He is a Party member—a billionaire. That is all I know about him.

If this is true that this is all you know, you would probably benefit from the teaching of Chairman Mao: No investigation no right to speak.

If you had investigated you would have found that while true that due to the failings of Jiang and Hu a handful of capitalists were given party membership, that in reality it is in name only and they hold no power.

The one and only time they tried to exert power by pushing to loosen banking regulations, so they could offer consumer micro loans, the party made them disappear and restructured the company. Foreign capitalists cried about this for years because it showed the truth, capital has no real power in China.

Also since 2014 the faulty lines of Jiang and Hu are being corrected.

Subtitles do not work in English on my end, so unfortunately I cannot read it, and I do not speak Russian. Is there a text version I can run through a translator?

The NEP was forged in the context of a highly undeveloped Russia, with a necessity to uplift agriculture as soon as possible so as to rapidly improve industry. The hatred of the people towards the NEPmen was understandable, but a clear reading of the historical material conditions reveals that it was necessary. As long as the socialist state holds the commanding heights of industry, and maintains a vigilant eye towards any organized political resistance from the petite bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie, markets can be a complementary part to the broader socialist system in developing underdeveloped areas.

As for Mao's economy, it was again rapid industrialization. The problem with Mao's economy was that growth was uneven and unstable. Deng Xiaoping's reforms stabilized and slightly accelerated development. You'll get no argument from me that killing off the sparrows was wrong, but knowledge of agronomics was very low comparatively in China, and thus this mistake was not repeated as their knowledge advanced.

I also am not a fan of the sino-soviet split. I do not believe Mao to have been blameless for it, however, Khrushchev's venom was correctly called out by Mao. Just as Mao wasn't permanently good, so too was Khrushchev not permanently bad, but there's good reason why Khrushchev's actions enabled Gorbachev's, which enabled Yeltsin's.

Regarding technology transfer, certainly you can see that Chinese manufacturing is now more advanced than soviet manufacturing. In becoming the world's factory, they not only copied western tech, but totally owned the entire production process, and now are using it to advance and develop further. There is a qualitative difference between reverse engineering every single thing you copy, and being able to simply copy what you're already manufacturing.

All in all, I understand that I am not Russian. I am indeed a westerner, damned as I may be. However, I truly believe that I can recognize both the Chinese and Soviet approaches as immensely positive forces, and hope that Russia returns to socialism within my lifetime. I long to see the western empire fall, and I am happy to see existing socialist countries advance forward into the future despite western flailing. The west has fallen into China's trap, and it is too late to leave. What we are witnessing is a cornered beast that has already lost, and is throwing a fit in the aftermath.

basic pension is 150-200 yuan.

Wrong that's the national floor that is legally required but each local government adds their own contributions on top of this for example if you fall under the Shanghai local government you would receive 1500 per month as your basic pension.

That was a real village, and real peasants.

I didn't say it wasn't. I said it was an anecdote.

Ukraine is 450 yuan, converted. That’s a paltry sum, you can’t live on it.

Good thing cost of living in Chinese rural villages is tiny. In most especially the most rural ones you could likely get by on 50rmb a month especially with the community help that comes with village life.

your source is youtube; think on that.