Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

wsj.com

41–50 of 132 posts

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China's record for the last 40 years is lifting billions of people out of poverty while we stomped around bombing places and killing millions in the name of exporting our awesome values. Oh, and our infra is falling apart compared to theirs while we spend all our money on bombs. Let's make a compromise -- China can run their country and we can run ours. Is that so controversial?

>China can run their country and we can run ours Considering their traditional political philosophy doesn't even really acknowledge the concept of nation-states and international borders, no. Because "run their country" means "rule the world however we fucking want."

Can we check the record? Post-WW2?

Countries the US has invaded THAT BORDER CHINA: 2

Countries China has invaded, period: We have them 80% surrounded at sea between Korea, Japan, Taiwan and the Phillipines. People are really upset that they still control former-imperial-possession HK and have a remaining outlet.

And they're the imperialists?

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#42
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, some very bad things have happened. Not excusing that. But also things have worked out really really well for a lot of countries the US has imposed its will on. Countries it went to war with and could have utterly raped and plundered without resistance or really any objection. You think China is going to do better? Will it be more fair? The regime in China is willing to hurt anyone who even debates its track re…

China's record for the last 40 years is lifting billions of people out of poverty while we stomped around bombing places and killing millions in the name of exporting our awesome values. Oh, and our infra is falling apart compared to theirs while we spend all our money on bombs. Let's make a compromise -- China can run their country and we can run ours. Is that so controversial?

You don't get points on your track record for lifting people out of poverty when you're the one who put them there in the first place.

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#43
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, some very bad things have happened. Not excusing that. But also things have worked out really really well for a lot of countries the US has imposed its will on. Countries it went to war with and could have utterly raped and plundered without resistance or really any objection. You think China is going to do better? Will it be more fair? The regime in China is willing to hurt anyone who even debates its track re…

China's record for the last 40 years is lifting billions of people out of poverty while we stomped around bombing places and killing millions in the name of exporting our awesome values. Oh, and our infra is falling apart compared to theirs while we spend all our money on bombs. Let's make a compromise -- China can run their country and we can run ours. Is that so controversial?

Let's not forget that time just before your carefully chosen "40 years" where they starved 50 million people due to central planning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#Famine_deat...

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#44

It's about time that the US start standing up to China's unrestricted warfare [1]. It's amazing that most Americans don't realize that China views the US as an adversary and has been quietly waging a war against the West. Why there are people who welcome the rise of Chinese/CCP hegemony when they are actively looking to crush [2] "Western values" is beyond me. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_Warfare [2…

Yes, US should take China more seriously, but don't conflate US geopolitical interests with the West. China seeking security via regional hegemony is not an attack on Western values. Undermining US supremacy is not an attack on "the west" - western bloc countries have various interests that doesn't align with American interests, i.e. ME wars, Nordstrom 2, The fact that 3/5 FiveEyes countries haven't banned Huawei. But chief among them is exporting "western values", which has been globally destabilizing including the migrant crisis in Europe.

Document 9 is an paper for domestic policy about curtailing "western" influence within China, prescient after the shitshow happening in HK. China doesn't waste effort spreading the Chinese system outside it's claims, because technocrats knows it doesn't work without scale of 1billion people and they see how counterproductive this strategy is in terms of cost and domestic sentiment. The takeaway of Unrestricted Warfare isn't that China views US as an adversary in a totalwar scenario, but a competitor that has to be challenged using existing world systems. China doesn't seek to dismantle global systems, which it has benefited from, but modify it in manner commiserate with her influence. As the worlds largest exporter and driver of global growth, that's a completely reasonable expectation.

There's a reason China preaches cooperation while US is withdrawing from the world stage. Geopolitically, US is the only developed country in the world that can afford to isolate itself. The economic and demographic future of western countries are not good. Demographically neither is China, and cooperation is the only way forward. Western countries aligned with US postwar because Bretton Woods system + US security guarantee was a formula for economic prosperity. That era appears to be ending and the ensuing misery will make for strange bedfellows.

Again, if you're an American, you should take China more seriously out of self interest. But you should also vote for candidates that takes allies and the world more seriously as well. US foreign, not domestic policy is what can curtail China's rise.

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>China can run their country and we can run ours Considering their traditional political philosophy doesn't even really acknowledge the concept of nation-states and international borders, no. Because "run their country" means "rule the world however we fucking want."

Can we check the record? Post-WW2? Countries the US has invaded THAT BORDER CHINA: 2 Countries China has invaded, period: We have them 80% surrounded at sea between Korea, Japan, Taiwan and the Phillipines. People are really upset that they still control former-imperial-possession HK and have a remaining outlet. And they're the imperialists?

Google 9 dash line

Google belt and road initiative

People are upset that China isn't honoring their agreement and are dismantling the democratic system and free speech HK is enjoying now, these are universal human rights. Rather than China learning from what made HK so prosperous, as they were for a while, the new leadership is heading back towards the old Maoism policies that lead to the massive starvation and famine and lost generation. Any foreigner living in China is treated terribly, can't do basic things, can't become a citizen, and is constantly checked in on or followed by police. They keep all their citizens in a social credit system, they send religious minorities to labor and reeducation camps, harvest organs from them, etc. Not surprising from a country that teaches about and speaks of Hitler in a positive light, you can't really criticize Hitler without criticizing one's own self and past policies. The US at least admits the things it has done that were anything close to that were wrong as they oppose our own values.

