Hello viewers, welcome to “Qin Peng Observation.”
Today’s focus: What happened? Musk goes all in for Trump, offering multiple gifts. American media predicts Trump’s moment of total victory is approaching.
The 2024 Nobel Prize in Economics has been awarded for the relationship theory between institutions and prosperity, shattering the myth of the “China model.” China’s stimulus plan is causing trouble.
This episode is an exclusive video for viewers of a clean world. Please follow my YouTube new channel in the comment section, as well as the clean world account. I will be producing a new episode exclusively for the clean world every Monday.
In the past week, the world’s richest man and tech wonder Musk has captured global attention, becoming the most dazzling star in the eyes of media and audiences:
On October 5th, he attended Trump’s campaign rally in Pennsylvania, openly supporting Trump’s presidential campaign. He even jumped out of excitement, surprising many people.
On October 7th, he appeared on an interview with the top American media figure, now the self-media figure Carlson, declaring full support for Trump and elaborating on his views on various issues. The viewership exceeded over 54 million, sparking another round of political debate.
Then, on October 11th in California, he showcased Tesla’s Robotaxi driverless taxi, CyberCab futuristic driverless bus, and Tesla robots in a Hollywood-style tech show.
Over the weekend, he skillfully caught a giant starship with super chopsticks, igniting the hot topic of human migration to Mars in 2026. Tech enthusiasts and management enthusiasts are also discussing the mysteries behind the starship and Musk’s SpaceX unique culture of failure: every failure could be a step towards progress. Thus, this private company of only 6,000 people defeated the tens of thousands and even hundreds of thousands of individuals in NASA and China’s aerospace system.
Earlier last week, Musk made a major move by announcing his Super Political Action Committee, paying $47 to swing state voters as long as they signed a petition supporting the First and Second Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. “Easy money!” he tweeted on social media platform Twitter-X.
As Musk goes all in for Trump, Trump’s approval ratings are significantly rising. On the political betting website PolyMarket, the gap between his support and Harrin’s support is widening, reaching 55% to 44.7% by Monday.
The rise in Trump’s odds of winning can be attributed to various factors, possibly stemming from Musk’s October surprises or due to Harrin’s recent frequent interviews, which exposed her shortcomings in economic governance. Consequently, in recent days, more mainstream American media outlets are discussing the possibility of a massive victory for Trump and the Republican Party.
On Monday, The New York Times acknowledged that Vice President Harrin had to launch a lightning war due to declining support among African-American voters. She unveiled a plan to enhance the financial conditions of African-Americans, accepted interviews with two African media outlets, and released two ads in battleground states targeting this crucial voting group.
On Sunday (October 13), CNN data journalist Harry Enten warned that Trump is expected to win historic levels of support among African-American and Hispanic voters in the November elections.
On Sunday, a poll released by The New York Times/Siena College showed that Harrin held 78% of the African-American vote. However, in 2016, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton led by a significant margin with a 92% vote rate among African-American voters, while Biden won with around 90% of the African-American vote in 2020.
Enten said to CNN on Sunday that Trump would perform his “best ever” among Hispanic voters since the former President George W. Bush in 2004.
So, why did Harrin lose support among black voters? CNN columnist and conservative expert Scott Jennings attributed Harrin’s decline in favorability among African-American male voters to the Democratic Party’s focus on identity politics and transgender issues.
While Harrin performed well among female voters – garnering about 83% support from African-American women – she only received 70% support from African-American men. Additionally, reports state that Biden received support from around 85% of African-American male voters in 2020.
CNN’s national polling average suggests no clear leader in the race, but this also makes the Democratic Party increasingly concerned. Supporters of Trump often remain silent in polls or refuse to answer, leading to potentially higher real support rates. Therefore, even if Harrin is leading in national polls, like Hillary Clinton did before, she might win the popular vote but lose in the electoral college vote.
In the 2020 U.S. election, a month before the vote, Biden led Trump by over 5 percentage points in three “blue wall states.” However, currently, there is no clear advantage for Harrin in national or swing state polls, with the race essentially tied.
This situation has led many media outlets to speculate that Trump may ultimately achieve massive victories in the presidential and congressional elections, hence warning of the danger of Trump returning to the White House. For example, John Authers, a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion and former chief market commentator for the Financial Times, wrote an article on Monday stating, “The U.S. political narrative has completely shifted to Trump’s potential overwhelming victory. The stock market is rising due to political factors; the bond market seems to be still unbothered.” Authers also pointed out through data analysis that not only does it seem like the Democratic Party has failed in the Senate, but there’s also a precarious chance of regaining the House. However, he warned that a Trump presidency could bring inflation.
