Live data from Hacker News

3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

hdtradeservices.com

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#51
post #49
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to believe that, but I really don't. I'm not convinced that people in Wisconsin are better off in the long run if we trade with China rather than bomb it (to set up two extremes). That is to say, I'm not convinced free trade is Pareto efficient.

Would you mind if I ask you to elaborate? I can think of two ways to read this 1. If the USA bombs China, and China fights back, that means a global war and global wars accelerate the progress of science and technology, therefore in the long run people in Wisconsin will be better off just like quite possibly they are better off now than they'd be in the alternative universe where World War II never happened (where th…

So a common reason given for U.S. prosperity in the 1950's and 1960's was that the industrial base of the rest of the world was decimated which made the U.S. the unmatched economy in the world. I'm not saying whether it's true or not, I'm just saying that it's something people say. To the extent that's true, doesn't that mean it would be better to bomb countries like China and India to keep them from competing with us? I'm not saying we should, but isn't that the implication?

My point is that while I think globalized free trade probably maximizes world GDP (to the extent you can deal with externalities like pollution in the developing world), I don't think it's necessarily the course of action that maximizes prosperity for Americans. I wouldn't say that it definitely doesn't--I'm just not convinced.

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#52
post #46
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why, still, do you exclusively penalise the other party for unfamiliarity, which is a bilateral function? Because social relations aren't symmetric. Successful societies are built on: families, local communities, and national unity (in that order). This is nearly universal. Certainly, someone in Chengdu cares far more about his neighbors than he cares about me! > Why are intranational and international wealth inequ…

> poor people in America are part of the same body politic as myself, while poor people in China are not. ...and you don't see that as the problem worth fixing? I live in Canada, where we get copies of all the social-policy laws from the US forced upon us as treaties [to ensure Americans don't just drive up here for their marijuanas or what-have-you] with no ability to actually vote in the US elections that control t…

I'm not sure how you can look around the world and decide that what would make people in the U.S. better off is to make our body politic even more heterogenous and schizophrenic. We have enough trouble with Texas and California in the same union.

I look around the world and what I see is that the countries people generally admire from the point of view of quality of life: the Scandinavian countries, Japan, etc, have a high degree of cultural and political homogeneity and unity. Meanwhile, I see a European Union in meltdown because of the difficulty of forming a political union between people in countries with very different economies and cultures.

I also see international organizations like the United Nations that are deeply dysfunctional, and fundamentally compromised by the influence of a number of Asian, Middle Eastern, and African countries who bring to it their basically corrupt political systems. Don't get me wrong, I think the U.N. is great for things like coordinating disaster relief and whatnot, but I can't imagine a world where something like the U.N. exercising political influence in the U.S. would in any way be good for Americans.

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#53
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be great if most of the products being sold are made in your home country Why?

Because I'd rather support the economy of Wisconsin than the economy of Chengdu. I like people in Wisconsin, can't really relate to people in Chengdu, and then there is the whole militarily adverse repressive communist regime thing. Beyond that, I have no desire to contribute to the externalization of pollution, health and safety risks, etc, that come from exporting production overseas. I think globalization is utter…

Whereas I actually identify more strongly with a hacker in Chengdu than with an old age pensioner, former government worker, in the Bronx. Or a banker.

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#54
Yeah, but... actually export products already have much better quality control than domestic-oriented products we ordinary chinese consume everyday, except our great leaders who have special farms around the countries producing organic "特供品"s for them) , We envy you Americans!

At the outskirt of my city there's a special farming zone producing high quality vegetables for Japan, I always wonder what dose that taste like, must be very delicious.

There're many merchants/stores here selling defective items (B品/外單) western companies rejected. It's very popular among young people, especially clothes.

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#55
post #52
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> poor people in America are part of the same body politic as myself, while poor people in China are not. ...and you don't see that as the problem worth fixing? I live in Canada, where we get copies of all the social-policy laws from the US forced upon us as treaties [to ensure Americans don't just drive up here for their marijuanas or what-have-you] with no ability to actually vote in the US elections that control t…

I'm not sure how you can look around the world and decide that what would make people in the U.S. better off is to make our body politic even more heterogenous and schizophrenic. We have enough trouble with Texas and California in the same union. I look around the world and what I see is that the countries people generally admire from the point of view of quality of life: the Scandinavian countries, Japan, etc, have…

Oh, I'm definitely not suggesting that American's own body politic should grow, by any means. If anything America could do with being split into about four different countries. (Not on any usefully-simple geographical lines, though; something more like "charter cities"/"special economic zones" might do better. An ideal division might be "The United Farmlands of America" and "The United Metropolises of America", since each group has pretty homogeneous opinions on how "their country" should be run.)

It would certainly be nice, though, if countries of people who do have homogeneous bodies politic, where country A is interested in the political decisions country B make because they affect A, could somehow trade something of their own for the right to have their own people get some control over A's affairs. They might, perhaps... buy stock in A? :)

(There's actually a lot of things putting governmental-policy "stocks" on a global market would solve, when you think about it. Certainly problems too, of course, but consider, for one thing, that it offers a workable alternative to "takeover by war" and "eternal austerity" that some Eurozone countries have been looking for for years now: "takeover by transfer of controlling equity as a liquidated asset during default.")

