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

American Disruption

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 210 posts

Re: American Disruption

#181

Post by dylan604 »

9rx wrote: post #168
dylan604 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Navarro (or is it that other guy who's name refuses to stick in my brain) that admits that the jobs they want to take out of China (screwing in many tiny screws) will not be jobs in the US but automated factories. So it's not a jobs program they are pushing. It's having manufacturing on local soil and less money going offshore. This is not something they mentioned during the campaign, but are saying it now. Duri…

What really stood out to me is that they say the factories will produce their own power on-site, with approvals for power plants happening "faster than we've ever had before", because the grid is "at risk of bombings". Which suggests to me that it not just about having manufacturing local for the sake of it being local or to stop money going offshore, but because it is preparing for war.

Then they are playing the long con in expecting to not have to vacate at the end of the term as there is no way that enough manufacturing returns to be local with the ability make enough of anything in the time span of this single term

Re: American Disruption

#182

Post by 9rx »

dylan604 wrote: post #181
9rx wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What really stood out to me is that they say the factories will produce their own power on-site, with approvals for power plants happening "faster than we've ever had before", because the grid is "at risk of bombings". Which suggests to me that it not just about having manufacturing local for the sake of it being local or to stop money going offshore, but because it is preparing for war.

Then they are playing the long con in expecting to not have to vacate at the end of the term as there is no way that enough manufacturing returns to be local with the ability make enough of anything in the time span of this single term

> expecting to not have to vacate at the end of the term

Perhaps that's exactly where the need is foreseen? Such a takeover would assuredly lead to a bout of violent conflict, that very well could lead to all out civil war if not managed well. You wouldn't need the kind of manufacturing required to take on the world, but you'd need a little bit to keep the people at bay. Americans with manufacturing facilities might not be so friendly after that kind of stunt, but if you can make new friends from abroad with facilities on US soil...

Re: American Disruption

#183

Post by jemmyw »

notahacker wrote: post #126
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It reminds me a lot of Brexit. Politicians in the south of the country were warning that the financial sector (predominantly in London) would loose 100,000 jobs and people in the north were saying "oh, that sounds pretty good". A few years later when that didn't happen to that extent I remember an interview with someone from a fishing port which lost a lot of business that previously went to Europe. They were complai…

Tbf the fishing ports were some of the most rational Brexit voters. They were aware that EU fisheries policy quotas seriously impaired their ability to catch fish and believed that leaving the EU meant leaving the quotas behind. Unfortunately for them, they happened to be completely wrong about this (arguably not unpredictably: the UK MMO was more zealous than most European countries about enforcing catch restriction…

The EU quotas didn't impair them from catching fish, it allowed them to catch fish. The problem for British fishermen being that the fish people like to eat in the UK are the ones that tend to hang out in other countries waters, and vice versa.

Feels like they were just taking out their rage on the decline of their industry, which is much more to do with British govt policy and business consolidation than the EU policy. The govt has shown time and again that they don't really care, speak words and take the opposite or no action. I can't say I have much sympathy, the fishing industry in most countries seems out to destroy itself with over-fishing and is highly resistant to regulation designed to save it from itself.

Re: American Disruption

#184

Post by jemmyw »

notahacker wrote: post #174
fragmede wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is it rational that they didn't do their homework to find out that the quota wasnt going to be removed once they'd left the EU?

I'm not sure it's entirely irrational to fail to predict what the government would eventually settle on, especially when said government was at least feigning interest in getting a better deal for fishermen... Particularly not compared with some of the other Brexit vote rationales

What the fishing industry in the UK wanted out of Brexit was pie in the sky though. It's not like the plan was to saw the British isles off the continent and set sail into the Atlantic, so they still had to deal with the fact of fishing in commercially contested waters.

It seemed like their plan was to be able to do more fishing of the kinds of fish that are available around coastal Britain that aren't popular in the UK and sell them to the Europeans. I say plan, I mean "barely thought out idea". Because the reality is that the ships that do that fishing already exist and already have agreements with the processing businesses, which are already in the EU. And fishing is such a tiny part of the UK economy in comparison to some other countries that access was just traded away.

Re: American Disruption

#185

Post by notahacker »

jemmyw wrote: post #183
notahacker wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbf the fishing ports were some of the most rational Brexit voters. They were aware that EU fisheries policy quotas seriously impaired their ability to catch fish and believed that leaving the EU meant leaving the quotas behind. Unfortunately for them, they happened to be completely wrong about this (arguably not unpredictably: the UK MMO was more zealous than most European countries about enforcing catch restriction…

The EU quotas didn't impair them from catching fish, it allowed them to catch fish. The problem for British fishermen being that the fish people like to eat in the UK are the ones that tend to hang out in other countries waters, and vice versa. Feels like they were just taking out their rage on the decline of their industry, which is much more to do with British govt policy and business consolidation than the EU poli…

> The EU quotas didn't impair them from catching fish, it allowed them to catch fish.

