Trump Administration Considers Banning Another Major Chinese Firm (cnbc.com) 232
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: The U.S. administration is considering limits to Chinese video surveillance firm Hikvision's ability to buy U.S. technology, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, in a move that deepens worries about trade frictions between the world's two top economies. The move would effectively place Hikvision on a U.S. blacklist and U.S. companies may have to obtain government approval to supply components to Hikvision, the paper said. The U.S. Commerce Department blocked Huawei Technologies from buying U.S. goods last week, effectively banning U.S. companies from doing business with the Chinese firm, a major escalation in the trade war, saying Huawei was involved in activities contrary to national security.
Hikvision and Dahua Technology which produce audio-visual equipment that can be used for surveillance were specifically cited in a letter to Trump's top advisers last month, signed by more than 40 lawmakers. The lawmakers said China's actions in its western region of Xinjiang "may constitute crimes against humanity" and urged tighter U.S. export controls to ensure that U.S. companies are not assisting the Chinese government's crackdown there. The issue stems around the facilities in China that "U.N. experts describe as mass detention centers holding more than 1 million ethnic Uighurs and other Muslims," reports CNBC. "Beijing has said its measures in Xinjiang, which are also reported to include widespread surveillance of the population, are aimed at stemming the threat of Islamist militancy. The facilities or camps that have opened are vocational training centers, the government has said."
Hikvision and Dahua Technology which produce audio-visual equipment that can be used for surveillance were specifically cited in a letter to Trump's top advisers last month, signed by more than 40 lawmakers. The lawmakers said China's actions in its western region of Xinjiang "may constitute crimes against humanity" and urged tighter U.S. export controls to ensure that U.S. companies are not assisting the Chinese government's crackdown there. The issue stems around the facilities in China that "U.N. experts describe as mass detention centers holding more than 1 million ethnic Uighurs and other Muslims," reports CNBC. "Beijing has said its measures in Xinjiang, which are also reported to include widespread surveillance of the population, are aimed at stemming the threat of Islamist militancy. The facilities or camps that have opened are vocational training centers, the government has said."
Slap similar sanctions on America (Score:2, Interesting)
America's actions in the middle east constitutes war crimes, so China should stop exporting rare earth metals to America and American companies, just to show that they can play the same game.
I see what you did there (Score:3, Funny)
A clever phrase? No, literally, I'm watching you on my Hikvision down at police HQ.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, so what, winning a trade war is easy.
Not when you have more to lose than the other guy.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the important point here, a trade war isn't about money, it's about both sides enduring pain until one of them blinks. The Chinese, and that's individual citizens on forums like Weibo not the government, have said they'll eat grass before they let Trump win a trade war, and they have extensive history showing they're prepared to make this level of sacrifice. The US OTOH is already paying out billions of dollars of subsidies to help people hurt by it, and it's going to get much, much worse as more t
Re: (Score:2)
And when they run out of the grass the US will still be eating steak just a little less of it. Right now Americans largely aren't taking this seriously but once they do start taking this seriously support will rally and the petty social first world problems dividing us will be left in the dust. We destroyed Japan, we destroyed the Nazis, and we toppled the soviet union.
The Chinese really should blink they'd really only have to start playing fair and stop cheating. Otherwise the narrative might change and th
Re: (Score:2)
"The US can flaunt its arrogance, but there is nothing "easy" about going to war against the largest army on the planet."
Easy no, but lots of bodies isn't anywhere near the whole story. The US by far has the most powerful military on the planet. Do you have any idea what that population reduction would do for the environment?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you really comparing supporting one government vs another strategically to herding people into camps and abusing them or invading your neighbor and burning thousands of peaceful people alive for no cause?
Re: (Score:1)
This is very true. The economies of China and America are very much dependent on each other and if one tanks the other likely will as well. It's part of what keeps the threat of war very low. However, some of the actions of Trump are starting to worry me. As long as he doesn't go overboard and sticks with banning security threats we may be okay, but you can never trust he won't get all pissy and start a war or make some other stupid decision. If things are done smartly we can try to decouple from China slow
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: Slap similar sanctions on America (Score:2, Insightful)
This is very true. The economies of China and America are very much dependent on each other and if one tanks the other likely will as well.
