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

White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 390 posts

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#221

Post by ravitation »

AngryData wrote: post #191
YesThatTom2 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NO!! Don't you understand?? Yes, we'll suffer for 50 years, BUT in that time the supply chain will be created in the U.S. and our grandkids and their children will be able to benefit from having all that industry in the U.S. instead of China. And if I'm wrong, I won't be alive to be able to say I'm sorry to my grandkids who are now living in a barren wasteland. The best solutions are the ones you won't be around to s…

I agree with the principle of bringing local jobs back, bolster our own industries to be more self-sufficient, however I think it is being done in the most disruptive and unstabalizing way possible. We should be going for a firm but gentle push, instead of swinging a sledgehammer around our heads and hoping we don't break the wrong skulls.

Just wondering, but what does a "firm but gentle push" look like that brings "back" local jobs? "Bringing back local jobs" is the entirely wrong way to solve the issues facing those that are losing jobs in declining domestic industries. It's just the easiest for a (probably) blue-collar worker to engage with and the easiest for a politician to sell, even if it's pure fantasy.

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#222

Post by chrisjc »

anon23423532 wrote: post #77
tehbeard wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP never said China was a victim, just that a tariff screws over US companies, not China.

If manufacturing moves elsewhere and a few million already disgruntled Chinese are out of jobs, Chinese government has big problems. Their impotent threat towards the US ag industry is also laughable when we produce 40-50% of the worlds soybeans and corn. Increasing food prices for the millions of unemployed workers is surely a winning strategy Cheap labor is plentiful, there's only one US consumer market. China has…

I agree with you, although the thought of millions of nationalized, disgruntled, unemployed citizens within a highly industrialized country is rather terrifying in general, not just for the Chinese government.

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#223

Post by omegaworks »

siddarthd2919 wrote: post #211
omegaworks wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>our grandkids and their children will be able to benefit from having all that industry in the U.S. instead of China. When those products were made here, it led to toxic chemical plumes and widespread soil contamination around the factories that produced semiconductors. [1] >I'm sorry to my grandkids who are now living in a barren wasteland. Trichloroethylene contamination produces heart defects, kidney and liver can…

So... your okay with Chinese kids with heart defects, kidney and liver cancer. The USA has more enforcement over these kind of things. If toxic pollution is your only concern, yes it is better to have those industries in USA.

>So... your okay with Chinese kids with heart defects, kidney and liver cancer.

Show me where I said that. Of course not. You seem to be ok with every country that hopes to participate in the technological economy having their own contaminated region.

Step back for a second. Think of the earth like a single-unit closed system. Would we rather have 195 regions contaminated with TCE or one/two?

Your petty nationalism would force those kids to stay in their country AND have them deal with the toxic waste of their protectionist government-subsidized industry because they'll have no other choice but to.

You're also making the argument that somehow we'd have the political will to both institute tariffs that protect the industry AND police those industries when they harm our environment. Guess what buddy, those are contradictory ideals. The USA isn't some magical place where we can defy these incentives.

Your assertion that we'd be better at managing waste here is especially fantastical considering the present EPA chairman. Scott Pruitt has undermined the protection of our environment at every opportunity. [1]

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/health/epa-toxic-chemical...

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#224

Post by ravitation »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #130
atomi wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But isn't the reason these products are made in China because it's inherently both more efficient and cost-effective? You're saying we should make products in a less efficient and more expensive way to avoid relying on other countries? And by the way isn't the bulk of our imports raw materials anyway?

>You're saying we should make products in a less efficient and more expensive way to avoid relying on other countries? In this case yes. This is competition between nation-states we're talking about, viewing the entire relationship through the narrow lens of economic efficiency is missing the forest for one specific tree.

And viewing "this" through the extremely more narrow 19th century lens of competition between nation states completely ignores the entirety of 20th century economic and geopolitical thinking.

