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

The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

noahpinion.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 252 posts

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#181

Post by CapstanRoller »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #148
goodbyesf wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This was the thinking in the 1980s when the US invited China into their global trade network. The US didn't invite china to anything. The US begged, threatened and cajoled china to open their immense and cheap labor force. China had what the US wanted. It was nixon that went to china, not mao that came to the US. > The thinking was they would move away from communism and Russia and towards an open Democracy. That's…

No, I don’t think China was right to crush democracy. It doesn’t flow that their economic success was tied exclusively to authoritarianism. One might argue they would have a stronger domestic consumer economy if they hadn’t.

>authoritarianism

This term is functionally meaningless. Authority is not a coherent ideology (an -ism), it's just the natural outcome of the state maintaining a monopoly on violence.

The real question is: whose authority, and for whom?

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#182

Post by CapstanRoller »

nonethewiser wrote: post #111
davoneus wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd blame the prevailing economic mantra that "profits are the only things that matter" more than any set of UD presidents.

Its both though.

It's both in the sense that politicians are executives whose job it is to meet the demands of Capital. This also means that politicians are beholden to Capital and their personal ideological inclinations are largely irrelevant — the only options are to serve Capital or be ejected from their position.

The individual executives serving Capital are interchangeable.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#183

Post by CapstanRoller »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #141
woooooo wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Puerto Rico is a terrible example. Cuba is a much better one, it's not even hypothetical.

> Cuba is a much better one, it's not even hypothetical America doesn't claim Cuba as its territory. If China requested parity with Taiwan in respect of America's relations with Cuba (recognition of sovereignty, trade restrictions and no American military presence there), it would be a good deal for everyone.

>America doesn't claim Cuba as its territory.

Where do you think the Guantanamo Bay torture facility is located?

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#184

Post by A_D_E_P_T »

poopypoopington wrote: post #176
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is all about dependency trees. The US decides to divert imports from China to other countries, which in turn may import from China. This is already happening with more than ~80% of products that are "Made in Vietnam" and at least ~40% of products that are "Made in Korea." Not only do the raw materials come from China, but most of the work is done in China. The product is shipped overland from a Chinese factory t…

Honestly did you even read the article? "Yes, there are cases of Southeast Asian nations slapping their labels on Chinese goods and then sending them to America to allow Chinese manufacturers to get around tariffs. But look at the graph of U.S. import shares above, and you’ll see that if 7% of imports from Asia ex-China are due to re-exporting, that would only shave 1.7 percentage points off of Asia ex-China’s share…

The article does nothing to refute the case, because Noah Smith has engaged in a little bit of sleight of hand in that section you quoted.

The 7% number is from 2018 data (!) -- yet Noah is talking about "since 2019." And, looking at the graph again, the major shift occurs in 2019.

So Noah's "7%" (again, from 2018, largely before the "decoupling") is totally irrelevant, and he handwaves away the possibility that China has since done an increasing amount of exporting to SE Asia for re-export to the USA.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#185

Post by _kbh_ »

CapstanRoller wrote: post #180
proudeu wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean US is aggressor state, so has experience in invading other countries. If they wanted to invade China they would have some experience in doing so. I just hope EU leaders won’t follow them this time.

USAmerica now only has experience fighting against much weaker opponents. Almost everyone who remembers WW2 is dead. When confronted with slightly more competent weak opponents (e.g. Taliban), the US military performs far more poorly. This poor performance worsens sharply as enemy competence scales. Full-scale war with near-peer or peer adversaries? USA is SOL. But aside from the loud-mouthed war hawks or perma-doome…

> When confronted with slightly more competent weak opponents (e.g. Taliban), the US military performs far more poorly. This poor performance worsens sharply as enemy competence scales.

Russia and America have fought albeit slightly indirectly.

US soldiers engaged Wagner in Syria in the Battle of Khasham.

Rough outcome of this battle.

US / SDF side - 1 wounded

Wagner / Syrian government side - 50 - 100 dead. upto 200 wounded.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#186

Post by tuatoru »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #15
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is all about dependency trees. The US decides to divert imports from China to other countries, which in turn may import from China. This is already happening with more than ~80% of products that are "Made in Vietnam" and at least ~40% of products that are "Made in Korea." Not only do the raw materials come from China, but most of the work is done in China. The product is shipped overland from a Chinese factory t…

> When all's said and done, Chinese factories haven't slowed down and Chinese GDP is still rising (by more than American GDP) which tells you that the "decoupling" has to be in some respect illusory. Can we really know that anymore? China has stopped publishing a majority of economic indicators.

Satellite photos of night-time lighting and shipping movements are probably reliable.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#187

Post by reducesuffering »

emptysongglass wrote: post #171

For an exercise in how wrong we can be, here's Steve Yegge two years ago telling us to prepare to speak Mandarin because China is going to reign supreme and there's nothing we can do to stop it. Steve deleted the article but the internet remembers. https://archive.vn/bC1Ns

I went in fully wanting you to be right, but Yegge has 90% good points there, and idk why he removed it. It’s possible there was a bit too much “running of his mouth” like talking about the CEO annual meetup at BillG house.

China does have serious issues with its real estate economy and fertility. But the US also got through the grave issues of 2008, and China still has 1.4b people who take rigorous education a lot more seriously than many in America. And they will have far more people than us in the foreseeable future too.

Do not count China out, they are a “hurricane,” are dangerously aimed at Taiwan, but with better understanding we can hopefully all defuse the situation amicably.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#188

Post by rightbyte »

_kbh_ wrote: post #185
CapstanRoller wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USAmerica now only has experience fighting against much weaker opponents. Almost everyone who remembers WW2 is dead. When confronted with slightly more competent weak opponents (e.g. Taliban), the US military performs far more poorly. This poor performance worsens sharply as enemy competence scales. Full-scale war with near-peer or peer adversaries? USA is SOL. But aside from the loud-mouthed war hawks or perma-doome…

> When confronted with slightly more competent weak opponents (e.g. Taliban), the US military performs far more poorly. This poor performance worsens sharply as enemy competence scales. Russia and America have fought albeit slightly indirectly. US soldiers engaged Wagner in Syria in the Battle of Khasham. Rough outcome of this battle. US / SDF side - 1 wounded Wagner / Syrian government side - 50 - 100 dead. upto 200…

What is your point? That soldiers die if you shell them?

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#189

Post by orbital-decay »

diego_moita wrote: post #26

Funny how things change. In the 90s the U.S., EU and Japan were the champions of free trade for industrial products and services. However, when it would come to agricultural goods they were the champions of tariffs and protectionism. Why? Easy: because 3rd world countries were very competitive on agriculture. Egypt had better cotton, Argentina had beef, Brazil had orange juice, Cuba had sugar, etc, etc. 3rd world cou…

Good thing you mentioned Japan. It was a huge competitor to the US in 80s and 90s in industrial products, yet nobody considered restricting the trade with it.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#190

Post by humanlity »

pphysch wrote: post #146
whats_a_quasar wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not protectionism. Most of that manufacturing is not moving back to the U.S., it's moving to U.S. allies like Vietnam or Mexico, that would also be called third world countries. It really is what it says on the tin. It's a risk for the U.S. to be economically dependent on a state whose government does not share American values, and that is threatening its neighbors with invasion.

Vietnam and Mexico are not "US allies"

define: obey order like Japan
Post reply on HN