Our massive and monumental trade deficit would suggest that you are, at best, only partly aware of the real picture: yes, MBA's and Wall Street will suffer (that's not the world's tiniest violin; I'm just rolling a booger between my fingers) and Americans' access to disposable junk will be reduced (another huge OMG) but in the long run, there's simply no question as to whether it needs to be done.
It should've been done twenty years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
The economies of China and America are very much dependent on each other and if one tanks the other likely will as well. It's part of what keeps the threat of war very low.
1. Do you believe the petrodollar will be an effective lever for maintaining US monetary policy indefinitely?
2. In the event of global financial collapse, which do you think will be more adversely affected?
a) strong government which can utilize a centrally planned economy where labor can be forced and civil liberties are non existent
b) democratic countries
Re: (Score:2)
Short term: strong government. Long term: democratic.
Democracies go into chaos, but recover. Strong dictatorships hold off chaos longer, but end up with the rulers dead and new rulers.
Re: (Score:2)
That may be so, but before democracies can recover there is sprawling military to maintain. Any power vacuum that gets filled may result in even fewer democratic countries, especially if nuclear weapons are deployed.
Also keep in mind that past results does not guarantee future outcomes when it comes to revolutions under oppressive regimes. Total surveillance made possible through technology is a factor to consider.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Trump has tertiary syphilis and barely understands the levers he's pulling. This isn't 5th dimensional chess.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump has tertiary syphilis and barely understands the levers he's pulling.
That would be true of the last 10 presidents as well.
You think his predecessors had a good understanding of most of the issues involved in running a country, and the likely short and long term results of various decisions and policy options? HAH
This is what the cabinet members, briefings, and teams of presidential advisors are for.
Also, for strategy to be effective -- an important necessary element is to keep much of the strate
Re: (Score:2)
Also, for strategy to be effective -- an important necessary element is to keep much of the strategy and the details secret: so the media and the average person doesn't even have the information available necessary to remotely have enough of a clue to make such a statement about the president's understanding, etc.
Did you just say that the office of the Presidency was not to wield power, but to distract from that power!?
Somebody get me my improbability drive!!
Re: (Score:2)
China is completely and utterly dependant on two things: trade with the US and free and open ocean shipping lanes. China could only survive a few month without either. The US is has control of both.
I wouldn't be so sure of that. The evidence suggests that the US Navy can't even drive a destroyer without ramming random cargo ships, and not that long ago a US patrol boat surrendered to a couple guys in a motorboat with small arms, because the patrol boat was just that unprepared to fight. The US Navy in its current state should not inspire arrogance.
Re: (Score:2)
heh. no, I'm not saying that the US would need to do anything to disrupt the shipping lanes.
All they would need to do would be to step back. The US has been the exclusive guaranteer of safety and stability for the world's oceans for over 70 years.
Fair point.
"but China's go super fast anti-ship missiles!" who cares? Out past a few hundred miles of their coastline, the missiles are irrelevant.
I expect modern US CIWS does OK against those anyway, at least until we run out of defensive missiles. Aegis-controlled anti-missile missiles are on a very short list of new technologies with an actual track record in naval warfare.
The US barely uses those shipping lanes anymore. (international trade, outside of North America is only about 5% of GDP and they no longer need foreign oil) Why continue to bare the burden of keeping the safe and stable anymore?
I think that's actually a fine place for the US to play policeman: no one seems to mind (except pirates), and it doesn't cost us much. But, yeah, it would hurt China way more than ourselves if we simply chose not to do that.
Re: (Score:2)
The idea that 'the whole world is totally and completely inter-dependant and America NEEDS foreign trade" is totally over blown. International trade can benefit the US. But, it doesn't always, and it isn't critical.
Europe absolutely needs to import massive amount of energy, or they die. China absolutely needs to export and import massive amounts of everything, or they die. The Middle East absolutely needs to export oil, or they die.
But the US? Not so much. If international trade were to be severely disrupted, a few sectors in the US would suffer, but it would mostly just be a readjustment.
You underestimate the amount of microchip manufacturing done overseas, and nothing in the world has a longer toolchain than a fab. Yes, we have the raw materials and technology to start making e.g. memory chips in the US to meet all of our own needs, but the shortage would be brutal for many years.
