Live data from Hacker News

China is the manufacturing superpower

cepr.org

281–290 of 315 posts

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#281
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people don't like protectionism because in the long term it's worse for both countries. You have a short term benefit of protecting a handful of jobs in exchange for vastly more expensive goods for everyone as well as more expensive inputs to your other products undercutting other local industries. Protectionism is popular because the benifits for the few are visible while the downsides are diffuse but add up. A…

> Some people don't like protectionism because in the long term it's worse for both countries. That is a good argument from a purely economic perspective, but the ability of a country to manufacture things on their own is a long-term benefit to the country from a security and sovereignty perspective. It's hard to prevail in a war if a potential enemy is making all your stuff for you. China understands this very well,…

When you say "economic perspective" I believe you mean a financial or poorly monetary one. Any econ course would teach you that economics is really based around preference and opportunity cost, which is inclusive of the non-monetary attributes you bring up to dismiss the "purely economic perspective".

Thus your argument, if framed in economics, is that countries are choosing a worse option, considering their alternatives. This is a valid argument to make, but it's not consistent with your introduction.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#282
post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...Maybe the car manufacturers take a public view that's different from their private view. Maybe without the government forcing the manufacturers to go through 3rd party dealerships, they would still use them, but how about removing the laws and see? >... Why would a state demand extra hurdles that cost its residents more money? As the wikipedia article points out, this is really a textbook case of rent seeking. Th…

>Maybe without the government forcing the manufacturers to go through 3rd party dealerships, they would still use them, but how about removing the laws and see? I actually read a pretty good reason not to remove these laws a while ago (and it is tangential to the argument about pricing that I made a while ago): It is impossible for independent resellers to compete with the manufacturer. This actually happened with Te…

>... It is impossible for independent resellers to compete with the manufacturer.

Yes, those who manipulate the legislature to do rent seeking, might lose those profits when the law is removed. That is actually a feature, not a problem.

>...We do, because these dealers make the market more efficient.

Again, independent economists and the Dept of Justice don't agree with you.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#283
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the second half: If some other party seeks to hurt you, it is in your best interest to prevent them from doing so. Especially if the cost is less than the harm they would inflict. Presuming peaceful coexistence, then it is not in anyone's interest to limit anything beyond the basic idea of 'my freedom ends where your begins'.

>Presuming peaceful coexistence, then it is not in anyone's interest to limit anything beyond the basic idea of 'my freedom ends where your begins'. Let me put it another way. Your comment suggests some kind of state of maximum efficiency in which the best producer can be charged with production in a monopolistic fashion, and that would limit the amount of resource usage and toil for everyone. In an ideal world with…

> Your comment suggests some kind of state of maximum efficiency in which the best producer can be charged with production in a monopolistic fashion

Only in a risk-free/non-probabilistic world.

To be clear, 'my freedom ends where your begins' is a way to simplify and summarize an approach to the theory of rights. The point of bringing it up in this context was to point out that there is an equilibrium between opportunity spaces of different actors. In other words, as long as we share the universe, we can't do expect to do literally anything (to other actors or their property in particular) without reprecussions, because any justification for it would be inconsistent.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the biggest problems are legislative incompetence and corruption. You have people proposing laws without considering how people will respond to them, or choosing a "compromise" authored by the perpetrators of the original offense. People say things like "corporate profits are too high, we need to tax them more" but the actual reasons corporate profits are high are lax antitrust enforcement and regulatory…

I actually wrote an article that you might be interested in. It connects competition policy, market power, and social unrest. If you’re interested, feel free to take a look -- I’d be happy to hear your thoughts. https://thecommongoodchronicles.substack.com/p/an-assassinat... Higher taxes for the absurdly rich/corporations could be a good start if the money was put to good use, but taxes ultimately don't solve the und…

> Unprecedented inequality has unleashed volcanic forces beneath society’s fragile surface, threatening to erupt in violent social unrest. Corporations and elites have exploited workers, unchecked, for so long and to such an extreme degree that the masses, consumed by contempt, are now cheering the execution of a CEO.

I think this is missing a piece.

