American terrorists that cheat, lie and steal, trying to blame others for their own sneaky and shameless behaviours

Trump is now demonizing Chinese AI innovators for stealing from the USA AI fraternity. The USA ought to look into the mirror and see what it did in the past before bringing up hubris. The USA, in its effort to progress, was using state sponsored theft by stealing British trade secrets since 1791. USA's first Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton advocated rewarding those who brought valuable trade secrets for the country. In other words, rewarding theft of trade secrets from others.

Now, what China may be doing is just taking a leaf from the USA, nothing out of the ordinary. China has not hit back yet using this argument. Do not again float the mantra that the USA has 'exceptionalism' status doing what it did and any other country cannot follow. Putin was right all along, saying that the USA will accuse any other country of doing unacceptable things itself and then accuse others of doing the same.

Trump is now again raising the issue of erecting tariffs against countries for, of all reasons - forced labor issues. What can be more hogwash than what the USA did in the past by kidnapping Black Africans to work as slaves in cotton fields, railroads and mines which is even worse than forced labor, without wages and some clad in chains for fear that those slaves may run away.

Having said that, I am surprised that Red Dot is also among 60 countries under forced labor practices identified by the USA. Did I miss something?


Anonymous

Americans living under the GDP lies

As China has four times the population of USA, its per capita GDP (PPP) is still three times lower than the USA, spread out among its huge population. On the other hand, everything is so much cheaper in China - housing, transport, energy, cost of living and inflation itself is almost negligible. In fact, deflation is more a problem than inflation in China.

Bear in mind that the wealth of the USA is concentrated in the hands of the top 10% of USA rich elites. Therefore, it is nothing to crow about the high USA per capita GDP (PPP) when 90% of ordinary USA citizens are hardly considered richer than ordinary Chinese per se. If you do not peel away the glamor on the surface of the USA gloating, you lose seeing the true picture. There are comments that lower income USA citizens do not even have US$400 in their pockets for emergency.

If the USA's per capita GDP (PPP) is really that high, why is there so many USA citizens living on the streets, unable to afford a home? The most ridiculous explanation I have come across was that those people without a home are people who prefer living on the streets or a 'lifestyle choice'. When they have to eat, shit, pee and sleep on the streets, that is something of a 'lifestyle choice' indeed.

From the comments of USA citizens having contact with Chinese citizens on Red Note, the realization was often of shock and awe, knowing that their Chinese counterparts are enjoying better living conditions than they could ever hope for. Taking away Tik Tok was in fact a blessing in disguise for China, able to counter all the USA propaganda over the decades. Now, the USA citizens have realized they had been lied to and are continuing to live under a Nation of liars leading them into the sewers.

If China had the same population as the USA, its GDP (PPP) per capita, will be higher than the USA. Think about that!


Anonymous

Indonesia became the first ASEAN state to be punished by China for acting like India

Indonesia tried to behave like India, trying to seize control of China's multi-billion Nickel Mining and Processing facilities built by China. The Chinese, having sunk in all the billions was thought to be held hostage now and will never be prepared to lose all their investments.

What China did was just not what the Indonesians expected. The Chinese tore down the whole facilities, uprooting even the last screw, and paid more than a hundred million US$ fee to ship the parts back to China. The Chinese did not argue, threaten or just take it lying down. They are telling the world that Indonesia, like India, is now un-investable. It is not just a bad decision against the Chinese. It is sending a clear message to the rest of the world that Indonesia will soon be branded the graveyard of foreign investments, just like India.

What lead to this drastic move is taken from the same playbook of the Indians. The Chinese were lured into investing in Nickel Mining and Manufacturing facilities and was initially given all the sweet-sounding assurances and agreements and after believing in them, sunk in multi-billion US$ into those projects. When the Nickel Mining and Manufacturing started operation, the Indonesian Government changed the rules, reducing massive quotas and trying to force the Chinese partners to sell a majority stake to Indonesians. The Indonesians were betting on the fact that the Chinese have already invested billions and would not pull out knowing the loss would be substantial. China proved them wrong.

Having said about this issue, China must be prepared for consequences. We know about the anti-Chinese events in the past among the Indonesians and there is no reason to doubt it will not happen again.

As I said before, Vietnam and Indonesia are among those ASEAN States that cannot honestly be trusted with open arms. China should always treat them at arm's length and be very wary of their flimsy loyalties.


Anonymous

mysingaporenews viewership as at 26 Jul 26

 

What is the true return of 3.4% annualised profit?

SINGAPORE: Sovereign wealth fund GIC's returns fell for a third straight year to a six-year low in FY2025/2026, as it took less risk and prioritised resilience amid what it called "profound uncertainty".

GIC also announced it will refresh its investment framework to be more flexible as it navigates what CEO Lim Chow Kiat called a "fundamentally changed" world.

In its 2025/2026 annual report released on Friday (Jul 24), GIC said its 20-year annualised real rate of return stood at 3.4 per cent, down from 3.8 per cent the year before and the lowest since FY2019/2020's 2.7 per cent.

Before adjusting for global inflation, the 20-year annualised nominal return was 5.6 per cent.

GIC uses a rolling 20-year metric, which measures average annual returns over the most recent two decades, as its primary performance indicator. This year's figure covers April 2006 to March 2026, after FY2004/2005 was dropped and FY2025/2026 added. CNA

What is this thing called 20 year annualised real rate of return? In simple term, it means averaging the returns over a 20 year period, to smoothen the ups and downs. There can be a 20% growth in some years, 0 growth or negative growth in some years, the 20 year spread will show maybe a 2 or 3% growth every year. What does this mean to the statistics of growth? Flat, little changes. Big gains will show as small gains, big losses can still be small gains or small losses.

The effect is that the fund will not have to face criticism for big losses or to gloat for big gains over an exceptional year. Would this impact the bonuses of the fund managers? If the bonuses are computed using the same 20 year annualised formula, the fund managers would not be seeing big bonuses or negative bonuses. It will average out as well. The fund will not have to pay big bonuses for one year and crawl back for big losses the next, meaning the bonuses will also be averaged out. This will be a weak point for attracting top fund managers or gamblers that want short quick returns and big bonuses, even cooking the books to show big gains in one year but losses for a few years.

What is a 3.4% annualised growth? If the fund had good growth in the first 10 years, like 10% or 20%, and chalking an annualised 3.4% growth over 20 years, what would be the growth rate of the last 10 years? Another simplified example, if the first 10 years, the fund's average annual growth was 10%, and the last 10 years, the average annual growth was 0%, the 20 year annualised growth of the latest year would be 5%, despite having no growth for the last 10 years. The pros and cons of using a 20 year annualised growth are obvious. Is there any country other than Singapore using a 20 year annualised growth formula?