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#225

Post by chrisjc »

noonespecial wrote: post #112

Sure does smack of tossing ol' Briar Rabbit into the briar patch. "Punishing" them by making their finished goods a ton more competitive by kneecapping our own industry? Wha?! Forget Russia, should we maybe be looking into what China may have done to get this guy elected?

> Forget Russia, should we maybe be looking into what China may have done to get this guy elected?

You don't think they could be related?

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#226

Post by unethical_ban »

killjoywashere wrote: post #199
ljw1001 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strategy he’s following is to throw bones to his base and make the people of the country pick up the tab. If you’re applying an economic lens here, you’re solving the wrong problem.

This. If anyone doesn't understand why ljw1001's comment is the correct interpretation, I highly recommend Beuno do Mesquita and Smith's "The Dictator's Handbook". https://smile.amazon.com/Dictators-Handbook-Behavior-Almost-...

Is the cover for "The Innovators" a rip-off of this cover on purpose, or by coincidence?

https://www.amazon.com/Innovators-Geniuses-Revolution-Isaacs...

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#227

Post by canjobear »

For the anti-protectionists: Can you direct me to extensive empirical evidence that protectionist policies are harmful in the medium to long term?

I often hear that Asian countries have followed protectionist policies for decades, and they seem to be doing well. Norway is also highly protectionist at least with regard to agriculture and as far as I know they have achieved their desired results. When does it work and when does it not work?

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#228

Post by 794CD01 »

AngryData wrote: post #191
YesThatTom2 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NO!! Don't you understand?? Yes, we'll suffer for 50 years, BUT in that time the supply chain will be created in the U.S. and our grandkids and their children will be able to benefit from having all that industry in the U.S. instead of China. And if I'm wrong, I won't be alive to be able to say I'm sorry to my grandkids who are now living in a barren wasteland. The best solutions are the ones you won't be around to s…

I agree with the principle of bringing local jobs back, bolster our own industries to be more self-sufficient, however I think it is being done in the most disruptive and unstabalizing way possible. We should be going for a firm but gentle push, instead of swinging a sledgehammer around our heads and hoping we don't break the wrong skulls.

Ideally yes, but when you are a retard with a sledgehammer, your options are limited.

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#229

Post by abiox »

ravitation wrote: post #221
AngryData wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the principle of bringing local jobs back, bolster our own industries to be more self-sufficient, however I think it is being done in the most disruptive and unstabalizing way possible. We should be going for a firm but gentle push, instead of swinging a sledgehammer around our heads and hoping we don't break the wrong skulls.

Just wondering, but what does a "firm but gentle push" look like that brings "back" local jobs? "Bringing back local jobs" is the entirely wrong way to solve the issues facing those that are losing jobs in declining domestic industries. It's just the easiest for a (probably) blue-collar worker to engage with and the easiest for a politician to sell, even if it's pure fantasy.

> "Bringing back local jobs" is the entirely wrong way

if so, what is the right way?

Re: White House announces 25 percent tariff on Chinese tech goods

#230

Post by defertoreptar »

mtw wrote: post #173
anon23423532 wrote: post #48

It's punishment for stealing hundreds of billions of dollars of IP, illegally subsidizing businesses to steal market share, and general national security by not outsourcing knowledge and infrastructure critical to national security to save a few bucks. It's easy to let someone push you back inch by inch instead of fighting back, but eventually you're on the edge of a cliff and have nowhere else to go. I'd take short…

The are subsidies everywhere. The US government subsidized the oil industry for dozens of years, same for agricultural sector and major sectors of the economy (See Great Depression). Currently, electrical vehicles are also receive subsidies in most states. I'm not a big believer in IP (go Free software!). I find though if we have to strictly follow IP, then the US would have to pay for the use of paper and gunpowder,…

This goes beyond subsidies. We're talking about espionage, theft, forced technology transfers, and mandatory joint ventures if you want to set up shop in China.
Post reply on HN