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

When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

atlasobscura.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 110 posts

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#101

Post by imtringued »

a9h74j wrote: post #60
systemvoltage wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is wrong, misguided and naive. International trade when done with effective reciprocity and managing the trade deficit, can lead to competition on a larger scale, better outcome for consumers and specialization in particular aspect of manufacturing or services. Even domestically, specialization is how human species became to me. If humans continued to be inwards looking and never engaged in barter-trade or any k…

> aliens on another planet Related thought experiment: What if the aliens were 1000 years ahead in patenting everything (in a way which didn't expire), then forced their IP regime on Earth, extracting IP rent for everything, since it would _only_ make sense to trade with them?

This is such an amazingly good question because it directly relates to real life. Of course you would trade with them to get 1000 years ahead and then once you are at the same level as them you would betray them and completely ignore their "stupid" IP laws. This is basically what China has been doing for decades now.

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#102

Post by imtringued »

ardit33 wrote: post #46
Mekantis wrote: post #2

People like to pretend that protectionism is such a bad thing. But Western nations built themselves through protectionism, it's something China has been doing to great success and the Asian tiger economies (primarily South Korea) did as well. After all, there's only so much you can do for your population if you never ensure a steady supply of high quality jobs that provide a path into the middle class, and you don't…

If that is true, then Argentina (and many other Latin countries that adopted protectionism policies) would be flourishing. Argentina should be as rich as Canada, but they are 1/5th of their level. Protectionism might workout/help out for a limited time to jump start nascent local industries, but in the long term is damaging to an economy.

Protectionism isn't about jump starting local industries. It's about converting foreign owned local industries into domestically owned local industries. You can only afford to do it once you no longer need foreign investors.

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#103

Post by Mekantis »

systemvoltage wrote: post #8
Mekantis wrote: post #2

People like to pretend that protectionism is such a bad thing. But Western nations built themselves through protectionism, it's something China has been doing to great success and the Asian tiger economies (primarily South Korea) did as well. After all, there's only so much you can do for your population if you never ensure a steady supply of high quality jobs that provide a path into the middle class, and you don't…

This is wrong, misguided and naive. International trade when done with effective reciprocity and managing the trade deficit, can lead to competition on a larger scale, better outcome for consumers and specialization in particular aspect of manufacturing or services. Even domestically, specialization is how human species became to me. If humans continued to be inwards looking and never engaged in barter-trade or any k…

> This is wrong, misguided and naive.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't jump straight to insults.

> International trade when done with effective reciprocity and managing the trade deficit, can lead to competition on a larger scale, better outcome for consumers and specialization in particular aspect of manufacturing or services.

I didn't say international trade should be stopped entirely. "Free trade" isn't "all trade". I'd appreciate it if you didn't strawman me. A part of the myth is the idea that free trade means perfect competition. No, it means a massive existing company can easily buy up local competitors and ensure that competition ceases entirely.

> Even domestically, specialization is how human species became to me. If humans continued to be inwards looking and never engaged in barter-trade or any kind of bilateral exchange either with monetary instrument or goods/services; we would still be caves.

This ignores the many cases where countries have protected local industries despite these industries existing elsewhere producing far better products and being far more competitive, and been wildly successful because of it. And again, I never said "no trade ever at all allowed because all trade is bad".

> National to international trade is just one more step in the expansion of trade that we all benefit from. We have proof that it works when all parties are rational and cooperative. If we found aliens on another planet, it would only make sense to trade with them (just increasing the abstraction layer from national to international to interplanetary).

I never said otherwise. Trade is fine. Foreign companies crowding out local industries to the point that local jobs are primarily low quality and low paying is not (see the number of countries that are relegated to production of fabrics and other low-cost goods).

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#104

Post by ethbro »

dragonwriter wrote: post #76
missedthecue wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People like to pretend that protectionism is such a bad thing" David Ricardo mathematically proved it was a bad thing over 200 years ago. It absolutely befuddles me that people, especially in scientific communities, continue to support its implementation. Hong Kong has always been free trade and their GNP per capita is now greater than all of western europe, barring Norway (which is equal to HK). Protectionism makes…

> David Ricardo mathematically proved it was a bad thing over 200 years ago. Ricardo’s proof applies to comically simplified conditions which fail to consider a number of factors that exist in real world trade and resulting shifts of specific industries between countries including: (1) potential impacts of current activity on future production possibilities, and (2) strategic impacts of different production patterns…

Politicians have always befuddled economists.

Economists have always befuddled politicians.

Unfortunately, the collision of the two typically leads to the worst of all outcomes without the benefit of any. E.g. Implementing protectionist policies without a low term plan for their withdrawal.

