA.

Alcohol and tobacco are taxed heavily in the USA, since they're considered substances that are bad for your health.  They're also things that people will consume due to addiction, and addiction makes consumption less dependent upon price, i.e. they'll still pay the extra tax regardless what you charge.  This has its limits though.  The Clinton administration found that a super-tax on cigarettes caused fewer young people to begin smoking, and also caused some others to quit altogether.

The idea of avoiding a tax on productivity is good, but you must remember that some productivity should be taxed to help pay its own way.  If increased profits are a sign of higher productivity, then it will become impossible to both tax the rich and also avoid taxing productivity.  However, some high profits are due to monopolistic characteristics, like those associated with state-protected monopolies, like zoning, licenses, trademarks, patents, and copyrights.  The state granted monopolies are profitable because the state has an interest in promoting research and creativity.  In the UK they tax television, which Americans react with outrage to hear about.  The USA also has local and federal taxes on cable TV.  State-run lotteries are marginally profitable.

Taxation of dividend income is considered unfair to the rich, but done anyway in America.  Corporations pay income tax on the income they earn, and then the wealthy pay income tax on corporate profits that are distributed to them in the form of dividends.  This makes people demand profits even more, since the net effect of corporate profits compared to government bonds must be considered for the very wealthy.  A super-wealthy person might be more likely to switch into tax-free, low yield government debt than to experience the risk and low after tax returns of corporate stock ownership.  That's just one scenario.  The impact of dividend taxes must be viewed in the macro to determine if it's a mistaken policy over all.

There is a chance that the policy has changed since I learned of it almost 15 years ago, too!  I think that's what happened with taxation of alimony, which was once taxable to the earner but not the former spouse.  So high income alimony payers also paid tax at the high marginal rate while the lower income ex-spouse paid no tax at the lower income level for alimony received.

Two considerations must go into what to tax: 1 -- can you collect it easily, and 2 -- should it be collected.  Notice that the second question is "should" you tax, and the first question is can you collect.  One of the reasons the rich are taxed more on their income and the poor are taxed more on their consumption is that the rich are more wired into the economy, meaning that have more accounting data on which to base their income.  The poor in America may engage in less formal economic activities, but they get zapped when they go to spend.

Tax exemption for school tuitions is a good idea.  In America, we do not allow tax exemptions for private schools that discriminate on race.

[ Last edited by matt605 at 2006-1-24 04:06 PM ]

2006-1-25 03:56 AM

china4life
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 87651
Digest Posts 0
Credits 105
Posts 76
Registered 2005-12-18
Status Offline

Why??

They have a minumim wage right??

Why don't they also have a maximum wage??

And of course.............housing, school, medical, and transportatino for everybodoy should be free......for all........................all school should be free including university...........how many lives are destroyed because they don't have money for school?
I mean my life...............is destroyed because i am always working to pay off school fees..............i could be using that money to buy pepsi or something...............

We are all atomised.........................

2006-1-25 11:59 AM

#10

freeman (freeman)
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 10197
Digest Posts 1
Credits 305
Posts 277
Registered 2003-8-19
Status Offline

about tuition

Besides taxing more on the luxury cars, villas, yachts, and the like, yes, the central government's Education Ministry must cut the college tuition fee for all students.

Why cannot Beijing decree that the per-semester tuituin for a college student must be lower than 1,000 yuan or 1,500 yuan? Set the ceiling for all state-funded univerisities and colleges, why not? as China4life said, many, many poor but bright kids were kept out of the college doors, because their famiies cannot afford it. And, it is time to readjust it.

2006-1-25 02:44 PM

#11

homarano
Newcomer
Rank: 1

UID 87401
Digest Posts 0
Credits 17
Posts 17
Registered 2005-12-14
Status Offline

Yes ,tax the richs

I agree entirely with "freeman" . In France they have a tax calls S.E.R. It is a tax on the Exterior Signs of
Richness ! Like luxury car, private plane , big mansion ,expensive jewelry ..etc.. Even if you live outside
of France as long as your business or income come from France.