Re: (Score:2)
United States' trade deficit in goods with China hit a record $419.2 billion last year. US exports to China were worth $120.3 billion, while its imports were 4.5 times bigger, totaling $539.5 billion.
Whoever exports the most loses the most. It's fairly basic.
Re: (Score:2)
He's banning another firm cheese! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When you think about it. All labor is "manufacturing" You're taking something and turning it into something else. The nerds here manufacture computer programs, I myself manufacture the way your house works electrically. Food for thought.
Re: (Score:2)
The alternative is to not have any choice for reasonable employment because jobs have been off-shored to sweat shops in other countries exploiting their workers because they don't have a choice. All economists regardless of where they sit on the political spectrum recognize that Globalization hasn't been a panacea and has caused many systemic problems some of which have actually caused poverty. They only disagree about how to address the problems not whether the problems exist.
You're talking as if there was a surge in us unemployment while the truth is it's currently at 3.6%, something that hasn't been seen since 1969.
Re: (Score:3)
You're talking as if there was a surge in us unemployment while the truth is it's currently at 3.6%, something that hasn't been seen since 1969.
Yeah, except for one thing, since the recovery only low wage jobs have recovered and indeed increased since prior to the recession. Mid and high wage jobs are still lower than pre-recession levels [industryweek.com]. That's the explanation for low unemployment today. It's not the same as the economic expansion of the 50's and 60's. You could live in a suburb on one income and raise a family. The way the calculation works if you work 1 hour for minimum wage you're considered "unemployed". If you're working for minimum wa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct in the wage distribution of added jobs, but those are mainly in the service industry. Uber and mcdonalds low wages are not because of global competition but the cause of deregulation and lack of unionization, caused domestically.
Re: (Score:2)
You are right, there are many factors. You are correct that the dismantling of unions is one factor. Globalization is also another factor because when jobs are shipped overseas for example the people who worked in factories are left with either service industry jobs that require a college degree that they are unqualified for (in low supply mind you) or low wage jobs. They can't just laterally move to an equivalent job. The Recession obviously is another factor. AI and business automation is another. I
This is gonna end badly. (Score:4, Insightful)
You can only throw rocks at a tiger for so long, until he tries to tear you to shred.
Even if you're a tiger yourself.
Maybe he doesn't realize the US is dependent on China too. It's a mutual work VS money deal. If China goes on strike, even for a month, the US economy would crash hard too.
I guess we will see, how dependent China is on the US.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The Americans have demanded a screeching halt to all of these. The fact the Chinese even began talks with those swords hanging over them indicates just how weak the Chinese knew their hand was. China exports over four times as many goods to the American market as vice versa and China is completely dependent upon American global security commitments
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"Engage in cybertheft"
You mean they dont participate in our antiquated IP traditions.
Backward engineering is still legal there, they dont have a DMCA to outlaw innovation, so innovation still happens there. Thats not them being nefarious, thats US being stupid and undercutting our whole tech sector just for the benefit of some idiot cartoon mouse.
"Force technology transfers"
See above
"Hyper-subsidize their own industries"
Yeah, if we had universal healthcare, american labor would be competitive again. But we
Re: (Score:1)
The forced technology transfers are due to China not allowing companies in certain sectors to enter the Chinese market. You have to form a joint venture with a Chinese company which will own 51% of the stake. All tech must be transferred to the new JV. Then, the tech is stolen and given to a new, 100% Chinese owned company, which now competes with you. Do people not know this happens? It happens and just imagine the outrage if America did something like this.
The rest of your replies are nonsensical an
Re: (Score:2)
I worked for a company back in 1996. Even then, the Chinese company we dealt with took our product, copied the circuit boards ( Including the fake traces that did nothing but say " I've been copied!" ) and tried to sell them as their own.
You can pretend otherwise, but reality doesn't back you.
Re: (Score:3)
The Chinese:
The Americans have demanded a screeching halt to all of these. The fact the Chinese even began talks with those swords hanging over them indicates just how weak the Chinese knew their hand was. China exports over four times as many goods to the American market as vice versa and China is completely dependent upon American global security commitments for access to raw materials, energy and end markets. There is no modern China without active American involvement.
