Biden To Order Review of US Reliance on Overseas Supply Chains For Semiconductors, Rare Earths (cnbc.com) 196
President Joe Biden will direct his administration to conduct a review of key U.S. supply chains including semiconductors, high-capacity batteries, medical supplies and rare earth metals. From a report: The assessment, which will be led by members of both Biden's economic and national security teams, will analyze the "resiliency and capacity of the American manufacturing supply chains and defense industrial base to support national security [and] emergency preparedness," according to a draft of an executive order seen by CNBC. The text of the executive order is being finalized and the ultimate language could vary from the current draft. The White House also plans to review gaps in domestic manufacturing and supply chains that are dominated by or run through "nations that are or are likely to become unfriendly or unstable."
Though the order does not mention China, the directive is likely in large part an effort by the administration to determine how reliant the U.S. economy and military are on a critical group of Chinese exports. Biden said earlier this month that his White House is gearing up for "extreme competition" with China. The pending executive order is one of the administration's first tangible efforts to evaluate and shore up American business and defense interests through a thorough review of where, and from which countries, it receives key raw materials. Some of the commodities and components listed in the order included rare earth metals, a group of minerals used in the production of a variety of advanced technologies, including computer screens, state-of-the-art weapons and electric vehicles.
Though the order does not mention China, the directive is likely in large part an effort by the administration to determine how reliant the U.S. economy and military are on a critical group of Chinese exports. Biden said earlier this month that his White House is gearing up for "extreme competition" with China. The pending executive order is one of the administration's first tangible efforts to evaluate and shore up American business and defense interests through a thorough review of where, and from which countries, it receives key raw materials. Some of the commodities and components listed in the order included rare earth metals, a group of minerals used in the production of a variety of advanced technologies, including computer screens, state-of-the-art weapons and electric vehicles.
I can Save you some time... (Score:5, Insightful)
We are too reliant.
Thanks... good night.
Re:I can Save you some time... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The US is further behind on processing than we are on mining, though it needs to improve on both. You're absolutely right, though, that it's not an issue of availability.
About a month ago I made some investments in UCore and TMRC. Amazingly lucky timing, I was looking at them as a long-term play because the market forecasts for demand are way out of whack with reality, and the sector hadn't yet heated up as much as battery mineral resource sectors. Though the potential China overhang was additionally an ob
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I can Save you some time... (Score:4, Insightful)
Limited agreement. Heavy industry needs to be brought back with environmental controls. Even light industry should have more environmental controls that is currently in place. And, yes, that will raise the costs. So do it first for those things that are more strategically important.
The problem is how to encourage the industry without pushing various forms of corruption. (Also how to enforce those environmental controls.) This probably means that benefits can't be targeted to individual contracts. (Look at what happened in Wisconsin with FoxConn.) But saying that "X doesn't work" doesn't say what would work. But all of the traditional methods seem to encourage various forms of "padding the budget".
Re:I can Save you some time... (Score:5, Informative)
Rare earths mining can be done with existing mining, environmental and safety regulations. In fact, it's actually happening right now because China refuses to export rare earth, so even the added cost still makes the US very competitive.
And foundries are expensive - enough so that environmental regulations are a drop in the bucket because the foundry needs it anyways. If they can't discharge polluted water out (and foundries put out a lot of contaminated water), they can purify it - the equipment already exists and is required by the process anyways. Plus, the pollutants can be recovered and re-used - heavy metals like arsenic and such can be recovered and re-used.
Where the US falters is in making cheap consumer goods, but that's not something that's usually a critical supply chain item. Critical products aren't typically the ones consumers buy.
After all, the US makes N95 masks and other stuff domestically already, vaccines are produced in the US, etc. Those things are doing just fine even with all the regulations in place.
Making a US made TV is probably a lot lower on the list of critical items. Domestic production of ICs is vital for things like defense and military where you want to ensure the chips aren't tampered with, for example.
Re: I can Save you some time... (Score:2)
Yes, all of it CAN be done, but why would anyone invest in the US right now to even build any of it.
We used to have all of the tech here, there is a reason we shipped it overseas and itâ(TM)s not labor costs. Shipping costs a TON more per device than the labor does.
The problem is that we donâ(TM)t have a government that wants to stimulate business.