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#105

Post by ejanus »

vl wrote: post #38
Mekantis wrote: post #2

People like to pretend that protectionism is such a bad thing. But Western nations built themselves through protectionism, it's something China has been doing to great success and the Asian tiger economies (primarily South Korea) did as well. After all, there's only so much you can do for your population if you never ensure a steady supply of high quality jobs that provide a path into the middle class, and you don't…

Free trade advances human race as a whole and raises average standard of living. But it’s important to understand what is at the end of this advance: irrelevance of labor. Not only hyper-optimization produces fragile systems (i.e. look at the mask and sanitizer shortages at the most wealthy nation on Earth), it also eventually will make most of the labor uncompetitive. You can only consume so much on credit, I’m not…

I don't think this is correct. It favors those with capital and technology. The strong over the weak. And it increases the barrier to enter. Look at Africa(my continent) as an example of where free market leads to collapse of economy.

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#106

Post by missedthecue »

fiblye wrote: post #90
missedthecue wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People like to pretend that protectionism is such a bad thing" David Ricardo mathematically proved it was a bad thing over 200 years ago. It absolutely befuddles me that people, especially in scientific communities, continue to support its implementation. Hong Kong has always been free trade and their GNP per capita is now greater than all of western europe, barring Norway (which is equal to HK). Protectionism makes…

Because it's a small city with zero resources that acts as a gateway to the Chinese economy as a whole. If China didn't use HK as its economic entry, HK would be absolutely worthless with Singapore relatively nearby and in a much better geographical position. Larger, independent countries with resources that open themselves to the extent of city states end up selling their resources to the lowest bidder (after the pr…

"If economics were so easy that the optimal way was mathematically proven 200 years ago, I think economic difficulties would be resolved by now."

I think you underestimate the market failures of the political system. Politicians are not interested in doing what's best for society, but what gets them votes and donations to help reelection. Sometimes the two align. Other times they do not. Like it or not, that is how the incentives are set up. This is why rent control for example keeps getting passed time and time again despite economists unanimously agreeing that it does not work.

http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/rent-control/

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#107

Post by ginko »

nkurz wrote: post #31
saagarjha wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A water scarce country like India should really not promote high consumption of soda and sugar based drinks. I mean, I can see not promoting sugary drinks in general…but what does this have to do with water scarcity?

I'm dubious about the numbers as well, but this article tries to do a full calculation of water usage for a .5L bottle of Coca Cola produced in the Netherlands: https://www.waterfootprint.org/media/downloads/CocaCola-TNC-... It concludes that each .5L bottle requires 35L of water as input. The majority of this is from the water required to grow sugar beets, which comes primarily from natural rainfall. Obviously, Indi…

Considering India is producing 20% of the world sugarcane I think sourcing a sweetener shouldn't be a problem.

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#108

Post by perl4ever »

rurban wrote: post #96
perl4ever wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A water scarce country like India What makes you say that?

The fact that India has a water crisis, caused by a political/corruption crisis. https://thewaterproject.org/water-crisis/water-in-crisis-ind...

The phrase "water scarce" still seems odd to me. Would you say the US is water scarce? Your link describes aspects of the "water crisis" that include contaminated water, and lack of collection of the water that is available.

To me, saying that it is a "political/corruption crisis" is equivalent to saying that water isn't really scarce.

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#109

Post by nnain »

newyankee wrote: post #7

When India liberalized in 1991 and welcomed foreign investment again rick Coke simply bought out a lot of local competitors. Even today my favorite local soda 'thums up' is marketed as a separate drink by Coke in India. A water scarce country like India should really not promote high consumption of soda and sugar based drinks. However the same cannot be said about other industries. Pre liberalization India used to be…

What's your definition of Water scarce? 38 years, Barring the dessert region, which part are you talking about?

Re: When India kicked out Coca-Cola, local sodas thrived (2019)

#110

Post by nkurz »

ginko wrote: post #107
nkurz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm dubious about the numbers as well, but this article tries to do a full calculation of water usage for a .5L bottle of Coca Cola produced in the Netherlands: https://www.waterfootprint.org/media/downloads/CocaCola-TNC-... It concludes that each .5L bottle requires 35L of water as input. The majority of this is from the water required to grow sugar beets, which comes primarily from natural rainfall. Obviously, Indi…

Considering India is producing 20% of the world sugarcane I think sourcing a sweetener shouldn't be a problem.

True, but how is this relevant to how the amount of water used in producing the product affects water scarcity? Are you saying that because they "source" the sweetener it shouldn't be counted as an impact of the production?
Post reply on HN