To say nothing of Taiwan, an independent country with its own government and system that China still claims is part of their domain, rather than simply accept reality. It has become imperialistically aggressive towards Taiwan and demands airlines and hotels, media, sporting events etc not show the Taiwanese flag, refer to it by its name, or do anything that indicates the reality that exists now, which is that Taiwan is its own separate country and an example of what would have happened if the democracy had taken root in China, where you'd still have free practice of religion and Chinese values, a strong economy, good health care system, free access to information, etc. If you want an example of Chinese imperialism, look no further than Taiwan, the only reason they haven't invaded Taiwan is because they know they can't without serious consequences.

The old wars were at least excused as staving off invading forces that were seeking eliminate democracy. South Korea is its own country now, they have democracy, look at the DPRK versus SK, we were literally fighting evil and SK is better off for it. Same for the other countries. We're pretty crappy at imperialism if that's the goal since none of those countries are part of any kind of empire and we barely have any influence over them. Thankfully Vietnam didn't end up like DPRK and adopted capitalism at least or a much less dictatorial version of communism.

At least in the US, you're allowed to read about the ills of imperialism and criticism of past and current government actions. In China, you can't even compare the leader to a cartoon character without serious consequences. If the government is doing something wrong, you as a citizen wouldn't know about it and wouldn't be allowed to speak publicly about it, much less organize a protest against it.

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#46
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High bids are not strong evidence of ulterior motives. They reflect the fact that many US companies prefer not to take on foreign investors, so those investors have to bid much higher to get the deal.

> They reflect the fact that many US companies prefer not to take on foreign investors There is no evidence for this being the cause of the price premium. There is substantial evidence that capital flight predicts which countries overpay for foreign assets. Russia and China are better explained by the capital flight hypothesis.

Economically it'd be both. Capital flight increases the supply of loanable funds available for foreign investments. Unwillingness to take on foreign investors decreases the demand for this. High supply + low demand = a poor price.

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#47

It's about time that the US start standing up to China's unrestricted warfare [1]. It's amazing that most Americans don't realize that China views the US as an adversary and has been quietly waging a war against the West. Why there are people who welcome the rise of Chinese/CCP hegemony when they are actively looking to crush [2] "Western values" is beyond me. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_Warfare [2…

What I don’t understand is how we got into this situation in the first place.

We know how powerful the US intelligence agencies are. The fact that the CIA has been able to install leaders in previously hostile governments shows their competence. Aside from Iran, most of their operations were successful. Even in their missteps, they were able to limit its influence in the region.

So how did it come to this? Why does it feel like the CIA dropped the ball on China?

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#48
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China's record for the last 40 years is lifting billions of people out of poverty while we stomped around bombing places and killing millions in the name of exporting our awesome values. Oh, and our infra is falling apart compared to theirs while we spend all our money on bombs. Let's make a compromise -- China can run their country and we can run ours. Is that so controversial?

Let's not forget that time just before your carefully chosen "40 years" where they starved 50 million people due to central planning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#Famine_deat...

Mao tried to have Deng killed, and Xi was sent to a re-education camp during that time. I’m not sure “they” is the correct term here.

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#49

It's about time that the US start standing up to China's unrestricted warfare [1]. It's amazing that most Americans don't realize that China views the US as an adversary and has been quietly waging a war against the West. Why there are people who welcome the rise of Chinese/CCP hegemony when they are actively looking to crush [2] "Western values" is beyond me. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_Warfare [2…

What I don’t understand is how we got into this situation in the first place. We know how powerful the US intelligence agencies are. The fact that the CIA has been able to install leaders in previously hostile governments shows their competence. Aside from Iran, most of their operations were successful. Even in their missteps, they were able to limit its influence in the region. So how did it come to this? Why does i…

> Why does it feel like the CIA dropped the ball on China?

Because the CIA, literally, dropped the ball on China. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/20/world/asia/china-cia-spie...

Re: U.S. Seeks to Heighten Scrutiny of Foreign Investment in Tech, Infra, Data

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They reflect the fact that many US companies prefer not to take on foreign investors There is no evidence for this being the cause of the price premium. There is substantial evidence that capital flight predicts which countries overpay for foreign assets. Russia and China are better explained by the capital flight hypothesis.

Economically it'd be both. Capital flight increases the supply of loanable funds available for foreign investments. Unwillingness to take on foreign investors decreases the demand for this. High supply + low demand = a poor price.

> Economically it'd be both

It could be both. We only have evidence for the supply hypothesis (i.e. capital flight). American companies requiring a higher price for foreign investors sounds plausible. But it's a guess for which we have zero evidence, particularly at a systemic level.

(Fixed demand and higher supply still lower prices.)

One test might be found in comparing pricing and flows for foreign investors around investment vectors companies have discretion around (e.g. private investment or M&A) to vectors with which they don't (e.g. public markets). You'd have to control with prices and flows from American investors in those markets, too, which makes it difficult.

Post reply on HN