There are too many regulations and taxes and the majority of those are not environmental, theyâ(TM)re just in place to keep a massive government ap
Re: (Score:2)
It does feel the optimal approach for the US is drawing on foreign reserves at low cost while retaining the ability to bring production and exploitation of US resources up to scale swiftly if required.
Until it's required, why consume the resources?
Re: (Score:3)
The question is not *that* we are too dependent, but *how*.
You need to identify and characterize threats and vulnerabilities. It makes a difference *who* you are relying on, and for what. Whether you are talking telecommunication processors or memory chips makes a difference, as does whether the widget comes from Japan or China.
Whether you have alternative sources makes a difference too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And the reality is we already know all we probably need to about the 'how'. There are plenty of US industrial firms and various organizations under the Pentagon that have almost certainly done all that analysis work already for their needs. We could probably spend a few weeks identifying the most credible and qualified sources and just go ask them!
Guys like Biden don't form task forces to do stuff, they form them to NOT do stuff. Its about CYA - "hey look I am taking the China problem seriously", and appea
Re: (Score:3)
We are too reliant.
Wrong. Americans were too cheap.
Do you know how much more the stuff you bought would cost if America kept all those manufacturing and mining within the US instead of outsourcing them? How many Americans would like it to have everything cost more and, as a result, having to live a more frugal life?
Just look at how much subsidies American farmers get every year. Imagine paying similar subsidies to factories and mines so they could keep operating. How much would it cost?
The almost two decades of high econo
Watcha gonna do about it? (Score:2)
It's great to review the situation and all, but I doubt a politician can have much effect on a problem like this.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd say the New Deal, Lend-lease and the US economic performance during the Cold War suggest otherwise. In those cases, the Federal government was willing to pony up the cash needed. That might be tricky if Republican lawmakers decide to be obstructionist, and with a strong possibility of the House flipping in two years, it makes Biden's job a lot harder, but previous Administrations and Congresses have been able to push through pretty massive domestic industrial expansions.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually Biden can do a lot about it by ending the trade war with China. China produces 80% of the world's rare earths and has been talking about cutting the US off with a trade embargo.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually Biden can do a lot about it by ending the trade war with China. China produces 80% of the world's rare earths and has been talking about cutting the US off with a trade embargo.
China outproduces everyone not because of their reserves, but because mining is dirty and we've passed laws that make it more expensive to dig out of the ground than to import megatons of bulk material from overseas. If you "care about the planet" you might consider that this is a net loss, as the dirty mining is still happening, and now you're also burning shitloads of bunker oil to transport the materials halfway across the world, but most "caring about the planet" is just "virtue signaling" and "stuff w
Re: (Score:2)
Any Chinese embargo would only have short term
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Who is going to build a new mine and refinery, knowing that in a few years China will come along and crush them with cheaper imports anyway?
The market isn't that big anyway, most of the manufacturing is not in the he US. It's just that what there is in the US is critical.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly, it will require the mine to become taxpayer funded. Maybe worth it for the sake of national security, but painful either way.
Re: (Score:2)
The US can only prevent that in the US though, and the US market isn't big enough on its own because most of the manufacturing involving rare earths is done elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
It's great to review the situation and all, but I doubt a politician can have much effect on a problem like this.
If an elected United States Representative, fail to fulfill their job title and role, then perhaps it's time we elect a new United States Representative, and make it damn clear as to exactly why the old one, is being fired.
It's that simple. Citizens either give a shit, or they don't. Choose, and remember you still live in a Democracy.
Re:Watcha gonna do about it? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's that simple. Citizens either give a shit, or they don't. Choose, and remember you still live in a Democracy.
Lol, "it's that simple"?
Have you not been paying attention for the last decade or so?
Citizens can't even figure out if what they give a shit about is real at this point. How in the fuck are you going to get a majority to vote someone out when they can't determine how likely it is that Hillary Clinton has kidnapped children being raped under a pizza place? When they see Trump appointed judges laugh election lawsuits out of court and still show up in the thousands to storm the capitol?
Citizens give a shit. The problem is that a whole lot of them don't know what the fuck they're talking about, and/or they don't know what to do to make things better. Or they can't, because they live in a gerrymandered district, designed to take away their ability to influence an election.
If it was simple, we'd have fixed this shit by now.
Re: (Score:2)
Rezoning some areas to be industrial or allow mining. ...
Negotiate Trade deals with more reliable countries to help source products.
Annexing land that may be more abundant.