IN THEORY, between two parties dealing fairly, Tariffs suck. But we are already living in a world where nobody is dealing fairly with anyone else, but we keep pretending it's a free market. It's time we stop pretending that the rest of the world isn't playing us for chumps.
A list of all 23 open US complaints against China brought to the WTO (they have a great website):
DS309 : Value-Added Tax on Integrated Circuits
DS340 : Measures Affecting Imports of Automobile Parts
DS358 : Certain Measures Granting Refunds, Reductions or Exemptions from Taxes and Other Payments
DS362 : Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights
DS363 : Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Produc
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe he doesn't realize the US is dependent on China too. It's a mutual work VS money deal.
Probably. With the amount of "stable" and "genius" he has, he is probably so disconnected from reality, he cannot grasp simple facts like this one anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing most people don't know about is Chinese (and other countries) investment in American companies. It's often hard to trace the relationships due to the way the holding companies are structured but we've been "invaded" in the economic sense. It's part of the reason some work environments have deteriorated in America. What is the explanation for executive boards that only care about money nothing else like environment, country well being, citizens, etc. Simple: foreign investors
Wars are no longer
Re: (Score:2)
The thing most people don't know about is Chinese (and other countries) investment in American companies. It's often hard to trace the relationships due to the way the holding companies are structured but we've been "invaded" in the economic sense. It's part of the reason some work environments have deteriorated in America. What is the explanation for executive boards that only care about money nothing else like environment, country well being, citizens, etc. Simple: foreign investors
Wars are no longer fought on the battlefield. They are fought in the Economic Game Theory arena. We would be wise to follow Sun Tzu's Art of War: Know thine enemy and know thyself
While the idea that the US would need to import evil capitalists is laughable in itself, there are other more tangible reasons this just isn't true. There is so much capital amassed in the US that the free floating foreign capital can't really make a dent, and most of that is pension funds and institutional aka passive investors.
Re: (Score:2)
While the idea that the US would need to import evil capitalists is laughable in itself
The US doesn't need or want this type of investor. The beneficiaries of the arrangement are the foreign investors not anyone in the United States. They do it to make money for themselves and the money is funneled outside of the United States. That's the point. We shouldn't allow this to occur. It's not in our country's best interest. This is yet another part of Globalization that has not benefited the United States. It has done precisely the opposite. Blocking things like the Broadcom acquisition of
Re: (Score:1)
T likes to play Game of Chicken.
Re: (Score:1)
It seems like Trump genuinely doesn't understand international trade. The White House was asked if he believes that China pays tariffs that the US imposes, and they replied that he genuinely does.
https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Although I'm to lazy to dig up a link, at the beginning of the trade war with the EU it was quite obvious from Trump's statements that he believed that US imports was subject to a special sales tax where he mentioned specific percentages. He was talking about VAT (which does not discriminate against foreign goods).
Re: (Score:1)
You can only throw rocks at a tiger for so long, until he tries to tear you to shred.
Even if you're a tiger yourself.
Maybe he doesn't realize the US is dependent on China too. It's a mutual work VS money deal. If China goes on strike, even for a month, the US economy would crash hard too. I guess we will see, how dependent China is on the US.
If China is dependent on the US, the only thing Trump's shenanigans will change is that China will start a serious effort to change that and because Trump's corporate cronies will be relying on his tariffs to save them instead of becoming competitive the Chinese will win.
Re: (Score:2)
Um... we don't make electronics in this country (Score:3, Insightful)
We manufacture a lot, but it's mostly done with robots and it's mostly high end machinery. Unless this is another emoluments violation [vox.com] I'm not sure how this will help anyone. If he's trying to put pressure on China to protect our industry, well, you need an industry to protect first. And we're past the point [nytimes.com] where the jobs would come back even if the factory's did.
I'd much rather see large scale federal infrastructure jobs programs paid for by the proceeds of those robots than more tariffs on TVs.
Re: Um... we don't make electronics in this countr (Score:2)
Um... we don't make electronics in this country
Um... actually we do; just not the low-end disposable junk that China tends to be know for.
Re: Um... we don't make electronics in this count (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think I have any clothes made in China at all. Plenty from various other Asian countries, and a fair bit from north African countries too. A couple of years ago I brought something made in Madagascar which surprised me a bit. China however nothing. On the other hand most of my footwear is made in China these days unfortunately.
