@TheKidneyDocto1 See i m trying to keep here my point of view on Democracy in China.. okay.. China isn't a dictatorship if u exclude this Xi Jinping and Mao era.. They conduct fair elections where every candidate is supported by CCP.. They represent people.. (1/2)
Now ethnic minorities..Okay..You do know that bhutan is the happiest country of the world..Many say that one of its reason is, they sent back the Nepalese ethinic groups back to Nepal and India..4/5
We everytime order from a same restraunt near my home.. and we talk with manager, 7/8
See i don't agree with one ethnic 9/10
See i love Democracy.. I love India as it is.. 10/11
Sorry if i hurt you anywhere.. I just presented my views
(11/11)
More from China
THREAD: Last week, China’s Cabinet announced that, for the first time, fees will be charged for “excessive” freedom of information requests, potentially meaning huge out-of-pocket expenses for lawyers and others who rely heavily on public information from the Chinese government.
According to a notice published Dec. 1, government offices will be able to choose from two different rate schemes: one based on frequency, one based on size. https://t.co/KxUSE3dXEu
The “size” route is especially problematic. Here’s why:
If you’re an activist or a lawyer seeking a copy of an 800-page environmental impact assessment report, it’s going to cost you around $4,000 under this scheme.
In the past, disclosure requests were essentially free in China because there were no rules for charging fees.
In fact, last December an administrative agency in Shenzhen was ordered to reimburse an applicant after sending him a pay-on-delivery parcel.
According to the State Council’s Dec. 1 notice, the aim of adding the fees isn’t to generate revenue, but to “guide applicants to exercise their rights reasonably.”
Regardless of intention, however, the new costs will likely be a hindrance to those seeking public information.
According to a notice published Dec. 1, government offices will be able to choose from two different rate schemes: one based on frequency, one based on size. https://t.co/KxUSE3dXEu

The “size” route is especially problematic. Here’s why:
If you’re an activist or a lawyer seeking a copy of an 800-page environmental impact assessment report, it’s going to cost you around $4,000 under this scheme.
In the past, disclosure requests were essentially free in China because there were no rules for charging fees.
In fact, last December an administrative agency in Shenzhen was ordered to reimburse an applicant after sending him a pay-on-delivery parcel.
According to the State Council’s Dec. 1 notice, the aim of adding the fees isn’t to generate revenue, but to “guide applicants to exercise their rights reasonably.”
Regardless of intention, however, the new costs will likely be a hindrance to those seeking public information.
You May Also Like
“We don’t negotiate salaries” is a negotiation tactic.
Always. No, your company is not an exception.
A tactic I don’t appreciate at all because of how unfairly it penalizes low-leverage, junior employees, and those loyal enough not to question it, but that’s negotiation for you after all. Weaponized information asymmetry.
Listen to Aditya
And by the way, you should never be worried that an offer would be withdrawn if you politely negotiate.
I have seen this happen *extremely* rarely, mostly to women, and anyway is a giant red flag. It suggests you probably didn’t want to work there.
You wish there was no negotiating so it would all be more fair? I feel you, but it’s not happening.
Instead, negotiate hard, use your privilege, and then go and share numbers with your underrepresented and underpaid colleagues. […]
Always. No, your company is not an exception.
A tactic I don’t appreciate at all because of how unfairly it penalizes low-leverage, junior employees, and those loyal enough not to question it, but that’s negotiation for you after all. Weaponized information asymmetry.
Listen to Aditya
"we don't negotiate salaries" really means "we'd prefer to negotiate massive signing bonuses and equity grants, but we'll negotiate salary if you REALLY insist" https://t.co/80k7nWAMoK
— Aditya Mukerjee, the Otterrific \U0001f3f3\ufe0f\u200d\U0001f308 (@chimeracoder) December 4, 2018
And by the way, you should never be worried that an offer would be withdrawn if you politely negotiate.
I have seen this happen *extremely* rarely, mostly to women, and anyway is a giant red flag. It suggests you probably didn’t want to work there.
You wish there was no negotiating so it would all be more fair? I feel you, but it’s not happening.
Instead, negotiate hard, use your privilege, and then go and share numbers with your underrepresented and underpaid colleagues. […]
I’m torn on how to approach the idea of luck. I’m the first to admit that I am one of the luckiest people on the planet. To be born into a prosperous American family in 1960 with smart parents is to start life on third base. The odds against my very existence are astronomical.
I’ve always felt that the luckiest people I know had a talent for recognizing circumstances, not of their own making, that were conducive to a favorable outcome and their ability to quickly take advantage of them.
In other words, dumb luck was just that, it required no awareness on the person’s part, whereas “smart” luck involved awareness followed by action before the circumstances changed.
So, was I “lucky” to be born when I was—nothing I had any control over—and that I came of age just as huge databases and computers were advancing to the point where I could use those tools to write “What Works on Wall Street?” Absolutely.
Was I lucky to start my stock market investments near the peak of interest rates which allowed me to spend the majority of my adult life in a falling rate environment? Yup.
Ironies of Luck https://t.co/5BPWGbAxFi
— Morgan Housel (@morganhousel) March 14, 2018
"Luck is the flip side of risk. They are mirrored cousins, driven by the same thing: You are one person in a 7 billion player game, and the accidental impact of other people\u2019s actions can be more consequential than your own."
I’ve always felt that the luckiest people I know had a talent for recognizing circumstances, not of their own making, that were conducive to a favorable outcome and their ability to quickly take advantage of them.
In other words, dumb luck was just that, it required no awareness on the person’s part, whereas “smart” luck involved awareness followed by action before the circumstances changed.
So, was I “lucky” to be born when I was—nothing I had any control over—and that I came of age just as huge databases and computers were advancing to the point where I could use those tools to write “What Works on Wall Street?” Absolutely.
Was I lucky to start my stock market investments near the peak of interest rates which allowed me to spend the majority of my adult life in a falling rate environment? Yup.