Tax insensitive for those who buy American Sourced products
Grants for research towards finding alternatives, or use what we have better.
One of the big reason why the Electric Car is getting popular today, to a point where it isn't a joke anymore, was due to Tax Credit systems towards electric car makers. Allowing them to make and produce
Re: (Score:2)
magine how many early deaths would have been prevented if the president had the capacity to ensure an influx of stockpiled PPE to every hospital within 1 week? Sure...COVID would still be a disaster, but I would bet thousands of lives were lost due to lack of ventilators and PPE that could have been stockpiled or at least had a plant to quickly distribute.
This seems dubious considering we were able to supply a lot of that (though perhaps not quite as early as one would like) and a lot of it (particularly the ventilators) went unused [washingtonpost.com]. Then later we discovered that using ventilators in many cases wasn't the best treatment option and some people shouldn't be put on them.
Furthermore all plans seem obvious and good in hindsight because you know exactly what you wish you would have had or needed, but you can't always anticipate that in advance. Suppose we do st
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is the current political environment it is difficult for any real long term disaster planning.
Why spend billions of dollars to prepare for something that might not happen. It is just Government Pork Fat...
Until that one day where it does happen, then everyone is like, why didn't we prepare?
The answer is we told our government that we didn't want to prepare, and they listened to us.
Re: (Score:2)
There are unlimited disaster scenarios at our disposal. We cannot foresee all scenarios (especially uncommon), it would bankrupt resources and cause harm in other areas. Ultimately, most resource issues are not just a matter of political desire, but of a real scarcity of resources.
What government can do is to prepare to remove roadblocks of legislative and logistical nature so that when a disaster occurs, they can get the disaster response professionals the needed items as quickly as possible. Part of th
So like last time? (Score:2)
Though the order does not mention China, the directive is likely in large part an effort by the administration to determine how reliant the U.S. economy and military are on a critical group of Chinese exports. Biden said earlier this month that his White House is gearing up for "extreme competition" with China. The pending executive order is one of the administration's first tangible efforts to evaluate and shore up American business and defense interests through a thorough review of where, and from which countries, it receives key raw materials. Some of the commodities and components listed in the order included rare earth metals, a group of minerals used in the production of a variety of advanced technologies, including computer screens, state-of-the-art weapons and electric vehicles.
This is exactly what Trump did and he took a huge amount of flack for it. Maybe now that there is a (D) attached to the idea it will finally be viewed positively. Because in reality this should've happened a decade ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Keep making more enemies. While the EU, China and Russia grow.
You're a fool if you think Russia and China aren't already enemies. And an even bigger one if you think securing supply chains related to defense isn't important. Even the relatively pacifist EU does this.
Make someone else do it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of our rare earth resources are in places like California, Nevada and Arizona. Places that will throw a hissy-fit if people try to dig up mountaintops.
Well, that's certainly consistent (Score:2)
Declaring that dangerous and dirty work should be done by poor, poorly educated, non-white workers toiling away out of sight and without environmental or safety controls is fully-consistent with our new President who, along with his family [bbc.com] members [nypost.com], have taken millions of dollars from China [realclearpolitics.com] (and other countries) in exchange for no visible work and having no known expertise in the areas involved, and is now supporting slavery and genocide [irishpost.com] as a cultural difference [news.com.au] when China does these things.
For Joe, China ru
Re: (Score:2)
And your Trump astroturfing gets nowhere. He was on the Russian tit and fawned plenty over Xi. He's gone. Get over it.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't wreck your own shit when others are willing to wreck theirs for you.
Ah yes. The long tailpipe.
targets missed (Score:2)
Nobody has paid me to provide a false sense of grassroots support for something, so no... no "astroturf" here
As to the rest: Biden family entanglements and money from China is a well-documented historical fact and there are at least 2 federal investigations related to it. If those are shut down by the Biden admin, then by the Democrat rule of "Trump fired Comey", Biden will have to be impeached.
As to the Trump-Russia stuff... Democrats used the House, the Senate, the FBI and the CIA and the State Department
Biden's doing a sneak-Trump in 2... 1... (Score:2)
Why no 3? Because we already are at 3.
It's gonna be like Obama following Bush again: All hope and change, and the same foreign politics, and Guantanamo G
gulag stays open, just with fewer silly antics and more turning the former crazy into the new "normal", so you are prepared for the next step with the next crazy that follows Biden, and will make Trump look like a sane guy.