Like what? (Score:2)
I don't know of any general purpose electronics manufactured in the states anymore. Maybe some instrume
Re: (Score:2)
Let the feodalism begin (Score:2)
Down with RFC's, protocols, standards.
Every sovreign country or block to build its own tech - from chips to apps.
US would be one such block.
China - another.
All others must choose sides or team up.
Russia and India alone would lack the capacity, EU would lack the political will, Africa and Latin America would lack the tradition for cooperation.
The times when you could Skype from one continent to another, or Google for nudes across the world, will be gone soon.
Hmm ... (Score:1, Funny)
Sheesh, what to do on this one?
Hate Trump? Sure, but that means defending China.
Normally that's fine, but in this case ... er, recognize the danger of Islamic militancy, to give China a pass on this?
Yikes, it's like a minefield for lefties! Which way to turn??
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Islamic militancy in China amounts to owning a prayer rug. The problem is China trying to pop. the Xinjiang with Han Chinese. Naturally, the locals took offense.
The easy choice to denounce both. Trump hasn't learned anything new since the 1970s, after he was safe from the Vietnam war. Many of his actions can be determined by that mind-set and the fact that he has the attention span of gnat and cannot calculate secondary effects. It isn't as though he's consciously trying to turn the U.S. back to that time,
Re: (Score:2)
However, Trump destroys everything he touches, the U.S. is doomed. He's got no positive policies, he's only got negative bull-in-the-china shop reactions to events.
Well, except for the US economy, the stock market, the North Korea situation, military effectiveness, and the space program, yeah, it's a total wasteland. In 2016 the news told me that if we elected Trump there would be millions of Muslims in death camps. Guess they were right.
Re: (Score:2)
Hate Trump? Sure, but that means defending China.
A little bit of cognitive dissonance is no barrier for overwhelming irrational hatred.
Normally that's fine, but in this case ... er, recognize the danger of Islamic militancy, to give China a pass on this?
They'd say you're perpetuating a stereotype. Because jihad or martyrdom attacks have nothing to do with Islam, you hateful racist Islamophobic bigot.
Yikes, it's like a minefield for lefties! Which way to turn??
Always the path of least resistance.
Re: (Score:1)
Wait, pro-trade is a *leftists* thing now?
Yes, for many decades. Populism moved to the right around the time Clinton was elected, between Ross Perot talking about the "giant sucking sound" of NAFTA vacuuming up all the US jobs, and Pat Buchanan also fighting Bush in the 92 primary with a populist message.
"Left" vs "right" is no longer the real debate in the US, at least on economic issues, it's all "globalist" vs "populist" now.
* Mainstream Dems and "establishment" Republicans are globalists, as are the 0.01% who benefit massively from it.
* Bernie
I'm afraid the ship has already sailed... (Score:4, Insightful)
If the US thinks it can delay China's development this way, it's in for a big surprise. China's cities are already decades ahead of any US city now. Their infrastructure is way more modern than anything USA can offer.
And with this kind of drum beating from America, more and more people are getting "enlightened" about what Huawei has to offer.
Guess what, my next device is likely to be from the company as various commentators are saying Huawei devices offer more value for money. On the Google question, I already survive without Google in my life. This list can only get long.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with trump's approach is that China will retaliate and US companies and citizens will pay the price.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with trump's approach is that China will retaliate and US companies and citizens will pay the price.
Good. We are complicit in this just as much as China. Consumers allowed companies to move production to China so we could save a few bucks. If it all comes back to bite us in the end, all the better.
Re: (Score:2)
No, globalists wanted cheap labor and to externalize costs in order to undercut domestic manufacturing. Consumers were quickly deprived of a choice of the origin of the goods they were buying.
It will most likely come back to bite us in the end, but those responsible will just sail away in their yachts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'm afraid the ship has already sailed... (Score:4, Insightful)
It is a sad testament to this site's decline that the equivalent of the "If you don't love it leave it!!!!" argument, popular among dying, internet-connected uncles for years, gets a score of 5, Insightful. Congratulations on having the same "unique" insight as every other pre-dementia coot repeating the same nationalistic one-liners while trying to remember to breathe. Now that deserves a participation award!
