this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
41 points (77.3% liked)

Linux

48310 readers
645 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Reading about FOSS philosophy, degoogling, becoming against corporations, and now a full-blown woke communist (like Linus Torvalds)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (20 children)

Would you mind explaining which data in particular you are looking at? According to your source, poverty rate in India has dropped from 22.5% in 2011 to 10% in 2019.

The one that says that Indian government refuses to publish the full numbers. I'm just going to ask you straight up whether you genuinely think the poverty reduction in India is comparable to China, because if that's so there's absolutely no point continuing this discussion.

I don’t think even the most pro-Capitalist person would try to tell you that Capitalism can fix all the problems of a collapsed communist society in only 30 years.

Except there was no collapsed communist society. You just made that up. What actual studies show is that over 7 million people died as a result of capitalism being introduced. https://academic.oup.com/cje/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cje/beac072/7081084?guestAccessKey=01c8dd9f-af1c-48b3-b271-eb5d3a45017c&login=false

If that's your idea of fixing things what else is there to say to you.

I’ll see if I can pirate an audiobook, I’m not interested enough to read a book on it. I read some summaries and it looks like massive overkill for a really simple direct question.

It's pretty wild that you say you're not interested enough to read a book on a subject you've been arguing about for two days straight. You clearly have very strong opinions on this, but you refuse to even read a book about it?

Maybe you should just stop dodging this question: how will workers take back the power and wealth of the billionaire class?

I didn't dodge that question. I answered it repeatedly. Workers already took power in China when the revolution happened. The government in China is by the workers and for the workers. You only have to look at the composition of the party to see that. If you bothered to learn how Chinese government works then you wouldn't be repeating nonsense here like a broken record.

China isn't run by the billionaire class. In fact, billionaires regularly being sentenced to jail and even executed is another clear difference between China and actual capitalist societies where such things simply don't happen.

All your claims have been debunked in detail by main people. Maybe spend the time actually learning about China instead of arguing here ignorantly?

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (9 children)

The one that says that Indian government refuses to publish the full numbers.

I just love that you misread the numbers to reach the conclusion you wanted, and not the real conclusion. And when I call you out, without a beat you pivot to "oh actually it's that we don't have the Indian government's numbers".

This is apex "communists are not capable of admitting they could make a mistake".

It's okay man, we're all just human, we all make little mistakes sometimes. I've certainly apologized for mistakes on this site before.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I love how you don't see the problem with claiming India reduced poverty when they don't publish their numbers.

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, I think it's very sus India won't publish numbers, but that's not the point. The point is that I think it's hilarious that you tried to use it as proof to make your point, when you probably skimmed it too fast because you straight read it wrong.

Especially when you're trying to cultivate a perception that you're a well-informed person, that mistake is just extra embarrassing.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, just to be clear. You're saying we should accept that poverty reduction is happening in India despite the fact that they hide their numbers. Did I get that right?

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, I think we should read an article thoroughly before misquoting it and looking really silly.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, what part am I misquoting. Do be clear. As far as I can tell, you are saying that I'm wrong because you believe the numbers indicating poverty decrease in India despite the fact that India hides the actual numbers. That's your argument is it not?

Seems that reading the article critically is what you refer to as misquoting.

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, my argument is that you misread it, because you were trying to use it as proof that poverty was getting worse. The article said nothing about that.

I think using sources that you've misread and are quoting to incorrectly makes for bad messaging.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm starting to get the impression that you didn't actually read the article. It talks about poverty decreasing using the numbers that are publicly available from India while also pointing out the following:

The survey data leaked to the media showed that poverty had increased in India. Without official data on poverty in a country hosting the largest number of poor in the world, agencies were not able to make an exact estimate of global poverty, whose eradication is the Sustainable Development Goal 1 to be achieved by 2030.

It' also concludes that India contributed to an overall poverty increase globally which is another indirect indicator of poverty actually increasing there:

With the addition of India’s new poverty data to the global system, the number of poor has increased. “The global poverty headcount in 2018 is revised slightly up from 8.7 to 8.9 per cent,” says the World Bank, adding, “The 2017 PPPs (purchasing power parities) by themselves reduce global poverty, which is more than offset by the new estimates for India that increase global poverty.”

Hope that helps.

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your two quotes are referring to two different survey counts. Let me explain how this works: it's impossible to get an exact count down to every individual, you survey a population sample and then make estimates based on your population sample. This can be done by both government and private agencies.

Here are the two different surveys from the article broken down:

The NSSO survey, done by the Indian government, not officially released, but leaked to the media. All this article tells us about the results of this survey is that "poverty had increased". No years, no numbers, no percentages. Just three words.

The CMIE survey, done by a private company, used by the World Bank. We at least have the numbers for this survey, which says poverty has more than halved from 2011 to 2019. However, the World Bank already assumed that poverty would be decreasing rapidly, and put out global poverty estimations based on rapidly decreasing poverty before

When you quoted the World Bank as saying

The global poverty headcount in 2018 is revised slightly up from 8.7 to 8.9 per cent

That was referring to CMIE survey results being less optimistic than original World Bank projections.

I did make a mistake, I didn't credit you for the NSSO survey, which did indeed support your point. I think that's why you misread the conclusion of the CMIE survey. I think it's sus af the government won't release it, but I'm also a scientist. All we have from it is, "poverty had increased". Imagine I presented to you a new article that said nothing about poverty rates in China except "poverty had increased", how much would you value that piece of information?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

You are correct that the published data indicates an overall decrease, just not as much as originally claimed. And you're of course right to say that a leaked report alone with a general statement regarding poverty increase isn't necessarily convincing. However, there is a lot of other indirect evidence showing that the poverty problems in India are quite dire today. Massive farmer protests are one example, increasingly volatile political environment is another. There are also lots of articles discussing lack of investment in the social safety net in India. All of this does not paint a picture of a country where there is any meaningful poverty reduction happening.

I acknowledge that there is conflicting evidence in the article I linked though.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)