71–80 of 82 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The current U.S. administration is nothing but outright hostile against the environment. Those regulations will be laxed and nothing good will come out of this.
Do you think Chinese mines would pollute less than US mines? How many environmental activists do you think exist in China?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Production is up, but jobs are down to about half as much as a proportion of the population, and by about a third in real terms. But then unemployment is quite low right now and there are plenty of un-filled jobs. Pay for low wage earners has seen some encouraging gains over the last few years. It's not clear the US actually needs a huge boost in manufacturing jobs. Historically, attempts to preserve or boost jobs ar…
Jobs are down due to automation, nobody's putting that genie back in the bottle :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One country benefiting more from trade than another isn't the same thing as the other country being worse off because of the trade. They're just not as much better off as they could have been. The goal of these disputes should be to reach a more equitable trading arrangement, not to stop or restrict trade that is 'harming' countries[1]. The Idea that the US is 'losing' due to the trade deficit and that reducing trade…
>The Idea that the US is 'losing' due to the trade deficit and that reducing trade with China will benefit America is utter tosh and even the administration's own trade advisers and negotiators are saying so (a bit more politely). The problem isn't so much the deficit as it is the way the US has been seduced into relying upon the Chinese industrial machine. The US industrial base has been depleting for decades. This…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately the global machine only works well if the parts are working together for the greater good in the first place, which is not a given.
One country benefiting more from trade than another isn't the same thing as the other country being worse off because of the trade. They're just not as much better off as they could have been. The goal of these disputes should be to reach a more equitable trading arrangement, not to stop or restrict trade that is 'harming' countries[1]. The Idea that the US is 'losing' due to the trade deficit and that reducing trade…
This is not a "neutral" behavior.
And this is different from the past when "every country stole ideas" because in those other instances the "thief countries" weren't generally trading those products with their target.
It's fine to steal ideas if you use it to make your own country better. It's not fine to steal things which you then use to undercut the people you stole from.
China should be careful here, if this does not work then they are pretty much done for, although the CCP can claim mental victory as usual as they've been propagating it as the silver bullet.
While the US is a major market, but it's not the only-one. Isolation policies do not work in a globalised economy, China isn't trying to isolate itself, the US is. If the US pulls this sort of erratic crap with one of its major trade partners, others will go look for alternatives too. Yes this will hurt China, but I think you underestimate how hard this would hit the US. This is the next economic crisis in the making…
It didn't work. The south didn't appreciate england's disgust with slavery. England developed other suppliers and found replacements.
Nobody is ever quite as special as they think they are. This goes for all sides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The global supply chain is fragile, energy inefficient, and exploitative. Why place “productivity” above all else?
I thought efficiency, economies of scale and productivity were the points for establishing a global supply chain. Consider containerization, large ships for transport - the cost of transportation is next to nothing. Take iPhone for example, do you think it would cost less if it was manufactured entirely in the USA (down to the components)? I would love to hear a counter-argument or example. Thanks.
And cargo ships are large sources of pollution and have substantial tax privileges; the costs are externalized.
Tangentially, if you read the “There’s Too Much Stuff” article that was recently on the front page, there’s plenty of cheap junk I’d love to see priced out of existence.
Anyway, the deeper issues we have are not likely to be solved by global trade and cheaper goods. There are other factors which I’d argue are more important.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This being the same USA that caps foreign ownership of airlines to 25%, for example. And which country was built on unlicensed use of European IP... No country or bloc has a truly free market. Even the EU has rules preferring and protecting indigenous companies. Criticising China alone is just hypocrisy.
China is by far the worst offender. Their laws resemble a developing economy while they are significantly industrialized. Make no mistake that the majority of the US including the Democratic congress support Trump on the goals -- if not 100% on the methods. Quite stupidly the US picked a trade battle with Canada and the UK/EU before going after China. Trump's administration had the termidity to call Canada a security…
What exactly does that mean?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By and large you're mostly right. There are some inequities in the way China treats foreign firms though. Completely blocking all the main US web technology firms for example. However I don't think the harm being done to the US economy by the trade war is worth the benefits to be gained, even though there may be some benefits.
> Completely blocking all the main US web technology firms for example That's a question of being willing to comply with Chinese contents-control requirements rather than trade per se. And if they comply they face a huge public opinion backlash in the US... At the same time, it is understandable that a developing country try to develop its own companies rather than handed its market to US companies... Level playing f…
Get outta here with your "China can do nothing wrong".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mountain Pass is mostly owned by Shenghe Holding Co. anyway. What an interesting turn of events.
Interesting, how do you know it's majority owned by Shenghe? Are the other investors shells for Shenghe?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Completely blocking all the main US web technology firms for example That's a question of being willing to comply with Chinese contents-control requirements rather than trade per se. And if they comply they face a huge public opinion backlash in the US... At the same time, it is understandable that a developing country try to develop its own companies rather than handed its market to US companies... Level playing f…
China literally steals tech from US businesses, mass produces it, and then undercuts the US companies that they stole the tech from in the US market . Get outta here with your "China can do nothing wrong".