Been there, seen that
Rare earths (Score:3)
This is in regards to Executive Order 13817 [federalregister.gov], right?
The Secretary of the Interior [...] shall publish a list of critical minerals in the Federal Register not later than 60 days after the date of this order
The United States is heavily reliant on imports of certain mineral commodities that are vital to the Nation's security and economic prosperity. [...] It shall be the policy of the Federal Government to reduce the Nation's vulnerability to disruptions in the supply of critical minerals, which constitutes a strategic vulnerability for the security and prosperity of the United States.
[...]increasing activity at all levels of the supply chain, including exploration, mining, concentration, separation, alloying, recycling, and reprocessing critical minerals;
https://www.nationaldefensemag... [nationalde...gazine.org]
MP Materials, which operates the largest rare earth element mines in the Western Hemisphere, had a big week.
It was one of three companies on Nov. 17 to receive Defense Department grants intended to return rare earth production to the United States. The following day it was listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
The Pentagon awarded a Defense Production Act Title III grant worth $9.6 million to MP Materials so it can begin to refine the strategic minerals at its Mountain Pass, California, mine.
Oh wait, that was Trump's order from 2017. I think it's funny seeing president after president doing the exact same thing (like Obama in speeches and in voting supporting a border wall with Mexico), but it is spun as good or bad depending on the political views of who is publishing the news.
Re:Rare earths (Score:5, Insightful)
A quick search, though, didn't lead to any reports about follow-up actions. Perhaps I didn't use the correct keywords.
But my impression is that Trump issued a lot of orders that didn't have *any* follow-up.
Re: (Score:3)
In my post I cited a link to an article showing where the federal government provided money to three mines to re-open or expand their operations. That was a direct, tangible action.
Here is a federal government report from 2019 that goes into great detail about specific minerals, including what percentage of that mineral is imported vs produced natively, calls to action, etc:
https://www.commerce.gov/sites... [commerce.gov]
Other direct actions include opening up federal lands for mining rare earths, and faster permitting t
Not Rare - just dirty (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They're called "rare earths" because they were hard to isolate from other elements. Especially from each other. You're right, they aren't particularly uncommon. But easily usable concentrations of them are uncommon. And, yes, the US has a lot of known mines for the stuff that have been shutdown because it wasn't economic to keep them open. But re-opening those mines often wouldn't be all that easy.
GOOD! (Score:3)
What we really need is tariffs on nations that extract rare earth metals using highly environmentally destructive processes. Yes, it's really just China but still. What we need is to enable the safe and environmentally friendly extraction of rare earth metals from places which exist right here inside the US.
Afghanistan (Score:2)
This is WHY we were really in Afghanistan - it was about their rare earth deposits.
Rare Earths? (Score:2)
Let me save you some time, Joe: Earths are so rare that there's only one and we're currently living on it.
Just ask Defense National Stockpile (Score:2)
They are the agency that is supposed to stockpile Rare Earths.
Oh wait, did we forget to take back the key from Trump when he left office?
Said it before, saying it again (Score:2)
People are still forgetting that there was a lanthanide metal mine in California. It was shut down because of the thorium content in the tailings.
It all comes back to "Radiashun!" fears.
Dude. (Score:2)
This is thirty years too late, we started offshoring manufacturing to the far east in the 80's because 'the free market'. Carl Icahn sold Motorola to the Chinese. Korea and Taiwan have been making the best government subsidised semiconductors cheaper and with more advanced technology for more than 30 years. As for the Chinese stealing our technology, they have been making better tech and sticking western companies labels on it for more than a decade. All of the electronics you own is made in the far east. M
Re:I wonder how Fox News will demonize this? (Score:4, Informative)
It's odd if Fox spins it this way, since it pretty much bolsters the notion that the US (and really, Western nations) need to the overreliance on China for semiconductor fabrication and rare earth supplies. If this is part of an overall strategy of limiting the impacts of any future disputes with China, it obviously makes sense that repatriating domestic rare earth extraction and fabrication is critical. Up here in Canada, there's also a growing sentiment that we've become far too reliant on China in key industrial and technology areas, and we need to start bolstering domestic capacity. Perhaps it is time for a resource and technology NATO-type pact. Since China has made it pretty clear that it wants to remake the world in its image, it's time to remind China that it doesn't own the planet yet.