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#56
post #46
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why, still, do you exclusively penalise the other party for unfamiliarity, which is a bilateral function? Because social relations aren't symmetric. Successful societies are built on: families, local communities, and national unity (in that order). This is nearly universal. Certainly, someone in Chengdu cares far more about his neighbors than he cares about me! > Why are intranational and international wealth inequ…

> poor people in America are part of the same body politic as myself, while poor people in China are not. ...and you don't see that as the problem worth fixing? I live in Canada, where we get copies of all the social-policy laws from the US forced upon us as treaties [to ensure Americans don't just drive up here for their marijuanas or what-have-you] with no ability to actually vote in the US elections that control t…

Treaties aren't forced on Canada; they're bought from Canada, and Canada sells them. Complain to your own government.

I like how quickly the framing of discussions jumps around in political arguments on HN; we start by talking about a government so authoritarian that individual police officers can arrest, try, and sentence you for up to a year in a labor camp on the spot, and we end up talking about how repressive the US is because we still criminalize marijuana.

China, by the way, publicly executes drug prisoners.

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#57
post #56
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> poor people in America are part of the same body politic as myself, while poor people in China are not. ...and you don't see that as the problem worth fixing? I live in Canada, where we get copies of all the social-policy laws from the US forced upon us as treaties [to ensure Americans don't just drive up here for their marijuanas or what-have-you] with no ability to actually vote in the US elections that control t…

Treaties aren't forced on Canada; they're bought from Canada, and Canada sells them. Complain to your own government. I like how quickly the framing of discussions jumps around in political arguments on HN; we start by talking about a government so authoritarian that individual police officers can arrest, try, and sentence you for up to a year in a labor camp on the spot , and we end up talking about how repressive t…

As I said, it's a power imbalance, with "force" being in the economic-coercive sense, not the threat-of-physical-violence sense: "do this, or we won't let you sell anything to us, so no entrepreneur or investor who cares about 'size of market' will want anything to do with you, so you'll run out of GDP-growth and your economy will stagnate." See: Cuba. Alternatively, "we'll take away the sweet deal [usually a tariff on a more productive country] that you've built your entire economy upon." See: Cambodia.

Don't see China in either case, though--they're in a very special position; they have enough population to sell to on their own, but they're also heavily invested in American credit markets. America has economic-coercive power over them in the same way a bad debtor has economic-coercive power over their credit card company: if you default, they get screwed, so they want to make sure they don't do anything that screws up your ability to pay them back, even if it would be good for their profit otherwise.

---

Also, as a note on framing: by thinking of the conversation as "jumping around," you're committing the Fallacy Of Linear Discourse In A Threaded Comment System (which I obviously just made up the name for, though I've heard it described before.)

Posts organized into a tree-structure are by default tangents from, not replies to, their parent. Only one subthread of each thread needs to actually "continue the conversation" -- the rest can have whatever other purpose their authors wish. Soapboxing for their personal issues, pedantry and pointing out typos, wordplay on the parent's speech, &c.

It's a self-perpetuating fallacy, since people who think threaded conversations are linear actually cause this jumping-around in the first place, by trying to force "the" conversation "back to the topic at hand."

This confuses enough people that I'm trying to work out a threaded-commenting UI where replies move down--like a message board--and only tangents move to the right (and default to closed.)

Notice that this post is actually two posts: one is a reply, and then the other, after the line, is a tangent. Don't they seem like they should be treated separately by the UI? :)

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#58
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be great if most of the products being sold are made in your home country Why?

Presumably because they would like to support people closer to home. International commerce is very important for exchange of ideas and cultures and is enriching for all involved so long as the makers of the goods aren't being exploited as is sometimes the case.

Presumably because they would like to support people closer to home

But does making most of the stuff locally really do that? By making e.g. cellphones here, you need to either pay Americans the same as Chinese workers make, or make Americans pay much higher prices for their cellphones. How does that help people closer to home? Seems like an handicap to me.

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#59
post #16
post #3

I don't care what country owns the brand as long as it is dependable and well made. Chinese products have a big stigma of being cheaply made. There are also a lot of reports of products from China containing unhealthy levels of lead. It would be great if most of the products being sold are made in your home country, but until prices are matched, it would be a while until that happens.

People pay lip service to wanting to buy locally made, but they don't vote with the only thing that matters, the willingness to pay more. As long as consumers demand the absolute lowest price, regardless of the exploitation required to achieve it, things will be made in poorer countries with an impoverished workforce.

In a marxist perspective, workers in the developed countries are being exploited too. In a free market perspective, Chinese workers are choosing to leave their farms and go to factories because it's a much better alternative for them, which has raised their wages and standards of living as a whole.

What exploitation are you referring to?

Re: 3 In 10 Americans Will Not Knowingly Buy Chinese-Owned Brands

#60
post #22
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I like people in Wisconsin, can't really relate to people in Chengdu, ?? They're just people.

Sure, but let's make no mistake: the people in Chengdu don't buy into this silly idea that they should care as much about the people in Wisconsin as they do about their neighbors just because "everyone is just people."

I have no control over what people in Chengdu think about me. I can only control what I think. I think I'm stronger as a result of free trade, and I even think that's true for my family, community, state, and nation.
Post reply on HN