• balsoft@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      ¿Por qué no los dos? I mean, if you actually go to developing nations you will see that they are investing into real infrastructure that improves the standards of living dramatically. They also intend to turn some profit off of it. Most likely much of that profit will be in building long-term economic relations, rather than immediate rent-seeking, which can be viewed as “trapping nations in debt traps”, or as “investing into development”. They also invest with much fewer strings attached compared to IMF, which is a win comparatively speaking.

        • balsoft@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Nah, I mean that what they’re doing isn’t charity (so they are doing the debt trap thing on some level), but it’s also beneficial for populations of countries they invest in, and better than whatever the fuck IMF is doing.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Yeah pretend that you weren’t literally just gushing about Chinese imperialism. Lenin would’ve loved that.

            Are you in denial even to yourself?