The quotas were a specific limit on how much they could catch, including in domestic waters. A specific gripe with the inshore fleet was that cod quotas were set so low they could in some cases barely avoid hitting their quota limits very quickly fishing off the UK coast. And cod of course, is something they could actually sell to Brits if they were allowed to catch more of it. Of course, the tradeoff was that larger, longer range vessels wanted to be able to fish in other waters, and fish markets wanted to at least be able to attempt to export what we don't eat, so an agreement with the EU was reached. Now it's not unpredictable this agreement didn't involve dismissing DG Mare's views on sustainable fishing levels or denying foreign vessels reciprocal access to British waters, but I wouldn't call the fishermen's hope for considerably fewer restrictions on what they could catch irrational, especially not compared with some of the other rationales...

Re: American Disruption

#186

Post by CharlieDigital »

9rx wrote: post #158
CharlieDigital wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It should be no surprise to anyone observing trump since he took office that the end goal was always to decouple from China Then why are we also slapping tariffs on Taiwan, Canada, Japan, Mexico, EU, RoW?

If we assume what is said is valid (a huge assumption, I know) and ignore the contradictions: They claim that China is able to pass into the US through Canada, Mexico, etc. and that the tariffs there are to put pressure on those governments to also put the squeeze on China in kind.

Then why did he just lift them on everyone except China?

Re: American Disruption

#187

Post by h2zizzle »

tim333 wrote: post #97
h2zizzle wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to figure out what you mean. Experts forecast Brexit would hurt the financial sector, Northerners said they were cool with that, the forecast was wrong, Northerners were upset. Nothing about that sounds illogical. Vindictive and short-sighted, sure. But everything follows reasonably. I say this as someone who's stomach sank when I'd heard that Brexit had passed and that there was a real chance that Donald…

A lot of voting, Brexit and other stuff, comes mostly to whether people are pissed off with the current situation or not. If pissed off they vote for a change as in Brexit, otherwise not. I'm not sure a lot of the reasoning gets much deeper than that. I remember asking Brexit voters who said they didn't want EU regulations to name one actual regulation that inconvenienced them and I don't think I got one answer.

That's fine, but "Brexit voters were generally irrational or misinformed" does not change the fact that this particular case features Brexiters who voted cynically for an outcome that they were assured would happen by the very people who were seeking to prevent Brexit, who were then justifiably upset when those predictions didn't come to pass. It's not a good example of the irrationality of Brexit. Maybe of the futility of attempted revenge.

Re: American Disruption

#188

Post by goatlover »

sharemywin wrote: post #83
goatlover wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China is evil and the worlds enemy And what is the US under the Trump administration? China didn't start a trade war, accuse every other country of ripping it off, hasn't talked of acquiring Greenland and making Canada it's 51st state, or discuss bombing cartels in Mexico.

let's not forget about arguing against due process, prison without trials, weird interpretations of ancient laws, mercurial application of the law. or the free speech threats. the AP, threaten licenses from news orgs, threaten law firms, sue news orgs.

And today he's signed an executive order to investigate Miles Taylor and Chris Krebs because he doesn't like what they've said about him as president. This is authoritarian playbook stuff.

Re: American Disruption

#189

Post by caycep »

mullingitover wrote: post #170
smath wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Q is anyone knows: would yield on the 10y going down actually help the US to refinance its existing debt (akin to a mortgage refinance), or simply issue new debt more cheaply?

I think it's both, more debt is added all the time and the existing debt gets refinanced as it rolls over. Just found an article about this whole strategy (and how it's not working) here[1]. [1] https://www.reuters.com/markets/rates-bonds/us-10-year-yield...

if all these shenanigans kill the whole driving point of bonds anyway (the full faith and credit of US Govt) - will it ever be as easy for the treasury to issue bonds again?

Re: American Disruption

#190

Post by jemmyw »

notahacker wrote: post #185
jemmyw wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU quotas didn't impair them from catching fish, it allowed them to catch fish. The problem for British fishermen being that the fish people like to eat in the UK are the ones that tend to hang out in other countries waters, and vice versa. Feels like they were just taking out their rage on the decline of their industry, which is much more to do with British govt policy and business consolidation than the EU poli…

> The EU quotas didn't impair them from catching fish, it allowed them to catch fish. The quotas were a specific limit on how much they could catch, including in domestic waters. A specific gripe with the inshore fleet was that cod quotas were set so low they could in some cases barely avoid hitting their quota limits very quickly fishing off the UK coast. And cod of course, is something they could actually sell to B…

Yes but there's always going to be a quota and at least with an EU one you can catch fish in EU waters not just your own, which is what I meant by it allowing them to catch fish.
Post reply on HN