Corporations and the government are together as a corrupt system (_______ industrial complex etc.) and then people get mad about it, but many of the problems are structural (i.e. insufficient checks and balances against corruption) so you can't put the blame on any specific person or just replace one evil CEO or Senator and be solved. But that's what people want -- a personified enemy to fight, a simple solution -- so it's what demagogues offer them. They tell them to blame the CEO because it gives people a target for their ire, when the actual problem is that you have to change -- and in order to do that, first understand -- the structures that led things to be this way.

But most people don't have time to read a thousand page healthcare bill to figure out just what's in it that causes things to be this way, so when some talking heads tell them to be mad at the CEOs, they get mad at the CEOs. Which doesn't fix the problem, and that only makes them even madder.

> Afterwards, I worked at the intersection of data science and antitrust law to support collective action litigations.

I'm increasingly of the opinion that employer-based labor unions are useless.

When the employer is in a competitive market, the employer already has little to give in negotiations because the competition is already forcing them to give anything they don't give to labor as wages to customers (i.e. also labor) as competitive prices.

When the employer is a monopolist, at best the union is going to extract part of the monopoly rent, but not all of it, and the monopolist's customers who aren't also employees are still getting screwed. Meanwhile that union then has the perverse incentive to defend the monopoly rather than trying to destroy it, because they're getting part of the monopoly rent, which is a disaster.

Conversely, suppose that local land owners are conspiring to capture zoning boards to keep housing prices high and screwing over local laborers who then can't afford to buy and have to pay high rents. Is unionizing the property management companies going to solve this? Of course not, they wouldn't even be representing most of the people being screwed over and their expected behavior would be to try to negotiate higher wages for the property management employees etc. rather than advocating for zoning reform.

Which hints at what people should be doing instead: Political organizing. Not for a party, but for issues. Get all the tenants and the would-be homeowners who are stuck living with their parents together to pay dues to an organization to oppose politicians who resist zoning reform. Get them out of office. Publish voter guides and use the dues to buy political advertising. Do the same thing for trust busting and getting rid of certificate of need laws etc.

Because that's the problem. Monopolists and the corporations siphoning tax dollars out of the corrupt government are doing this, and you're not.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#285
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chinese loanmaking to foreign countries has mostly gone bust, with many loans basically in default. As America (or the world bank/imf as a proxy for american capital) can attest, calling in these loans is a great way to make a lot of enemies.

The World Bank and IMF generally don't (and can't) call in loans so I don't know what you're trying to say there. Sometimes what happens is shithole countries default on their debts and then whine about injustice when lenders refuse to extend the terms.

It is injustice. Loans are not just social mechanisms to begin with. There's nothing "just" about the west's domination of the globe; and in fact, justice would look like the west paying out to the rest of the world and expecting nothing back.

Not that the west ever gave a fuck about justice beyond intraclass squabbling

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#286
post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Maybe without the government forcing the manufacturers to go through 3rd party dealerships, they would still use them, but how about removing the laws and see? I actually read a pretty good reason not to remove these laws a while ago (and it is tangential to the argument about pricing that I made a while ago): It is impossible for independent resellers to compete with the manufacturer. This actually happened with Te…

>... It is impossible for independent resellers to compete with the manufacturer. Yes, those who manipulate the legislature to do rent seeking, might lose those profits when the law is removed. That is actually a feature, not a problem. >...We do, because these dealers make the market more efficient. Again, independent economists and the Dept of Justice don't agree with you.

>Yes, those who manipulate the legislature to do rent seeking, might lose those profits when the law is removed. That is actually a feature, not a problem.

As I said, independent dealers provide liquidity to the auto market. When there is only one buyer or seller in any other case, we call it price gouging or price fixing. Additionally, the "extra profits" or savings (in some cases) actually do contribute to maximum satisfaction of consumers. For example, if the only dealers were run by manufacturers then they could unilaterally decide that cars over 5 years old will never be repurchased, dooming those deals to private transactions with zero warranty, or else second-tier used-only retailers.

>Again, independent economists and the Dept of Justice don't agree with you.