The poor polling situation has alarmed the Democratic Party. Last Thursday, former President Obama became agitated during a speech, accusing African-American males of making excuses, the underlying reason being unpreparedness to accept an African-American woman as president. However, his harsh attitude has sparked backlash on social media and within African-American groups. For instance, The Wall Street Journal criticized Obama for discriminating against African-Americans.
This week, Harrin’s team hastily introduced an economic plan for African-Americans, including providing $1 million in loans, offering up to $20,000 tax exemptions for African-American entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs of other races, providing apprenticeship opportunities for Black individuals, as well as cannabis legalization.
However, on Monday, Newsweek published an opinion piece criticizing Harrin’s new plan for black voters as insufficient and too late. The author questioned, “Why announce this plan on October 14th of an election year? Additionally, why has Harris not taken action for three and a half years after taking office?”
Criticism also fills the Twitter comments section on Harrin’s other economic plans. Harrin announced, “Our economic plan will provide: $50,000 startup deductions for small business owners; $6,000 child tax credits for new parents; $25,000 down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers.”
However, commenters argued, “The $25k for first-time homeowners only applies if no one in your family owns a home.” “90% of startups are not profitable in the first year, so there won’t be any ‘tax breaks.’ These are just hollow promises. How does the plan help the American working class currently dealing with inflation and rising costs?” “Giving $50,000 to new startups? $25,000 to buy a house? Who is footing the bill for all this?”
Clearly, with just three weeks until the U.S. election on November 5th, this tense situation is likely to continue and may even lead to unexpected events. So, who will have the last laugh in the end? Let’s continue to monitor.
Let’s also focus on the 2024 Nobel Prize in Economics. Many Chinese people believe it holds significance not only economically but also politically.
The award went to three economists, namely Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, professors at MIT, and James A. Robinson, a professor at the University of Chicago. They were recognized for their research on “how institutions are formed and how they affect prosperity.”
The Nobel Committee stated that these three economists “have shown the importance of social systems in a country’s prosperity” and that “societies with poor governance and exploitative systems do not bring growth or improvement.” They also “explained why extractive economic systems and authoritarian rule persist, despite reforms potentially yielding more benefits.”
The award ceremony sparked discussion online. Some Chinese netizens stated that these studies essentially say, “superstructure determines economic base, not the other way around,” hinting at a certain type of nation. Others mentioned that these findings may cause some people to be impatient and react forcibly. The discussion varies from social justice and open society to authoritarianism and democracy’s impact on the economy.
If you are interested, you can read their books, available in both English and Chinese. Among them, Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson co-authored “Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty” and “The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty.” Simon Johnson and Daron Acemoglu wrote “The Power and the Progress: Our Struggle for the Technological and Prosperity.”
For lack of time, we won’t delve into the main content of each book here. But from their titles, you can probably grasp that building good institutions in a country leads to lasting prosperity. It requires not only technological advancements but also freedom for citizens, where the government serves the people rather than the people chase the government. Progress also depends on our choices regarding technology; cutting-edge technological advancements can empower citizens and democratize, benefiting the majority. However, if all major decisions are in the hands of a few arrogant tech leaders, the situation changes.
Do you feel these books are related to China? The significant differences between the once prosperous Hong Kong, the currently reigning tech peak Taiwan, and mainland China, what are the underlying reasons?
Looking back over this period, the so-called market rescue policies of the Chinese authorities also highlight underlying issues: they are only rescuing local governments, the real estate sector, and the stock market, without making any changes at the institutional level. The authorities cannot provide Chinese citizens with an open society, including private entrepreneurs and consumers, with freedom, hope, and rights. In that case, what will such market rescue policies ultimately lead to? I believe the answer is self-evident.
In fact, international finance experts have also given low evaluations of the stimulus policies in China. For example, Reuters states, “China’s stimulus promises hope for the real estate industry but not confidence”; CNBC commentators believe that China’s stimulus plan is merely a “Band-Aid” for structural issues; The Wall Street Journal calls China’s stimulus a roller coaster ride: the revival policies from Beijing have not made a lasting impression, leading to the recent rise and fall of the Chinese stock market.
How do you perceive the economic prospects in China?
Well, that concludes today’s share. If you enjoy my program, please subscribe to my YouTube channel and the clean world account in the comment section. Feel free to share your thoughts and topics you would like me to analyze in the comments.
Welcome to subscribe to the YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjix7du7PHahnSJm8dctzDA
Welcome to subscribe to the clean world channel:
https://www.ganjing.com/zh-CN/channel/1eiqjdnq7go7cVXgAJjJp39H61270c