Re: (Score:2)
Which part of his post do you actually disagree with ? Notice he wasn't suggesting, as you put, that the poster actually leave the US to go to China : He was pointing the multiple flaws in trying to paint a positive picture of China. Modern cities ? Sure, you'll enjoy them from your small cell, since your "Social Credit" is nil and the Government didn't like what you had to say.
But hey, "Modern city!" amiright.
Re: (Score:2)
Trying to sound smart while you are really just saying "Orange man bad!!!" .
Re: (Score:3)
"That is great for you since you think that country is so great why don't you move there? "
Can someone not say anything positive about another country or negative about their own without getting the "if its so awesome, why don't you move there" argument? Its so childish and an idiotic argument.
Re:I'm afraid the ship has already sailed... (Score:5, Insightful)
China's cities are already decades ahead of any US city now. Their infrastructure is way more modern than anything USA can offer.
Copious citations required if you're including older cities like Beijing and Shanghai. If you're just focused on newer cities like Shenzhen, it's unsurprising (but a pointless comparison) when you're starting from scratch and don't have to deal with hundreds of years of legacy infrastructure.
Re: (Score:3)
China's cities are already decades ahead of any US city now. Their infrastructure is way more modern than anything USA can offer.
Copious citations required if you're including older cities like Beijing and Shanghai. If you're just focused on newer cities like Shenzhen, it's unsurprising (but a pointless comparison) when you're starting from scratch and don't have to deal with hundreds of years of legacy infrastructure.
It doesn't matter why, or if there are counterexamples. If most chinese have better infrastructure than most americans then it's true, and if not then it isn't. I don't know which it is, but I know all that other stuff is irrelevant to the question.
Re: (Score:1)
They asked for citations, which were no provided. There are newer towns and cities in the US with all brand new infrastructure too. The vast majority of Chinese villages and cities are not modern at all. GP made a statement backed by no facts at all, which was also quite bold.
Re: (Score:2)
Here is the electricity infrastructure in Shanghai:
https://www.alamy.com/stock-ph... [alamy.com]
China has some new infrastructure projects, and a lot of omg wtf infrastructure.
You realize that's Saint Croix, right? (Score:2)
You realize that's Saint Croix, right?
Geographically what to east it goes Florida (one of the United States), Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Saint Croix.
So several countries away from any of the United States. Saint Croix is protected by the United States, it's not near the states.
The US economy is _this_ bad? (Score:4, Informative)
Any kind of protectionism is a very bad sign. Pushing it is, like Trump now seems to be doing, is worse. It never helps, it delays necessary improvements and has the problems just hit a lot harder a bit later.
Re: (Score:1)
The significant argument is that China is a mercantilist power. And while free trade remains, in my view, theoretically correct in a best-case scenario, when the world's second-largest economy is both aggressively mercantilist economically and aggressively revisionist geopolitically you can't simply look at economic equations when you're making policy. These people who make everything we consume are literally our slaves because of "free trade". There is no humane way to under cut China, who cares literally
Re: (Score:2)
There is a difference between tariffs and starting to kill large companies...
Re:The US economy is _this_ bad? (Score:4, Interesting)
Any kind of protectionism is a very bad sign. Pushing it is, like Trump now seems to be doing, is worse. It never helps, it delays necessary improvements and has the problems just hit a lot harder a bit later.
"free trade" as it stands is just a euphemism for exploitation. Trade could have been used to work towards parity of ecological protection and human rights, but it's obvious why it isn't.
While bringing millions of people out of poverty through trade is a noble goal, enriching a government that will keep them bound in inescapable tyranny is most definitely not. The result will be that the greed that we have been ruled by will have helped create a massive industrial base in a country where millions of men will never have wives. China will find a way to keep their people occupied, one way or another. Sadly it'd be pretty typical to send off our poor to die in a war at great expense with an enemy that our own corporate interests created.
Even if Trump is doing right thing for the wrong reasons, it's still in our own long term interests not to prop up China any more than we already have.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if Trump is doing right thing for the wrong reasons, it's still in our own long term interests not to prop up China any more than we already have.
