The "trade war" thing has been the most/only interesting ideas to come from trump, to me. It was interesting in that he did recognized (fluked into?) an actual shift in public/expert position. China is the pro-trade side. They'll be willing to make concessions, do the work, etc. It's the beijing consensus now, not washington. Large american companies are still on the pro-trade side, being multinationals. They also ha…
> Imagine a Chinese company operating
> in the states, with an a fully imported
> senior management and all "c-level"
> discussions in chinese.
In other words, imagine a Chinese company operating in the US the same way US multinationals operate on continental Europe.
The "trade war" thing has been the most/only interesting ideas to come from trump, to me. It was interesting in that he did recognized (fluked into?) an actual shift in public/expert position. China is the pro-trade side. They'll be willing to make concessions, do the work, etc. It's the beijing consensus now, not washington. Large american companies are still on the pro-trade side, being multinationals. They also ha…
> Imagine a Chinese company operating in the states, with an a fully imported senior management and all "c-level" discussions in chinese. For what it's worth, you just described two separate companies I've consulted with, and I'm sure there are many others.
Not to mention Korean ones (Samsung is famous for this). There are enough Chinese expats in the states that I’ve heard there are even a few American startups that conduct business in Chinese.
The "trade war" thing has been the most/only interesting ideas to come from trump, to me. It was interesting in that he did recognized (fluked into?) an actual shift in public/expert position. China is the pro-trade side. They'll be willing to make concessions, do the work, etc. It's the beijing consensus now, not washington. Large american companies are still on the pro-trade side, being multinationals. They also ha…
> Imagine a Chinese company operating > in the states, with an a fully imported > senior management and all "c-level" > discussions in chinese. In other words, imagine a Chinese company operating in the US the same way US multinationals operate on continental Europe.
I’ve worked for Microsoft in China, our C suite was all Chinese (well, many Taiwanese). The nearest foreigner headed up sales for the region, was a German. Americans were common, but they were almost all Chinese or Taiwanese who naturalized.
Our SVP based in Redmond was also a Chinese (In charge of all of Microsoft Research and advanced research). He would try to conduct our meetings in Chinese, and then would demure to English when a few of us foreigners walked in.
Resource allocation is the single hardest problem to address in large organisations, and there’s numerous cases of companies withering and dying because they failed to properly align their resource allocation with market forces. Except withering and dying for a company is not a humanitarian crisis, but it is for a country. A company can also fire an underperforming team member, or ditch an entire department. Where as…
This is why some strains of socialism advocate a regulated market wherein businesses can freely experiment, then the optimal path is nationalized. Free market or centralized economy, at the end of the day someone is making an executive decision about how resources are allocated. Whether you believe that executive person (or committee) should be acting in the best interests of the public or a group of shareholders is…
This creates exactly the same set of problems. A CEO has to compete with other CEOs, if they don’t do so efficiently they will fail and another will take their place. A government committe doesn’t have to compete with anybody, if they fail, you just end up with a society that gradually deteriorates. A CEO also has to deal with market forces, a government committe does not. A government committe doesn’t have to produce goods that people want, they only have to align their resource allocation with the central plan, as their country is gradually eroded underneath them. Your argument is trying to have its cake and eat it too, it doesn’t resolve any of the inefficiency of central planning, it just shifts it down the road a bit.
How about top four? Paper, printing, gunpowder and compass.
I downvoted the parent comment but your response is also disengenuous. Unless I’m allowed to claim credit for Rome’s victories the ‘China’ that invented those things shares nothing with the China being discussed right now.
>shares nothing with the China being discussed right now.
Seems like apples to oranges, assuming the implied comparison is with western post-industrial age nations, which began industrializing centuries ago, as compared to decades ago with China.
> Imagine a Chinese company operating > in the states, with an a fully imported > senior management and all "c-level" > discussions in chinese. In other words, imagine a Chinese company operating in the US the same way US multinationals operate on continental Europe.
I’ve worked for Microsoft in China, our C suite was all Chinese (well, many Taiwanese). The nearest foreigner headed up sales for the region, was a German. Americans were common, but they were almost all Chinese or Taiwanese who naturalized. Our SVP based in Redmond was also a Chinese (In charge of all of Microsoft Research and advanced research). He would try to conduct our meetings in Chinese, and then would demure…
The "trade war" thing has been the most/only interesting ideas to come from trump, to me. It was interesting in that he did recognized (fluked into?) an actual shift in public/expert position. China is the pro-trade side. They'll be willing to make concessions, do the work, etc. It's the beijing consensus now, not washington. Large american companies are still on the pro-trade side, being multinationals. They also ha…
> Imagine a Chinese company operating > in the states, with an a fully imported > senior management and all "c-level" > discussions in chinese. In other words, imagine a Chinese company operating in the US the same way US multinationals operate on continental Europe.
Amazon vs Alibaba - to simplify, this game will be won by the best supply chain, And sure Amazon leads by far. But what happens when the "one belt one road" railroad is finished ? Will Alibaba get a preferential treatment ? And if so, could Amazon handle that ?
Have you tried Amazon outside of the USA? It sucks. In the UK I've been told it is ok. In Australia, Thailand and China it is not a great experience. In China Tmall is an amazing experience. In their home markets they both seem to be entrenched but globally I'm not sure if either will win.
We used Amazon a lot in Beijing and it wasn’t that bad. It was on par with everything else (tmall, jd, ...) that we also used, it wasn’t especially sucky, do you have anything more specific?