Re: (Score:3)
It was probably prompted by rumours published recently that the Chinese government has been asking suppliers of rare earths how badly it would affect the US if they enacted trade embargos. There is a particular focus on defence, such as the F35 which apparently uses a lot of rare earths, and also on technology manufacturing in general.
Ars picked it up too: https://arstechnica.com/tech-p... [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Canada has some of the largest rare earth reserves in the world. Our Parliament, whatever the current PM thinks, is moving much more towards pulling away from China for critical infrastructure and raw resource supplies, so Biden should give us a call.
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully things will happen the way the parliament thinks instead of Trudeau's wish - after all, says "genocide" is a loaded word and admires the basic dictatorship.
Re: (Score:3)
Nah, I'm a Canadian. He pissed off Alberta. The reality was the pipeline was in litigation hell and even with Trump's re-approval the odds were stacked against. And Alberta's pissed off because they bought an equity stake in the pipeline as well as several billion in loan guarantees, despite Biden making it clear last May that he'd nix the pipeline, and despite the litigation from both farmers and activists due to a part of it being built over a major aquifer covered in sandy soil that would have made an oi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They could just say "Trump was right". I think this is an issue the entire nation can get behind.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but there's also a M.A.D. aspect to this, if China is dependent on the US and the US is dependent on China then they might be a bit less likely to go to war with each other. China's belligerence and xenophobia lately has been worrying.
Re:I wonder how Fox News will demonize this? (Score:4, Interesting)
Seems like a smart decision that TMK no president before him addressed and benefits everyone, particularly the business community....but we can't acknowledge Biden or anyone with a (D) doing something well. The fox evening bracket will have to spin this as a disaster somehow or cowardice or something crazy no rational person will think of. I find this very worrisome because think of the XSX PS5 shortage...now imagine if this was due to raw materials and applied to equipment we actually need? Imagine if you have to get on a 6 month wait list to get a new laptop? It's an important issue than needs to be thought out and preparing early will help us deal with it better when it hits....for example, imagine how much less the early days of COVID would have impacted us if we had national disaster preparation and could get PPE to hospitals quickly? Sadly, this is just another thing that will get tainted by politics by having Biden's name on it and a full time opposition networking in Fox News and others willing to cut off their nose to spite their face.
This is why the political vitriol, needs to be demonetized. And I'm talking across the board. Every single "news" provider.
Greed has infected the news industry, and many grow tired of the political war they incite with hype and clickbait bullshit filling headlines. Even worse, Representatives now think their part-time job is standing on a social media stage, roasting the very people they're supposed to be meeting in the center aisle with. It's childish and pathetic, and it's time everyone gets back to work instead of collecting Twitter team points (as if THAT shit is what starving Americans need during a pandemic shuttering entire industries.) Hashtags, don't pay the damn bills.
Regarding a six-month wait to get a new laptop, I would much prefer we stop manufacturing disposable shit electronics instead. Would be nice if a laptop with all of it's non-removable parts actually outlasted a disruption in the supply chain. Besides, we're long past the days of CPUs and memory limiting users. (the average social media TubeFlix junkie isn't exactly stressing their hardware.)
Re: (Score:2)
This. I wish I had mod points.
Re:I wonder how Fox News will demonize this? (Score:5, Informative)
Trump literally did this. This is simply one of countless Trump policies that Biden is continuing, and merely re-framing/re-naming as their own policies to avoid the TDSing democrat base from rejecting them.
Fact is, most of Trump's foreign trade policies are either staying or getting even harsher under Biden. Not just on China either. They're keeping Iran sanctions in place. China sanctions and trade enforcement are going to be hilarious now that USTR is... Taiwanese (Chinese trade apparatchiks are reportedly melting down over this). And EU trade Commissioner just stated that he's very worried that Biden will not just carry on with Trump's policies going toward open trade conflict with EU, but actually harden US stance as Biden just ordered even harsher "buy American" policy than Trump did, effectively throwing relevant WTO rules completely out of the window.
Even Trump didn't go quite that far.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to Trump I have to pay more for parts from Digikey because of his tariffs. This is for hobbyist level stuff too, not manufacturing.
Re:I wonder how Fox News will demonize this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I wonder how Fox News will demonize this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Good. Products made with abject disregard for environmental destruction should have very high prices. Products made with exploited labor that exists far below the standards you expect for yourself should have very high prices. That's the true cost of the world you seem to think you're entitled to.
