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

Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 464 posts

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#451

Post by int_19h »

credit_guy wrote: post #396
int_19h wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The book didn't argue that the war wouldn't happen, only that it would be economically disastrous for everybody involved, and thus to choose to go to war is foolishness, since everybody is strictly worse off than they were before - i.e. there are no absolute winners. Countries did go to war anyway, and, exactly as predicted, it was a disaster for all of them, proving the point.

Most people think WW1 was so bad because people kept killing each other (with machine guns, artillery and poison gasses). Less so because they severed their commercial ties.

Today, yes. But in that era? The notion of declaring a war to profit from the plunder (or reparations, or whatever you call it) was not yet dead back then.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#452

Post by mantas »

int_19h wrote: post #450
mantas wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has shitty positioning too. USA was positioned to be a beacon of freedom since it's founding. Meanwhile China is position as what... Authoritarian country that loves to slaughter it's citizens in various ways? That's not exactly a great idea to sell to the world. The only way China can get on top is by holding the rest of the world hostage. Either by military or commerce backed by military. But as all relations…

China's positioning is rapid growth and "social harmony". I'm not saying that they actually deliver on this, but that's how it's being sold.

That's their selling point for country managers and boy do they deliver. But it's not that interesting for the general population. Very few people want rapid growth and "social harmony" by themselves.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#453

Post by FooBarWidget »

rorykoehler wrote: post #442
FooBarWidget wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is to provide a more balanced and fair view of things. Accusations of whataboutism is disingenuous, especially because I didn't even engage in it: I talked about China only. If anything, the parent I replied to is the one that talked about other nations. And there you go with the "or death" thing. Forced reeducation and detention, yes. But where is the proof that systematic killing is happening? All the pro…

>I don't need to remind you of all the human rights violations by the US. Whataboutism >And what do you say about the fact that a dozen of Muslim nations officially approve of China's conduct in Xinjiang? That's completely irrelevant. Do the people being repressed approve because that's all that matters. And for the record they do not approve of their families being raped and basically held captive by CCP employees d…

Whataboutism is dropping a dead cat on the table in order to steer the conversation towards that cat. I did not steer the conversation to the US, I stayed on the topic of China, therefore it is by definition not whataboutism.

You seem to say that whataboutism is anything that mentions similar crimes committed by another party, implying that the actions of others are completely irrelevant. No. My criticism is not "China does no bad things". It is "China is not represented in a balanced manner and is not held to the same standards as other countries". Since the discussion is about standards, context absolutely matters.

> That's completely irrelevant. Do the people being repressed approve because that's all that matters [...] their families being raped

There you go with the "families being raped" thing. My point with the aprovals of Muslim countries is: maybe those allegations of rape are false?

Like I said: forced reeducation and deradicalization, yes. Rape/killing/concentration/genocide, no. The Gray Zone articles show that claims of the latter rest on shaky sources that are either circular, or funded by US interests and agendas.

We can debate whether forced reeducation and deradicalization is appropriate. But genocide/rape/murder/etc is false.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#454

Post by agent00f »

not_exactly__ wrote: post #62
FooBarWidget wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China will have more incidents of pandemics for sure, because they haven't learned from the last one, and they won't learn from this one. I disagree. They took many months to report SARS to WHO, yes. But this time, reporting to WHO took ~5 days. It was discovered by dr Zhang Jixian on Dec 26, then reported to WHO on Dec 31. Then it took them about another week to sequence the genome and share it with the world. Plu…

> But this time, reporting to WHO took ~5 days. It was discovered by dr Zhang Jixian on Dec 26, then reported to WHO on Dec 31. False. It took much longer than five days. The WHO was indeed notified on the 31st but the Chinese government organs knew about this long before. First CCTV report that I recall was around the 15th. First confirmed cases were early December. There’s even US intel reports dating back to Novem…

The comment you replied to asked for a source, the fact you can't produce any despite all this bluster is revealing.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#455

Post by agent00f »

surge wrote: post #171
sct202 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one has to listen to the CCP. The CCP acts offended by everything.

The problem is, the WHO does, they even said this thing wasn't transmitted person to person. And they're supposed to be the authority everyone was saying to listen to.

The WHO said there's no clear evidence of h2h on Jan 14. The Chinese cdc team didn't conclude their investigation until a few days after, and the advisory was changed after. Your sort know perfectly well why your statements are misleading but will continue to make them for obvious reasons.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#456

Post by agent00f »

serf wrote: post #434
FooBarWidget wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WHO does not officially recognize Taiwan because the UN does not officially recognize Taiwan, and the WHO is a UN organization. It is as simple as that, got nothing to do with being in China’s pocket. If you don’t like that, pressure your government to recognize Taiwan, and pressure them to pressure UN.

