Talk:Lai Changxing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In defence[edit]

Seriously, people in Canada should spend better time with "humanitarian causes". Lai Changxing is not a humanitarian cause. In twenty years the entirety of West Vancouver will be composed of mansions for fleeing Chinese officials.

Has anyone read Pierre Lemieux's piece at this website?. I won't even directly argue against it. It sums itself up pretty good:

What has Lai Changxing done? As a Chinese resident, he has, since 1996, smuggled in China many billions of dollars worth of goods, ranging from crude oil to vegetable oil, rubber, cars, cigarettes, electrical goods, etc. Not only has he evaded nearly billions in taxes, but he did other nasty things like selling oil at half the official price and “distorting national oil prices and thus production and overall energy policy” (Far Eastern Economic Review dated Nov. 30, 2000).
As the press suggests in veiled, self-righteous disapproval, the “smuggling kingpin” also engaged in “corruption.” He had to keep Leviathan at bay. So, he bought off a host of bureaucrats, at least up to the level of the deputy mayor, the local customs chief, and a provincial deputy police chief. He paid them millions in bribes, entertained them with girls, and gave jobs to their relatives. As a result of the anti-corruption repression campaign in China, many of these bureaucrats have been recently charged and condemned, including to the death penalty. The main suspect was still at large, hiding in Vancouver. Fortunately, the Canadian government came to the rescue in upholding morality and the Chinese rule of law.

Two wrongs don't make a right. The same logic applies to Falun Gong. Simply because the Chinese bureaucratic and economic system is screwed up does not justify a guy going around knowingly (and proudly and shamelessly) bribing officials, evading taxes that would otherwise be used as a relative equalization of wealth, and doing it all for personal gain. Smarten up. Or it may simply be a matter of time before Canada is filled with Chinese lowlifes who have gained their success through corrupt and shameless methods.

I have changed the tone of the article to an anti-Chinese government piece to a more neutral piece that takes an objective look at the article. Colipon+(T) 03:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To the OP: you are clearly missing the point. He broke laws in a certain country, so he deserves to be punished. It does not matter if we, as westerners, agree with these laws or not; the fact is that he broke them. Would you want someone in your country breaking your laws and then escaping to another country that doesn't "believe" in these laws? This man is a criminal. There is no question about that.

To the people of Canada[edit]

Lai is a cunning, wicked man. There are mountain piles of evidences against him. "Anti-Chinese government or not" aside, he needs to be bought back to justice. By not bringing him back to China, the Canadian government is sheltering him from the very thing that they advocate --- Freedom & Justice. "Fair trial?" I don't know if he will get one. But by sheltering him, there won't be a trial. TheAsianGURU 20:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is why the Canadian Government suck. They are willing to do whatever it need as long as it piss of the Chinese Government. China should certainly NOT look into any complaints the Canadians care about (piracy, etc) as retaliatory measures. Show them China can't be messed with. 76.11.64.141 (talk) 07:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Canada doesn't necessarily have anything "against" China. It's actually more because the Canadian government is too naive when dealing with a case like this. They just don't know what they're doing. Colipon+(Talk) 20:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

where is the justice!![edit]

Of all the people who suffer from this guy's own selffish needs. I came from Fujian, Do you know how much he cause ??

If Canada is a democracy country !! at least jail him in Canadian jail and should not be set free! and Pierre Lemieux..what a $@@# there is still smuggling on democratic and free countries. I hope Canada would be fill-ed up with criminals like this guy and i want to see pierre's reaction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.199.99.100 (talk) 03:32, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss[edit]

