• OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    That’s completely absurd. This is the dumbest thing anyone’s said this conversation.

    The sample size isn’t “n=1” it’s n=800,000,000. It’s clearly visible from the graph that I posted that the reduction in poverty began immediately after the reforms, and then continued extremely consistently on an extremely large scale.

    In case you need a refresher on what the data looks like:

    You’re just so committed to shitting on every single thing that China does that you’re willing to throw out all reason and logic, completely ignore obvious facts, and throw out any means of evaluating any policy just to avoid the conclusion that China may have done a single thing right.

    What other possible explanation even is there? You’re just very objectively wrong.