2006-1-25 03:04 PM

#12

annali
Newcomer
Rank: 1

UID 87720
Digest Posts 0
Credits 20
Posts 20
Registered 2005-12-20
Status Offline

it's not a good idea to tax the rich heaviely.

many rich people have numerous ways to evade taxation, so it doesn't affect them much no matter how high the tax rate is. a lot of them have grey income, and the revenuers will find no way to tax this part. the rich are reluctant to pay taxes, because they think it'll cost them a big fortune but won't do any help to lift their fame. therefore, it maybe feasible to set up a donation fund specially for the rich. they pay taxes at the stipulated rates, and donate to the poor or the needy, so that they can have a better reputation, and the poor can have a better life - a win-win situation! hope every rich can be more benevolent and more active in donation. indeed the rich in china need to make more efforts here.

2006-1-25 04:31 PM

#13

matt605
Senior Member
Rank: 4

UID 30468
Digest Posts 0
Credits 2226
Posts 2185
Registered 2004-6-5
Status Offline

Market failure best defines government's role.

Investments bring returns, but when there is market failure, there will be no returns and therefore never any private sector investment.  So a rich person would never invest in an area where there is market failure.  Just because there is market failure does not mean an investment should not be made though.

Examples of just a few areas where government must invest are education, roads and defense.  In education, employers and parents benefit directly from an educated, motivated work force, but there are no businesses that want to train adults beyond the immediate skills necessary.  So even when an employee shows up for his or her first day of job training just out of high school, he or she is expected to be able to read, write, follow instructions, and use the restroom at breaktime.  So public education makes sense.

Roads are another example.  Very high fixed costs and very low marginal cost.  Build a road or bridge once and it will last many years with a small amount of maintenance (compared to construction costs).  The wear and tear of an additional vehicle is so small that there's no profit in collecting fees anywhere except the gasoline pump, where everyone -- the rich and the poor -- pay the same tax on a gallon of gasoline.  Localities also tax automobiles for roads and in some places schools.

National defense is a good example of a place where everyone theoretically benefits.  The price of deterring the Soviets from dropping nuclear bombs on America was always borne by the taxpayers through the federal government.  Here, the poor could claim that their lack of property made them less needful of protection from nuclear bombs, so the rich should pay more to have their many investments and nice homes guarded.  However, if you can deter a nuclear bomb from dropping, then everyone benefits some.

The idea that taxation is anti-democratic isn't well founded.  In fact, there was a movement within American constitutional law that attempted to link the process of voting to a constitutional right to public education.  Since Americans are expected to participate in their democracy by voting, and since voting is requires making a choice, then a minimum level of education is needed to learn about candidates and make a decision.  Therefore, it was reasoned, the constitution required education of all citizens for the purpose of participating in democracy.  It hasn't caught on yet, but the argument can be found in some supreme court opinions.  Currently, there are no federal dollars allocated to the education of children in rich or poor areas of the USA.  It's all funded by states and localities.

The USA's federal income tax is a progressive, marginal tax system.  So as a person earns more, they are taxed more, but the tax is applied to the higher portions of income.  So all are taxed equally on the first several thousand in income.  Then as some reach into higher income areas, they being to be taxed more on the dollars in the higher categories.  That way, the rich and poor pay the same amount on their first earnings.  So when a rich person is in a 40% bracket, that means they paid 40% on the top portion of their income for the year.  It doesn't mean they paid 40% of their income in taxes.

Often, people will re-arrange their assets to avoid taxes and increase their wealth.  The mortgage interest deduction is a good example of this.  The larger and newer your mortgage is, then the more you can deduct from your income tax.  If you're in a 40% bracket, then it's like getting an extra 40 cents back for every dollar spent.  Not bad, eh?  There are other gimmicks and even some tax credits, which are 1 to 1 reductions in tax liability.  When you get a 100% tax credit for something like adding wheel chair ramps to your business, then it's like being able to award a federal contract to improve your own property.  Anyway, the deductions and credits work to promote economic activity that the government finds to be beneficial to everyone.  That's why a tuition tax deduction for parents in China is a good idea.  It benefits everyone, especially the children who receive the extra education.