Again, appeals to authority do nothing for me. You can probably find at least someone in the DOJ to adopt any opinion you like in any case.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's hard to prevail in any war in a post-nuclear age. Another cold war is possible, and someone could prevail eventually. >The reason we are not manufacturing everything ourselves is that our incumbents refuse to allow anything to replace them, whether that is a more efficient company or a more able manager. That is not true in general. We have laws specifically to promote competition. I'm not aware of anything lik…

>Germany is currently stagnating because of the toll the Ukraine war is taking on them, The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany. It was all self inflicted. It was pure stupidity not to be prepared to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and it was pure stupidity to respond while unprepared instead of brokering some Realpolitik peace.

>The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany.

Their fuel costs are skyrocketing, which is affecting everything there.

>It was pure stupidity not to be prepared to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and it was pure stupidity to respond while unprepared instead of brokering some Realpolitik peace.

I agree about this. They should have never been unprepared, and they should have settled it by now with a reasonable deal. The war started because of NATO screwing around in Ukraine's politics and trying to set up NATO on Russia's border. Of course Russia also did political things in Ukraine, but it makes more sense for them to be involved with their neighbor than for countries much farther away to do it.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has a high amount of protectionism. You can't sell in China without approval, and no foreign-controlled business is granted access. You have to set up a minimum 51% Chinese-owned subsidiary and possibly jump through other hoops to get access. This along with all the outsourcing has been used to steal IP and put foreign competitors out of business.

Many of the claims you're making here are outdated, or just outright false. For example, the 51% requirement does not apply in most industries any more. It was a transitional measure as China opened up its economy to foreign investment, to prevent foreign companies from instantly taking over or outcompeting every Chinese company. But that measure has been rolled back over the years, and now only applies in particular…

>But that measure has been rolled back over the years, and now only applies in particular industries.

I would like to know where you saw this. Not to be a jerk but I've never heard this and I'm more informed than most.

>Tesla 100% owns its operations in China, as do more and more foreign companies.

Tesla is the first one to have that arrangement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigafactory_Shanghai What about this? https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Supply-Chain/Tesla-cars-fa... Keep in mind, producing Teslas in China is not the same as selling them in China. They can mandate Tesla to export 100% of the cars at any time if they feel it threatens the local industry.

>Many people in the US and Europe are operating with a mental picture of China that is decades out of date, or which is even just wrong.

Many people are also operating with an overly optimistic and romanticized picture of China that was never true to begin with.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Germany is currently stagnating because of the toll the Ukraine war is taking on them, The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany. It was all self inflicted. It was pure stupidity not to be prepared to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and it was pure stupidity to respond while unprepared instead of brokering some Realpolitik peace.

>The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany. Their fuel costs are skyrocketing, which is affecting everything there. >It was pure stupidity not to be prepared to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and it was pure stupidity to respond while unprepared instead of brokering some Realpolitik peace. I agree about this. They should have never been unprepared, and they should have settled it by now with a reasonable deal. T…

> The war started because of NATO screwing around in Ukraine's politics and trying to set up NATO on Russia's border.

That sounds like an attempt to rewrite history. Ukraine's prospect of becoming a member of NATO was completely buried since 2008, and the intention to join NATO was resurrected only after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. To this day, the interest of other members to accept Ukraine into NATO remains lukewarm and no meaningful progress has been made in this direction.

The war started because Russia couldn't stomach that Ukraine was on the verge of signing a major trade deal with the EU that would've opened up the EU market for Ukraine, and Russia, facing its vaning influence over Ukraine, decided to invade and subjugate Ukrainians through violence, as it had nothing else to offer.

Re: China is the manufacturing superpower

#290

And unfortunately for the West, manufacturing capacity translates to military capability in any prolonged conflict (which is why industrial policy and tariffs in dual use / strategic industries seem like the way to go)

you can't look at "Manufacturing" and translate that to military capability. what you manufacture is very important. Nothing china has can compete with the airpower capabilities of the west. A single F35 has the capabilities no amount of chinese planes can match.

While this is true the US military production is mostly in a sad state, especially Naval production as discussed before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41662831

especially this article https://www.americanmanufacturing.org/blog/chinas-shipbuildi...

Post reply on HN