How to improve Pawn promotion probability In my economic view, there are 3 types of economic companies. Pawn: Domestic companies which work in own countries Minor and Major pieces: Big companies which earn moneys in foreign countries King: Central centers in own countries Then, how to improve Pawn promotion probability? Supporting by Minor and Major pieces to Pawn may be good method. For example, if pawns in USA want to earn in China markets, supporting by Tesla, Microsoft and other Minor and Major pieces will be good. Conversely, if pawns in China want to earn in USA markets, supporting by Minor and Major pieces will be good. I recalled Mercari company’s fault. Mercari has tried to enter in USA markets only by itself, but it was failed. Because it had no support from minor and major pieces in Japan, such as TOYOTA or SoftBank.
2023/6/6. Unbalanced balance
I am thinking about world politics.
Ukraine vs Russia war has not ended.
In fact, there is balanced balance.
Ukraine vs Russia = G7 vs China
Is this true?
Russia may be under China and there are G7 behind Ukraine.
Shares of global GDP are
Ukraine:0.3%
Russia:3%
G7:44%
China:18%
If Ukraine : Russia = G7 : China is true, 0.3 : 3 = 44 : 18, and this is false.
There may be unbalanced balance.
My questions are
1)Ukraine is too small
2)Russia is too big
3)G7 is too small
4)China is too big
I am thinking one idea, China does not support Russia enough and G7 support Ukraine too much.
(I think that helping Ukraine is important.)
I mean Ukraine + G7’s support = Russia (+China’s small support).
This means Ukraine + G7’s support = 3, and Russia = 3.
Furthermore, if China supports Russia bigger, Ukraine (+G7) will lose.
In fact, G7 is losing their powers by this war.
This article is hard to read, so below is with ChatGPT.
————————————With ChatGPT—————————————————
Title: The Imbalance in Balanced Geopolitical Equations
The dynamics of world politics are complex and constantly evolving. A case in point is the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which has been unresolved for several years. At a superficial level, it may seem to reflect a balanced equilibrium, but on closer inspection, there are underlying disparities.
One might be tempted to equate the Ukraine-Russia conflict with the geopolitical power play between the G7 and China. But such an equation - Ukraine vs. Russia as G7 vs. China - needs closer scrutiny. Indeed, Russia may lean towards China while the G7 lends its support to Ukraine. However, the global GDP share of these nations reveals an unbalanced picture.
Let's look at the GDP shares: Ukraine constitutes a mere 0.3% of the global GDP, Russia holds 3%, the G7 nations combined command 44%, and China has an impressive 18%. If we were to say that Ukraine : Russia = G7 : China, using the GDP figures, the comparison of 0.3 : 3 does not equate to 44 : 18. There lies the imbalance.
In other words, from an economic perspective:
- Ukraine is too small
- Russia is substantially larger
- The combined G7 is not as influential as it once was
- China looms large
Here's a thought: China might not be providing enough support to Russia, and the G7 could be overextending its support to Ukraine. It's critical to understand the importance of aiding Ukraine, but this unequal distribution of support might be causing an imbalance. In essence, the assistance Ukraine receives from the G7 equals the power of Russia (along with modest help from China), meaning Ukraine + G7's support equals 3 (Russia's share), while Russia alone also equals 3.
Consequently, if China were to enhance its support for Russia, Ukraine, even with the G7's backing, would find itself at a disadvantage.
In this geopolitical tug of war, the G7 seems to be losing some of its strength. These complicated dynamics exemplify the potential for imbalance in what might initially appear to be a balanced scenario.
Comments
Post a Comment