So pay up. Quietly.
Re: (Score:3)
Products made with exploited labor that exists far below the standards you expect for yourself should have very high prices.
US labor standards are far less than what is expected in Europe. Should the EU impose tariffs on US products?
Re: (Score:2)
US labor standards are far less than what is expected in Europe. Should the EU impose tariffs on US products?
They did.
A big part of "Trump's Trade War" (TM democrats) was Trump imposing or threatening to impose corresponding tariffs on their imports to the US unless/until they backed off.
If they think they should penalize US exports to them because the poor US labor force is underpaid/underbenefitted compared to their own, that's their call. Retaliatory tariffs are the US' call. Negotiations over this are
Re: (Score:2)
Products made with exploited labor that exists far below the standards you expect for yourself should have very high prices.
US labor standards are far less than what is expected in Europe. Should the EU impose tariffs on US products?
Yes. And proportionally on products from every nation that does not meet EU standards. Small tariffs on those who come closest, and larger tariffs on those who are farther from compliance.
It should not be cheaper to import goods made [by slave labor / without environmental controls / etc.] in foreign countries than to purchase locally manufactured goods.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hi there, I make products in the US, and we export them to the EU. And tariffs are always charged.
Are they right in doing so? The fact that they do or don't isn't debatable, it's factual. I'm interested in opinion. Are they justified in charging tariffs because they have higher labor standards than the US?
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen some pretty shit manufacturing come out of the American slave, err, I mean prison plants. IIRC, one of those reconstruction amendments had an exception for prison slave labour and American politicians responded by illegalizing stuff like cannabis to fill the prisons up with non-violent offenders.
Re: (Score:3)
Yea its Trump's fault - nothing to do with the massive scale culture of industrial espionage in China - nope that's got nothing to do with it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean you have to pay what the parts are actually worth and not the subsidized low price given by currency manipulation, worker exploitation and theft of technology?
Re:I wonder how Fox News will demonize this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
>A lot of the Trump policies were things left over from the Obama or Bush administrations
This is a verbal sleight of hand. For any president, overwhelming majority of policies will be rooted in decades of history, because overwhelming majority of policies are fine. There are very few people who are concerned about things like how bureaucrats are hired and evaluated for example.
Trump was brought in by electorate mostly to break specific set of policies that were severely outdated and didn't serve interest
Re: (Score:3)
Fact is, most of Trump's foreign trade policies are either staying or getting even harsher under Biden. Not just on China either. They're keeping Iran sanctions in place.
I'm vary thankful this is happening. Foreign policy seems to follow some sort of variation of the second law of thermodynamics. [wikipedia.org] Some actions are reversible, and others aren't. I believe Trump's policies on China and Iran are irreversible. To get back to the same conditions as 2016 would take more effort than it did to get from 2016 to now.
You can't just pretend the last four years didn't happen. You need to play the hand you are dealt. Like him or not, Trump left Biden in a strong negotiating positi
Re: (Score:2)
This is what a large portion of people who voted for Trump stated they voted for back in 2017's two week "what went wrong" spree that US left wing media went on before they decided that TDS was the way to go. People wanted the bull in china shop to break the calcified structures of both domestic and foreign relations that were in place long after they ceased serving interests of the nation and its citizenry.
It remains to be seen if four years of Trump was enough for real change to be forced on US elites. So
Re: (Score:2)
No. This isn't the same as a trade war. This is, instead, preparing so that a trade war won't be too damaging. There's a big difference.
Actually, this sounds like just a study, but it could lead to decent corrective actions. Whether it will or not, however, isn't something I would care to make a bet on.
Re: (Score:2)
"As long as we don't call it trade war, we should continue with Trump's policies and strengthen them where possible".
Yes, that is what I said Biden's admin is doing above. Spin to sell it to TDSing crowd that is all about narrative and spin and finds the reality behind the narrative utterly irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this is an excellent example of why Biden must present them keeping and hardening Trump's policies as novel. That way people like person above will be able to accept them, since they're not "isolationist/protectionist/xenophobic" but "pro-american/enhance trade to improve american status in trade deals" instead.
It's all about rhetoric and spin, as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
"Trump literally did this. "
Trump literally did not do this.
Trump would ban a Chinese product vendor for unsubstantiated security holes, then cave, then ban another Chinese vendor, then cave. Trump gained no concessions from product vendors, never mentioned supply chains, and took no actions at all to promote domestic semiconductor manufacturing.