2006-1-26 11:42 AM

#15

china4life
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 87651
Digest Posts 0
Credits 105
Posts 76
Registered 2005-12-18
Status Offline

Lower Milltary costs to $0.00

Here is the cost of millitary spending in USA...........by economist Seymour Melman......He died unfortunately recently...............but it is disgusting the money wasted............

$5.3 TRILLION Dollars is More than twice the net value of the plant and equipment in America’s manufacturing industries. Also the cost of Creating U.S. Nuclear Weapon Overkill Compacity.

$$59 billion dollars……

Cost of building housing for the 600,000 homeless in America also the cost of Army Comanche Hlelicopter program $4.8 billion and Navy Joint Standoff Weapon program $11.2 million..

$80 Billion Dollars
Investment needed to provide 20% of U.S. electricity supply from renewable and clean sources or Navy submarine program 71 billion dollars and Navy Assault vehicle Program $8 billion Dollars.

$ 11 Billion Dollars

Money needed to meet federal standards of safe drinking water and replace old facilities or the total cost of the Navy’s “future Surface Combatant” Program

$42 billion dollars Investment needed to fix US Roads and bridges also the cost of Navy Trident Sub program $35 million dollars and Army interim Assault Vehicle program $ 7 billion dollars.

$10 Billion Dollars
Annual cost to provide Clean drinking water to the 2.4 billion people worldwide or the cost of the Tactical Tomahawk missile program 10 billion dollars.

$11 Billion Dollars

Research Program to develop zero emissions, coal gasification power plants and the cost of Amphibious Assault Ship program

$99 Billion
3,500 Miles of Maglev (magnetic levitaion trains lines) running at 266 miles per hour and also the cost of F-22 Raptor Advanced Fighter Program. $228 Million for one plane

$12.7 million

100 NEW natural Gas school buses or one Longbow Apache Helicopter

$41 Billion Dollars

Give health care to everyone in the US saving 18,000 people a year from death dut to lack of health insurance or the cost the C-17 Heavy Airlift Airplane Program

$7.9 Million
Annual cost to put 1,100 children in Free Head Start Pre School Programs or the cost of ONE that is right ONE ABRAMS TANK!!

268 BILLION DOLLARS fix the US school buildings or 1/3 of the cost of the Joint Strike Fighter Program.

20 Billion
Cost of salaries for 561,000 nurses that is needed or one Guided Missile Destroyer program

$$9.1 billion

Five years of funding for Global tuberculosis control program or Joint Surveillance target Attack Radar System Program…

2006-1-26 12:47 PM

#16

chinadaily (chinadaily)
SuperModerator
Rank: 8

UID 9672
Digest Posts 3
Credits 2432
Posts 1661
Registered 1970-1-1
Status Offline

after reading this, one might think about the poor .... Right?

In China, to get rich is glorious nowadays

(Businessweek)

Wang Zhongjun is loaded and happy to flaunt it. He wears Prada shoes, Versace jackets, and a Piaget watch. He smokes Cohiba cigars from Cuba. He drives a white Mercedes-Benz (DCX ) SL600, a silver BMW Z8, and a red Ferrari (FIA ) 360.

His art collection includes hundreds of sculptures and paintings. Value: $30 million or so. Home sweet home is a 22,000 square-foot mansion north of Beijing with antique British and French furniture, a billiard room with bar, and an indoor pool. When he tires of swimming, Wang can head to his stable (annual upkeep: $500,000) of 60 horses from Ireland, France, and Kentucky.

"Entrepreneurs in China today feel much safer than before," says Wang, a 45-year-old movie producer who served in the Chinese army, studied in the U.S., and learned painting before backing internationally acclaimed films such as Kung Fu Hustle. "We are more accepted by the media, government, and society today."

