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

221–230 of 252 posts

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#221

Post by sudosysgen »

proudeu wrote: post #179
rightbyte wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For real? You think the losing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan somehow gave valuable experience that in any way offsets the attrition on the armed forces?

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.

The US does not have any more experience in defeating near-peer militaries in a defensive position, as the last time it attempted (and failed) to do so was against China.

Iraq and Afghanistan may very well be more detrimental than useful. They made the US military focus on aspects of warfare that aren't relevant to a near peer conflict, and unlearning that is a difficult task that's currently consuming a lot of resources.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#222

Post by pphysch »

corethree wrote: post #158
jcrites wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What definition are you using of ally? Normally countries are considered allies when they have formal agreements (treaties) between each other to cooperate for mutual benefit. By this measure, the US and Mexico are definitely allies. Mexico is the USA's second largest trading partner worldwide. Exports of goods and services to Mexico support an estimated 1.1 million jobs (Department of Commerce). Mexico is also the s…

Those two countries aren't on the verge of taking away the economic and technological dominance away from the US. Therefore psychologically and in terms of US foreign policy, those countries are more allied to the US then China. It's not black and white. It lives on a gradient.

You are either in an alliance, or you are not. You are either an ally, or you are not. It is a binary classification.

The entire point of formal alliances is that they are sworn, binding guarantees that can be relied on, not wishy-washy resolutions.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#223

Post by proudeu »

whats_a_quasar wrote: post #94
woooooo wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait till you hear about Saudi Arabia.

What does Saudi Arabia have to do with the fact that the Russian and Chinese governments decided to become unfriendly by threatening their neighbors?

Because Saudi Arabia is actively commiting brutal genocide on Yemeni people and US governemnt is actually supporting and taking part in that due to SA being US ally.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#224

Post by hakfoo »

Lio wrote: post #217
hakfoo wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A problem is that democracy is hard to build and maintain. Even countries that are showcases for it have a hard time with keeping it stable in some situations. It requires either a lot of good faith by participants (most participants actually striving for the public good, and voters being able to disagree with an opponent, but still respectfully accept defeat) or systemic guardrails to effectively enforce good-faith…

I’m afraid I don’t respect that at all. The “state” does not know best. The reason that dictators withhold the vote is the same reason they refuse to allow a free press. They are scared of criticism. If they really knew what was best for everyone it would be obvious and people would vote for them. …but it ain’t obvious, so the hang on to power by repressing anyone that points that up is up and down is down. 4211

> If they really knew what was best for everyone it would be obvious and people would vote for them.

I'm not sure most-- or even any-- people really know what's best for everyone. It gets even more complex when it turns into what's best for one group versus another, or what's best for today comes at a cost to be paid in 5-10-20 years.

It's easy to catapult yourself into office by promising people ice cream instead of broccoli. The leader you want has to be persuasive enough to convince voters they want broccoli. An autocrat can just mandate broccoli.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#225

Post by corethree »

pphysch wrote: post #222
corethree wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those two countries aren't on the verge of taking away the economic and technological dominance away from the US. Therefore psychologically and in terms of US foreign policy, those countries are more allied to the US then China. It's not black and white. It lives on a gradient.

You are either in an alliance, or you are not. You are either an ally, or you are not. It is a binary classification. The entire point of formal alliances is that they are sworn, binding guarantees that can be relied on, not wishy-washy resolutions.

Your just using the word alliance to define your reality.

Think about it. It's the other way around. Reality is not defined by the word alliance, clearly there exists a gradient of countries who are more friendly than others.

Stick with the intention of the word by the person using it not the absolutist pedantic definition.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#226

Post by pphysch »

corethree wrote: post #225
pphysch wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are either in an alliance, or you are not. You are either an ally, or you are not. It is a binary classification. The entire point of formal alliances is that they are sworn, binding guarantees that can be relied on, not wishy-washy resolutions.