OK, but let's ignore the recognition of Taiwan for a second. China censoring social media chat about the virus[0], tons of talk among experts that China faked their numbers and dates[1], meanwhile the WHO praises 'Chinese Transparency'[2][3], while hinting that the actions of censorship and moderate reporting were the right idea to avoid widespread panic.[4] I'm not anti-WHO, but it's getting harder to believe that t…

Statements in sources you cite seem rather deceptive, for example insinuating that censorship delayed response. Wiki has a pretty factually sourced timeline with precise dates, and it shows the infamous Dr. Li in question messaged a private group about a lab report he saw from Dec 30 (authorities found out because it was reshared on public forum), when the WHO was notified if it on Dec 31. He was also reprimanded for claiming it was a sars outbreak, when there's no evidence at the time. I suspect many of these news sources are aware of these underlying facts, if they're the sort to do any research before publishing, so the only interesting question here is why they chose to be deceptive anyway.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#457

Post by apostacy »

nybble41 wrote: post #409
apostacy wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it's fairness you want, telling companies to hire locally isn't going to cut it. That's the opposite of fairness, really—you would be subsidizing local workers whose wages are already higher at the expense of foreign labor that has more need for the income. It sounds to me like you're saying that it is unfair to strangers that you would help out your family first before helping them. Most countries do subsidize…

> It sounds to me like you're saying that it is unfair to strangers that you would help out your family first before helping them. Well, yes, it is unfair to the strangers that you're favoring the people you personally care about when others are worse off. Being unfair doesn't necessarily make it wrong . You're free to help whoever you want—with your own resources. However, organizations distributing resources they t…

> Well, yes, it is unfair to the strangers that you're favoring the people you personally care about when others are worse off. Being unfair doesn't necessarily make it wrong. You're free to help whoever you want—with your own resources. However, organizations distributing resources they took by force, or enforcing their own rules on others, ought to be held to higher standards.

And I think that a government has an obligation to prioritize its own citizens before foreigners. And it appears that people here disagree with me.

Most governments do this. The Chinese government certainly does this for its own citizens. I wish that US government was as protectionist as the Chinese government is.

As it is now, American citizens pay taxes to subsidize our exploitation. The only people who benefit from the current immigration system are billionaires. The government is more concerned with the pursuit of capital for the elites than they are with the welfare of the people.

Thankfully, this administration has actually been enforcing the rules with H1-B visas. So lots of people I know have gotten great jobs in the last few years as visas are no longer rubber stamped. H1-B is nothing but a scam to help tech billionaires.

But yeah, putting outsiders above those you have a responsibility to care for is wrong. Volunteering at a soup kitchen does not excuse neglecting your own children. It brings me no comfort that the American middle class was eviscerated to help China. And yet that is trotted out whenever an American expresses frustration at how they have been harmed by globalization. It would be like if someone said: Sure, your bike was stolen, but at least the bike thief is happy, so it is ok.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#458

Post by int_19h »

mantas wrote: post #452
int_19h wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China's positioning is rapid growth and "social harmony". I'm not saying that they actually deliver on this, but that's how it's being sold.

That's their selling point for country managers and boy do they deliver. But it's not that interesting for the general population. Very few people want rapid growth and "social harmony" by themselves.

You'd be surprised, actually. This is more true in third world countries, and other areas that have experienced instability relatively recently (e.g. ex-USSR countries, including Russia) - at some point people start demanding a "strong hand" and whatnot.

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#459

Post by FooBarWidget »

Nasrudith wrote: post #309
FooBarWidget wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what is the obvious interpretation? Mine is ‘it is preliminary, so results can still change’ and ‘found no clear evidence does not mean evidence will not be found later’. Or maybe we can agree that there is no such thing as obvious, and different people will necessarily have different interpretations, for better or worse.

I see it as yours but recognize it as probably being read like the parents as not only is the default behavior for absense of evidence to treat it as evidence of absense or subtly of magnitude the fine distinction is lost on most. It is anti-communication in context as cunningly putting effort into /not/ being clear. If they truly weren't sure a more honest form would be "We have neither confirmed nor denied the poss…

Actually they, did say that they could neither confirm nor deny: https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible...

Re: Japan to fund firms to shift production out of China

#460

Post by FooBarWidget »

keiferski wrote: post #415
FooBarWidget wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what is the obvious interpretation? Mine is ‘it is preliminary, so results can still change’ and ‘found no clear evidence does not mean evidence will not be found later’. Or maybe we can agree that there is no such thing as obvious, and different people will necessarily have different interpretations, for better or worse.

By even posting this tweet, it is implied that there is no human-to-human transmission. They could have easily said, "So far, preliminary tests have found no evidence of human-to-human transmission, however we have only just begun research into the matter and thus still recommend social distancing." Why didn't they say this? Because China seems to have pressured the WHO the entire time, including saying that the bord…

They did say, within 24h of that tweet, that they have not ruled out human to human transmission: https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/china-says-it-s-possible...
Post reply on HN