That's for sure. Even though Deng Xiaoping declared that getting rich is glorious nearly three decades ago, just a few years back China's millionaires were running scared. When a Forbes Magazine survey of China's richest appeared in 1999, wags called it the "death list" after a tax crackdown targeted many who made the cut and landed some in jail.

Now China is embracing them. More than 300,000 Chinese have a net worth over $1 million, excluding property, according to Merrill Lynch & Co. (MER ). And mainland millionaires control some $530 billion in assets, Boston Consulting Group estimates. "There has been a revolution in attitudes toward wealth," says Rupert Hoogewerf, who authored the 1999 list. He now runs Hurun Report, a Shanghai-based company specializing in information about China's rich, which just released a survey on millionaires' buying habits. "People don't appreciate how much cash there is running around in China today," he says.

"DIZZY" OVER SHOES

Many people might not appreciate it, but luxury retailers sure do. Just five years ago mainland buyers accounted for 1% of global sales of luxury handbags, shoes, jewelry, perfume, and the like. Today the Chinese are the third-biggest high-end buyers on earth, with more than 12% of world sales, Goldman, Sachs & Co. (GS ) reckons. Within a decade, China will likely leapfrog Japan and the U.S. to become the top luxury market, predicts Goldman analyst Jacques-Franck Dossin. "China is experiencing huge wealth creation, and there is lots of conspicuous consumption related to that," Dossin says. "People want to show they are successful."

How? By buying custom clothes, diamond-encrusted watches, pricey cars, gourmet meals, and fine wine. Zhao Hui, a chain-smoking 38-year-old restaurateur, real estate developer, and Ferrari owner from Shanghai, says he speaks no English, but he manages to pronounce "shopping" and "Tiffany" (TIF ) as he shows off his $50,000 Franck Muller watch. Richard Hung, a 43-year-old manager of a pharmaceutical company, has a closet filled with dozens of Armani, Gucci (GUCG ), and Canali suits and more than 100 pairs of Italian shoes. "I get dizzy when I look at shoes," he says. Where to wear those duds? Try Beijing's exclusive Chang An Club, where few blink at the $18,000 initiation fee. "Our members can afford it," says General Manager Antonius van Gevelt, adding that Chang An aims to keep its fees higher than rival gathering spots. The rich "want to join the most expensive club in China," he says.

Luxury marketers are happy to serve up plenty of flash and bling to keep sales rolling. Louis Vuitton, which has a dozen boutiques across the mainland, in November served up 1,500 bottles of Veuve Clicquot and platters of paté de foie gras at the celebrity-packed launch of a new Beijing store. And fashionistas still marvel at Miuccia Prada's "skirt show" last spring, when she took over seven stories of Shanghai's art deco Peace Hotel.

CADILLAC CAFE

Pricey wheels do pretty well, too. The Rolls-Royce outlet in Beijing is one of the brand's top-selling dealerships. And Bentley Beijing has sold a half-dozen 728 stretch limos -- at $1.2 million each, the world's most expensive car -- more than any other dealership in the world. For thriftier millionaires without an extra million to drop on transportation, Cadillac, Mercedes, or BMW are eager to help. Shoppers at any of a dozen "Cadillac Experience Centers" in the mainland, for instance, can relax on a black leather sofa and enjoy a glass of Rosemount Cabernet in the "Cadillac Cafe" while browsing through photo-rich brochures that describe the brand's 102-year history. "Our whole showroom supports our brand: It's modern, sophisticated, and not your traditional luxury vehicle," says Stuart J. Pierce, who oversees the Cadillac brand at Shanghai General Motors Co. (GM ).

Now the luxury goods marketers are looking far beyond Beijing and Shanghai to find China's millionaires. Cadillac plans to have 40 showrooms in China by the end of 2007, and last year dispatched a 1959 El Dorado convertible on a seven-city "heritage tour" to drum up interest nationwide. At this month's ice festival in the frigid northern city of Harbin, watchmaker Cartier has created a massive ice replica of its flagship Paris store. "Our aim is to have the second- and third-tier cities become a more important part of our business," says Daniel Chang, who oversees Cartier's sales in northern China.