It is not that simple. China is not "propped up", it is just the cheapest source for a lot of things now and quite a few things are not even made in other places anymore or cannot easily be made in the numbers needed. I do agree that anything that is good for China is a problem at this time. But more and more so is anything that is good for the US. If you had not noticed, the US is already an early-stage police-state and it is slowly going in the direction of China. Remember that the "social credit score" i
Re: (Score:2)
China is not "propped up", it is just the cheapest source
Once you factor in externalized costs, it's not the cheapest source. Only the most profitable for the same group of people who control your 'representatives' through campaign contributions.
For example, a study estimated that 9 out of the 10 rivers responsible for most of the plastic entering the oceans were located in Asia. [www.ufz.de] What is the cost of having to consume microplastics whenever you want eat seafood?
"the lesser evil" argument is just a whataboutism. I can take the position of being against allowing fa
Re: (Score:2)
Your moral high-ground is bogus. Your "TCO" argument is bogus as well, as it does not translate to anything practical and is not even relevant. Also, you simply ignored that argument that things can often be not even made anymore someplace else in the required quantities. You are basically just grandstanding, safe in the knowledge that _you_ will never be called upon to do anything that works.
Re: (Score:2)
So, another honor-less coward sniping from the shadows presumes to explain the world to me. Funny. And utterly pathetic.
Re: (Score:2)
(Am not any AC, to be extra clear.)
Re: (Score:2)
Your calibration question is overly simplistic. There is no way to answer that without a larger essay and I doubt any insights you can offer are worth that effort.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean "people remain dumb and continue believe in protectionism".
Because people do generally not understand that protectionism is the road to hell. Like other utterly stupid things, it seems a good idea to them.
He pardoned a war criminal (Score:2)
Sorry sir, you have lost all credibility.
Dear free trade, anti-facism Repubs... (Score:3, Insightful)
I thought you R's were for free trade! I thought you R's were against unilateral action taken by one person, without review of the other parts!
I'm not a huge fan of China here, but I definitely don't support the President just being able to order that nobody can do business with a certain company. We're supposed to have separation of powers, and due process in this country. This ain't due process! This resembles a dictatorship.
So I implore whatever Republicans that still have any principles left, stand up to this guy! Stop falling in line just because the guy is president! Stand up for due process, and against unchecked power!
I applaud ... (Score:1)
Treatment of Uighurs (Score:2)
The lawmakers said China's actions in its western region of Xinjiang "may constitute crimes against humanity" and urged tighter U.S. export controls to ensure that U.S. companies are not assisting the Chinese government's crackdown there. China has faced growing condemnation from Western capitals and rights groups for setting up facilities that U.N. experts describe as mass detention centers holding more than 1 million ethnic Uighurs and other Muslims.
So I'm curious why there isn't a jihad against China?
Where is the condemnation from the Islamic world?
"Western capitals" are the ones condemning?
They'll be trained, allright (Score:2)
"The facilities or camps that have opened are vocational training centers, the government has said."
Ji Sing Pow
Training Muslim detainees in how to make little rock from big rocks the hard way since 2017.
Of course (Score:2)
We could always say that any Chinese investment can only own 49% of a US company, and require US owners for the other 51 percent, with free access to the product and its blueprints....
Another Cold War propaganda! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
big difference between camps for your own populace and those for immigration criminals. Countries have borders and laws and specifically immigration laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You show the wrong-headed ignorance I was talking about.
There are laws and procedures for asylum in these United States. An asylum seeker can be a criminal, either in country of origin or by violating the laws and procedures of the United States.
Quit trying to raise a smoke screen around the truth that the USA has borders, laws and immigration procedures, including for asylum seekers. Quit trying to advocate lawlessness.
Re: (Score:1)
RED DANGER! COMMIES!
Wait, what? CNN has spent the past 2 years telling me 24/7 that Russia is evil, and any politician who has ever talked to a Russian is forever tainted. Now the left is back to saying that Commies are OK?
Man, I just can't keep up with politics these days.
Re: (Score:1)
Wait, what? CNN has spent the past 2 years telling me 24/7 that Russia is evil, and any politician who has ever talked to a Russian is forever tainted. Now the left is back to saying that Commies are OK?
Dickless, what commies are you talking about? The Chinese? Get over yourself