Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 497 posts

Re: China

#61

Post by Ill_ban_myself »

deweller wrote: post #55

I applaud standing up to China's human rights violations. But this post grossly underestimates the short term economic effects that cutting trade ties with China would have. Companies would go bankrupt. It is quite likely that the US and possibly the world would enter a recession or depression. These events will have devastating effects on people around the world far beyond the 1%. We are part of a world economy. We…

In 10 or 15 years the the better way to effect change will be armed conflict in addition to economic recession. In another 30 years there will be no way to effect change. The time to act is now.

Re: China

#62

Post by Lammy »

swlkr wrote: post #35
mc32 wrote: post #2

>”It’s economically productive for the 1% to maintain a trade relationship with China. The financial incentives don’t help any Americans, and in fact, most of us are hurt by this relationship...” So true, since its inception with GHW, its execution and realization through Clinton and then once fully engaged the timid, supplicant responses from GW and BO, China has contributed to the stagnation of the blue collar work…

I know this wasn't intended but I thought it was interesting that he doesn't think of the 1% as Americans.

The 1% are above any state. They will align with any state that gives them favorable tax loopholes. If America clamps down they will just leave. Look at Eduardo Saverin for example.

Re: China

#63

Post by fastball »

Miner49er wrote: post #46
honest_tovarich wrote: post #24

I lived in China for 5 years, most of the time in Xinjiang, and is sad how the media manipulates people in the west, you clearly have never been in XinJiang or in China at all. You can believe whatever you want and I'm sure most readers here will support you, because like you , they have been deceived. What is happening in Hong Kong is sad, I agree with you there, and something should be done by the US and their alli…

It is whataboutism, but the U.S. is guilty of a lot of similar things that China is, not as bad in most cases, but I think it's fair to compare the Uyghurs to Guantanamo, the way we're treating immigrants at the border, or how discriminatory our justice system is towards black people. We have a higher percentage of people in jail then China by a lot (5x). Many of them are in jail for political/racial reasons (the Dru…

The Drug War is hardly political, and hardline immigration policies are not "racial".

Re: China

#64

Post by rapsey »

christophilus wrote: post #4
mc32 wrote: post #2

>”It’s economically productive for the 1% to maintain a trade relationship with China. The financial incentives don’t help any Americans, and in fact, most of us are hurt by this relationship...” So true, since its inception with GHW, its execution and realization through Clinton and then once fully engaged the timid, supplicant responses from GW and BO, China has contributed to the stagnation of the blue collar work…

This upcoming presidential election is definitely more interesting due to this issue. My brother is a staunch Democrat, but he's made it clear that he's not voting for them if they put someone up who's soft on China. I suspect he'd be voting 3rd party in that scenario.

I don’t think it will be all that interesting. Trump has it in the bag.

Re: China

#65

Post by bigpumpkin »

The key logical fallacy is that by cutting trade with China, the various grievances you list will somehow improve. For example, if we don't trade with China, do you think the recently passed Hong Kong Freedom And Democracy act will have any leverage with the Chinese? They will turn Hong Kong into another city in Guangdong the next day.

Re: China

#66

Post by spamizbad »

gbear605 wrote: post #6
mc32 wrote: post #2

>”It’s economically productive for the 1% to maintain a trade relationship with China. The financial incentives don’t help any Americans, and in fact, most of us are hurt by this relationship...” So true, since its inception with GHW, its execution and realization through Clinton and then once fully engaged the timid, supplicant responses from GW and BO, China has contributed to the stagnation of the blue collar work…

It’s one of the only issues I agree on with the current president. Unfortunately he doesn’t seem willing to actually be effective, and he doesn’t seem to care about the actual human rights issues. I’m hopeful that he might be willing to get things done though.

I’m genuinely shocked Trump hasn’t capitalized more on the HK situation. It would have been perfect for him to, at the very least, get some major concessions from China. Instead, we’ve been ones suffering.

Re: China

#67

Post by Vysero »

remarkEon wrote: post #50
Barrin92 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

most of the job losses of blue-collar work are the result of automation, not foreign trade (this is a statement for which ample evidence exists[1]), furthermore on the aggregate Americans do benefit from trade with not just China but also other low-cost nations, which again is economics 101. If the United States were to produce goods at the level of domestic wages a small segment of the workforce would benefit, but c…

>increase in price I, and I’m sure many many others, would be willing to pay a little more if I know that money is staying here and supporting families in this country. I can do without more plastic crap from China, and I consider it strategically important that high tech manufacturing comes back to the US. For defense reasons, among others. I’m sure someone will link the Wikipedia page with some neat plots from “eco…

Here Here

Re: China

#68

Post by hdkrgr »

johndevor wrote: post #10
sneilan1 wrote: post #3

The conversation about China has shifted from being relatively peaceful during the Obama years to war like today. The author of this article doesn’t understand how the presidential bully pulpit slowly changes the national conversation to war. Not to say that China isn’t violating human rights. They are. But we, the Americans, are the ones who started this fight by goading them on. Also: the crux of the argument in th…

> The conversation about China has shifted from being relatively peaceful during the Obama years to war like today. Just because the fight is now verbalized and on the forefront of the public's mind doesn't mean it wasn't already occurring, just not acknowledged. And I don't see the threat of war as being a serious one, given the nuclear deterrents of both sides.

Absolutely agree. Also, as a European, I can tell you that this perceived escalation is not an American phenomenon based on Donald's rhethoric. It's based in increasing perception of Chinese misdeeds in the West and around the world. And it's real in actual escalation of what China is doing.

In 2015, during the umbrella movement, there was discontent in Hong Kong over the taken-away promise of near-future free elections in 2017. In 2019 Hongkongers have their rights taken away NOW and are affected NOW. In 2019 we have a fairly accurate picture of what's going on in Xinjiang. The list could go on...

Re: China

#69

Post by moderngrandma »

Thank you for the article. I’ve personally stopped buying Chinese made/owned products due to the HK protests, but it has been extremely difficult to convince friends and families to do the same because I couldn’t properly explain to them why this was such a big issue. Thank you for spending the time to write up this article, and thank you for taking a stand.
Post reply on HN