The recent waves of deletion by user Ohconfucius and Zanhe is unexplained other than very short opinionated comments left on the edit comments. Please discuss anything here. Benjwong (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've explained enough in my edit comments, while your edit comments contain nothing but shrill accusations of vandalism and censorship. I'll explain the reason of my removal here again: the rumours about Jiang Zemin's death have been proven false, and the only source that supposedly ties Lai Changxing's extradition to Jiang's rumoured death is this one, but the article does not link the two events in any meaningful way, except that they were happening at about the same time. Wikipedia has very high standards for biographies of living people. Here's a quote from WP:BLP: Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing. The material you insist on restoring is questionable at best, and libelous at worst. --Zanhe (talk) 02:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I share the exasperation of Zanhe above. I think the 'content' level of the problem is that due to the high-level political involvement of Lai. There are rumours and conspiracy theories in the Chinese press that may or may not (or indeed cannot, by our rules) be represented here. This necessarily means that there is a degree of incoherence in the articles. On the 'personal' level of the problem, there seems to be a tendency of certain individuals to confuse or conflate core issues with assortment of coatracks and details of minor relevance, or relevance that he is aware of but perhaps are difficult to articulate or translate from Chinese culture or politics. I also abhor the attacking others not in agreement using accusations of "censorship" and "vandalism", none of which are conducive to collaborative editing. --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 03:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mainly Lai came in contact with alot of dirt. And alot of that dirt ran to the highest presidential level in the 90s. Since Lai left Canada. Jiang literally disappeared. The station that did the reporting has been in a complete mess since. People are getting fired all over. And people that shouldn't be promoted are promoted. Is almost as if the CPC wants to destroy the station. Jiang's son has lost his post. The only way I would even classify your deletions as reasonable is if you can show an alternate tie to maybe ATV's head Wang Zing from your own angle. Otherwise it is a listing of stuff that has happened since Lai was announced to leave Canada. To me, all of it is relevant. And regarding the link to "Li Ka-Shing". See Raymond Lam's father called "Xiamen's Li Ka-shing" who copied Li's cook-property style. He was most successful when Lai was functioning in Xiamen. I am fine with leaving that out of see also section because it will complicate things. Benjwong (talk) 03:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your sentiment is understandable. A lot of rumours might be true and could be relevant. But Wikipedia is not a tabloid, and rumours, no matter how plausible, do not belong here. When there are living people involved, Wikipedia policies are adamant that the only content allowed is indisputable facts supported by unquestionable sources. --Zanhe (talk) 04:03, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can say the info are in pieces (or even unorganized). But you cannot call it a rumour or tabloid. The TV station is a mess. Jiang's son is decommissioned. That is fact. What is even worst is the high level people hiding, while the little people take all the punishment. And you basically suggest none of that should be mentioned!? Benjwong (talk) 04:11, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rumours can still be written about here, so long as they are notable – that is attributed to sources citing 'reports of rumours about' and sourced (just like the Jiang's death rumours). To attempt to draw dotted lines between the disarray at the TV station and Jiang's son decommissioning without any documented link established from sources would be original research. We must not leave anything to innuendo. --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 04:25, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We all know 95% of these very controversial news purposely don't ever connect the dot. And if you try to connect the dot, it is original research. Interesting. Benjwong (talk) 04:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most news sources are more than happy to connect the dots if they can. If they don't, it's because they have no proof. If they can't prove it, then we can't either. --Zanhe (talk) 04:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Crediting Lai with WTO[edit]

The article's lede states: At his height he has been credited with converting China from communism to capitalism and bringing the country into the World Trade Organization.. I find this claim to be somewhat dubious, hyperbolic, or at least very poorly written. Can someone who read the book it's cited to give the original passage? Colipon+(Talk) 14:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please just buy the book and read it. Then outside the book do a research on 1990s Xiamen network (or more like Fujian network). That province practically got out of communism by letting a group of people out-govern real government officials. Nobody ever said Lai's tactic was clean. But if you compare his methods with other people in Fujian at the time, he opened up more of the economy and was cleaner than everybody else. Try comparing tactics used by 鄭翠萍 (大姐萍) for starters. Would anyone credit her as pushing China toward WTO, no way. Benjwong (talk) 05:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I fear you are suggesting that Original Research or Synthesis of published material was used to produce that sentence. If that's the case, please remove it. Ahyangyi (talk) 05:49, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lai Changxing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lai Changxing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lai_Changxing&oldid=1208077573"