Lately China's new moneyed class has gotten interested in more than fast cars, flashy threads, and extravagant timepieces. Growing numbers of mainlanders are snapping up everything from ancient scrolls and traditional ink paintings to French Impressionists. Christie's International says mainland buyers account for 20% of purchases at its Hong Kong auctions, compared with virtually none five years ago. And while most collectors prefer Chinese art, mainlanders now bid on Renoirs, Monets, and Van Goghs in New York and London, and a Shanghai businessman paid $1 million for a Picasso in a private sale. "There's tremendous potential," says Ken Yeh, deputy chairman of Christie's Asia.

Even as the likes of Cartier, Christie's, and Cadillac try to separate China's millionaires from their wealth, others aim to help them preserve it. Although foreign banks are barred from marketing their offshore services inside China, they are discretely wooing mainland clients via their Hong Kong offices, figuring those who have made money abroad are fair game. And soon, banking regulations in the mainland are to be relaxed. "In the long term, China can surpass Japan as a major market for wealth management," says Kaven Leung, who oversees Citigroup's private banking efforts in China.

Diamond watches. Armani suits. Silver Bentleys. Private banks. Getting rich in today's China is indeed glorious, and spending is even better.

[ Last edited by chinadaily at 2006-1-28 10:46 AM ]

2006-1-28 10:44 AM

#17

jimmy67 (jimmy67)
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 18944
Digest Posts 0
Credits 187
Posts 179
Registered 2003-12-10
Status Offline

wonder

If China really that rich?

2006-1-29 11:03 AM

#18

china4life
Primary Member
Rank: 2

UID 87651
Digest Posts 0
Credits 105
Posts 76
Registered 2005-12-18
Status Offline

Such a Waste.

It is sad people think that their self worth is what they can buy......but living in this Satisfy every need instantly push button society is awful.

Well as we have seen Civil disobedience in China is on the rise as the gap gets bigger and the political face changes............................

So what is holding this society together? Common Written language?................is that it??? Clubs and guns? both? I don't get it...........there should be massive riots everywhere....

I went to nanjin Lu where they have these Electronic signs that say...>WELCOME TO NANJING LU! BRINING YYOU HAPPY HOMELAND. CIVILIZATION!!!! of course the sign is covered in Mcdonalds advertisments..... and there are people digging out of the trash next to the sign to collect plastic....They have these stores on that streeet that sell Crystal Mickey Mouse Statues for 10,000 yuan..... That is like a yearly wage for some.

2006-1-29 11:09 AM

#19

matt605
Senior Member
Rank: 4

UID 30468
Digest Posts 0
Credits 2226
Posts 2185
Registered 2004-6-5
Status Offline

Is China that rich?

Yes.  It is.

China has about 125-150 million people who fit the economic description of an American middle class consumer.  So the top 1% of that subset is 1.25 to 1.5 million people.

China has 600 million people who live on less than $1 American dollar per day.  So when you realize that there are more than twice as many Chinese living on less than $1 than there are Americans total, then the size of the poor population is vast.  Even if all those people were transfered into America's statistical base, which would be a supreme insult to China's poorest, then America would still have more middle class consumers than China.

But China has many, many wealthy people.

So how to build up a country like China?

Chairman Mao said that the fox knows many things, but that the hedgehog knows one big thing.  I'm not sure what he meant when he said it, but for the remainder of our lives, the one big thing that China knows is that China can make it and ship it for less than anyone else can make it.

The second important fact is that nukes won't work against China because the wind blows the fallout toward South Korea, Japan, and California.

Once you understand the one big thing and the second important fact, then you can understand your own life better.

[ Last edited by matt605 at 2006-1-28 10:20 PM ]

2006-1-29 11:14 AM

#20

Printable Version | Email to Friend | Subscription | Favorites


Forum Rules	Feedback	Privacy