31–40 of 82 posts
This is bad for the whole world and reduces the efficiency of the global machine. Now countries have to explore more expensive mines to make up for the demand which could have easily been avoided. It feels like someone is dialing back the productivity of the entire world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The current U.S. administration is nothing but outright hostile against the environment. Those regulations will be laxed and nothing good will come out of this.
Do you think Chinese mines would pollute less than US mines? How many environmental activists do you think exist in China?
Firstly, I don't know what they expect to achieve with these threats. I think the US has shown so far that it's not going to easily bend to such threats, this was a bad move on their part. Maybe they knew this, hence using the media to broadcast this message. Still, this very much sounds like escalation talk rather than de-escalation. Secondly, these "rare earths" aren't actually rare, most mines were simply shut dow…
It's not just about threatening the US, it's about bolstering the Chinese moral across the nation, building a belief that China is a resilient underdog and the world is against it but it will fight back.
Firstly, I don't know what they expect to achieve with these threats. I think the US has shown so far that it's not going to easily bend to such threats, this was a bad move on their part. Maybe they knew this, hence using the media to broadcast this message. Still, this very much sounds like escalation talk rather than de-escalation. Secondly, these "rare earths" aren't actually rare, most mines were simply shut dow…
This is a cliche problem with these "great power" games. On one hand, neither side can publicly "bend." OTOH, public statements and/or implications that "we'll make them bend" are politically popular.^
Concessions are only possible when the volume of disputes are muted. Once they become national pride issues, or leaders put their own image on the line.... At that point, it's no longer about commodities or tariffs or whatnot. It's about winning.
^China is not a democracy, but that does not mean they don't have politics or that public perception is less important.
Firstly, I don't know what they expect to achieve with these threats. I think the US has shown so far that it's not going to easily bend to such threats, this was a bad move on their part. Maybe they knew this, hence using the media to broadcast this message. Still, this very much sounds like escalation talk rather than de-escalation. Secondly, these "rare earths" aren't actually rare, most mines were simply shut dow…
There's no long term view, China has quite a few things they can use to pressure the US and it will be stupid for them not to use those.
It's a self-harming game and the first one to bend will lose it. The longer US tarifs stays, the more some US companies that depends on those imports will be in trouble. China has plenty of cards to go the same route, controlling a huge part of the western companies production system. It feels to me that this is just a first card, and there's some more damaging ones to both China and the US to come.
And to be honest, with the current US behaviour, between this and Iran, the only thing it achieve is that most of the world will want to be as independant as possible of the dollar in the future
Firstly, I don't know what they expect to achieve with these threats. I think the US has shown so far that it's not going to easily bend to such threats, this was a bad move on their part. Maybe they knew this, hence using the media to broadcast this message. Still, this very much sounds like escalation talk rather than de-escalation. Secondly, these "rare earths" aren't actually rare, most mines were simply shut dow…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One country benefiting more from trade than another isn't the same thing as the other country being worse off because of the trade. They're just not as much better off as they could have been. The goal of these disputes should be to reach a more equitable trading arrangement, not to stop or restrict trade that is 'harming' countries[1]. The Idea that the US is 'losing' due to the trade deficit and that reducing trade…
>The Idea that the US is 'losing' due to the trade deficit and that reducing trade with China will benefit America is utter tosh and even the administration's own trade advisers and negotiators are saying so (a bit more politely). The problem isn't so much the deficit as it is the way the US has been seduced into relying upon the Chinese industrial machine. The US industrial base has been depleting for decades. This…
Which is pretty good growth, all things considered.
Mini-rant, feel free to ignore:
The alternative perspective which assumes total US industrial domination up to the present day (MAGA/Trump) is quite irrational considering world history: the US had almost no real industrial competition post-WW2 when all the other industrialized countries were either:
* shattered by wars in their homelands
* or completely cut-off from the rest of the world for 50 years...
So the industrial prowess of the US 1950 - 1970 (relative to the rest of the world) isn't coming back, now we're just headed for a normal equilibrium. One in which the US is still doing quite well from an industrial point of view.
Firstly, I don't know what they expect to achieve with these threats. I think the US has shown so far that it's not going to easily bend to such threats, this was a bad move on their part. Maybe they knew this, hence using the media to broadcast this message. Still, this very much sounds like escalation talk rather than de-escalation. Secondly, these "rare earths" aren't actually rare, most mines were simply shut dow…
China should be careful here, if this does not work then they are pretty much done for, although the CCP can claim mental victory as usual as they've been propagating it as the silver bullet.