Your just using the word alliance to define your reality. Think about it. It's the other way around. Reality is not defined by the word alliance, clearly there exists a gradient of countries who are more friendly than others. Stick with the intention of the word by the person using it not the absolutist pedantic definition.

Hate to break it to you, but modern IR is based in the legal tradition and as such ascribes precise meaning to words. It is pedantic by necessity.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#227

Post by Lio »

hakfoo wrote: post #224
Lio wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m afraid I don’t respect that at all. The “state” does not know best. The reason that dictators withhold the vote is the same reason they refuse to allow a free press. They are scared of criticism. If they really knew what was best for everyone it would be obvious and people would vote for them. …but it ain’t obvious, so the hang on to power by repressing anyone that points that up is up and down is down. 4211

> If they really knew what was best for everyone it would be obvious and people would vote for them. I'm not sure most-- or even any-- people really know what's best for everyone . It gets even more complex when it turns into what's best for one group versus another, or what's best for today comes at a cost to be paid in 5-10-20 years. It's easy to catapult yourself into office by promising people ice cream instead o…

What makes you think the despot will tell you to eat broccoli?

What if he just built a vanity project trans-fat factory and doesn’t want to loose face, so insists everyone must eat cheap trans-fats?

What if the autocrat decides to block access to a free-press and to jail anyone that dares to say ice cream makes you fat?

We can play what if scenarios all day but end result is always the same.

In an dictatorship you can’t remove a bad actor from power or even laugh at them.

In a democracy you can.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#228

Post by AtlasBarfed »

sudosysgen wrote: post #55
jszymborski wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The product is shipped overland from a Chinese factory to Vietnam or Korea, then some screws are tightened, some paint is slapped on, or a label is applied, and the product is re-exported. The whole point of this article is to rebute the point you've made. From the article: > The Economist’s basic argument is that because many of the goods exported to the U.S. from countries like Vietnam contain a lot of parts and…

Total 2023 Chinese exports are projected to be fairly close to what they were in 2021, which is not that bad given macroeconomic trends across the world. The risk for companies to build supply chains that completely avoid China is that they will be outcompeted by competitors who won't and who will make use of these loopholes.

Xi Jinping has already enacted likely unpopular economic policies that were failing without the US starting its economic cold war. He's already enacted purges and other violent measures to centralize power as I understand it.

What degree of economic damage would fundamentally destabilize China politically such that Xi is deposed?

If stupid me is thinking about such vulnerabilities/risks, would foreign businessmen bet on Chinese factories, or move them to the newer/cheaper labor markets I've been hearing about for the last 10 years like Vietnam and Malaysia?

And Jinping is 70, do you think he's lasting to 80? When he croaks, due to his elimination of what semblance of political power handover / elections that used to exist in China, it will be a bloodbath.

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#229

Post by jacooper »

oa335 wrote: post #134
edgyquant wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t true, they always preferred them. They did a number of misguided things in the name of containing communism but all of that was 1. over fifty years ago or more at this point 2. Unpopular with the public so it doesn’t seem like a good faith stance to pretend that’s current Us doctrine. It’s an ignorant whataboutism used by defenders of brutal regimes.

Is it possible that the US continues to interfere in foreign elections but we don’t know about it because we are subject to propaganda? 50 years ago, do you think the US populace was aware of their governments complicity in overthrowing democratically elected governments? Or did they only come to light 20-30 years later?

They are still doing it. They are still overthrowing governments they don't like.

https://theintercept.com/2020/07/23/the-u-s-supported-coup-i...

Re: The global trading system is starting to rearrange itself

#230

Post by corethree »

pphysch wrote: post #226
corethree wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your just using the word alliance to define your reality. Think about it. It's the other way around. Reality is not defined by the word alliance, clearly there exists a gradient of countries who are more friendly than others. Stick with the intention of the word by the person using it not the absolutist pedantic definition.

Hate to break it to you, but modern IR is based in the legal tradition and as such ascribes precise meaning to words. It is pedantic by necessity.

This isn't a legal court. There is no necessity in the context of this thread.
Post reply on HN