Get a load of this slava ukraini

No no it's this:

1. Decide you've gotta use tar.

2. man tar

3. Guess-and-check the flags until it seems to work.

4. Immediately forget the flags.

Okay but increasing unemployment is meant to do exactly what this petty oligarch wants: discipline labor, preventing workers (that's us) from eking out a little more from a very lopsided economic system.

Marx referred to the unemployed aa the reserve army of labor for capital. The bourgeois use it to say: "Want safer conditions? Enough money to pay rent and go to the doctor? Tough shit, there are hundreds of people I can call on to take your job."

The unemployment rate is carefully curated by the capitalist class to prevent low rates and their worst nightmare, full employment.

Libertarians tend to be obsessed with lowering the age of consent lol. You sound confused.

This person definitely knows what 4chan geta up to

Moral obligation? WTF?

Countries aren't just one dude being moral or not lol

The fallout created an anti-vaxx movement and damage to real humanitarian programs there.

If you don't want to spend a big chunk of time reading all about a country you've barely even thought of (looking at you, Gabon. I'm sorry I know this reflects on me), "America bad" will usually get you to the correct take anyways. The seat of global capital has habits.

The uneven ratios in those top three are due to massive populations of second class immigrant laborers, often slave laborers.

Economists aren't really in denial, they are just doing their job of giving a false sense of scientific legitimacy to the plan the ruling class will enact anyways: discipline labor, cut social spending, bail out finance when they inevitably crash.

Bruh you've gotta use vague signals and let the think tanks work with journalists to manufacture consent first.

They're a target of the US Empire and folks that can't do media criticism gladly take the bait.

The first rule of propaganda is emphasis, which is what you're astutely picking up on. Why are stories about X and not A, B, C? When they're about X, what context is emphasized, what is fact and what is allusion, who is interviewed and given the opportunity to comment and who is not? "World news" stories are very frequently just stenography of various think tanks, often ones that are more or less in agreement with one another.

The entirety of China's actions reported in this story are that China (exactly who isn't stated, not even a group) invited an AfD delegation to meet with them. No source is cited, but maybe it's Weidel. From this they create an entire narrative by retelling past articles about AfD's foreign policy statements and ask one person to comment: "political scientist Wolfgang Schroeder from the University of Kassel". They don't mention that he's also an SPD politician and associated with a government-funded research institute with a dodgy past. Maybe his takes are good, but why they asked him and not others isn't stated, of course.

This is just folks getting easily hoodwinked by a propaganda push. Same as folks were suddenly very concerned about WMDs in Iraq or the political powers in Afghanistan and so on. They weren't, not organically - a network of think tanks, government stooges, etc all rally to provide jobs for these kinds of nerds to write these kinds of articles and have these kinds of takes. Several think tanks in Washington have converted from focusing on Syria or Iraq to focusing on Russia or China, as they know who butters their bread.

Anyways that's a long ramble in response to a simple question.