Re: (Score:2)
TDS in action. "There was a small handful of actions that didn't pan out, so I'll ignore the overwhelming majority of actions taken and focus on that small handful".
Trump didn't actually do anything (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, TDS like this. When you pretend really really hard that things like NAFTA2 and Iran sanctions that effectively destroyed Iran's economy are "photo ops", there's really nothing to be said, as connection between reality and statement above is simply utterly absent.
Which is why Biden's admin has to pretend as hard as it can that these policies are its own and not simply inherited from Trump. Because people like person above will reject them regardless of merit due to their mental ailment.
Trump (Score:2)
"Countless?" (Score:2)
"This is simply one of countless Trump policies that Biden is continuing,"
I'll bet you can count them. And quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you should try doing it. I suspect you'll get tired and quit before reaching half way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: We can't make long-term decisions with Fox New (Score:2)
Amen. Regarding the topic itâ(TM)s is practically worthless. It sounds good but nothing is made here, especially electronics, what does it matter if US companies have their rare earth supplies shored up if everything is made overseas?
We make lots of stuff, just not much for consumers (Score:3)
Amen. Regarding the topic itâ(TM)s is practically worthless. It sounds good but nothing is made here, especially electronics, what does it matter if US companies have their rare earth supplies shored up if everything is made overseas?
Lots of large appliances as well as medical devices are still manufactured here. Imagine if this lead to a shortage of hospital diagnostics equipment? Lots of industrial equipment is also made here. We don't make the cheap stuff. We still make a lot of stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no reason we cannot make all this stuff in the western world tomorrow, it just takes some purchase ord
Re: (Score:3)
If Trump did this, it would be called xenophobic.
I'd be the first to praise it...even feel confused and suspicious that I was missing something.
You're a few months late, but go ahead and praise away [defensenews.com].
The order states that the county’s “undue reliance on critical minerals, in processed or unprocessed form, from foreign adversaries constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.”
But hey, "no president before [Biden]" amirite?
Re: (Score:2)
I stopped reading after your first false statement. His....and many other peoples issues were the agreements were far too heavy in favor of China. He didn't give a rats butt about them being Chinese. I'm sorry you have to make statements up to help justify your dislike of the policy.
Re: (Score:2)
Fixing your first line for objectivity.
Because _I say that_ how Trump Implemented the problem was based on xenophobic reasons (I do not care if this is true, but the media told me so and I liked it, and it's a good weapon to attack with).
The rest of the post continues in that vein. What you're not accounting for is that Trump hasn't actually come up with the policy (in truth, neither of the parties really runs what gets put out there; they may have a few cause celebres that they chuck in and run through, but the majority of this kind of thing comes from the perpetual public servants who've been doing the leg work for years or decades before it really sees the light of day).
Personally, I like the idea
Re: (Score:2)
> However it may be cheaper in China, because they may have better manufacturing or mining infrastructure.
LOL. It's because they have a lot of cheap labour and a disregard of the environment.
Re: I wonder how Fox News will demonize this? (Score:2, Troll)
If Trump had "cured" cancer, that would probably have been him rexommending everyone drink brake cleaner before his bleach. And you would have believed him.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't tell any more when people are joking. Do you think that BAReFO0t really believes that Trump said to drink bleach? Or do you think he is lying and knows that he is lying, but does it anyway?
Re: (Score:3)
Funny, my question was going to be how the left-wing mainstream media justifies Biden following Trump's policies
There isn't much to justify, since Trump did not really have much in the way of policies. It's become pretty obvious that Trump was not ever playing three-dimensional chess, and that he couldn't even really manage two-dimensional checkers. His "policies" were mostly just broad, fuzzy objectives that he clearly had no idea how to accomplish. Trump was basically a one-trick pony who focused on yelling at/punishing people until they did what he wanted. Trump in many ways is the epitome of an affluenza sufferer
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, my question was going to be how the left-wing mainstream media justifies Biden following Trump's policies. Since he was pretty much villified as a demon and na$i, the only rational choice would be to repudiate and repeal everything he did.But that's not the case, and this will cause much cognitive dissonance amongst the "wokists".
I'm a free market fiscal conservative, so one of my biggest policy problems with Trump (I specify policy problems because I'd say my biggest problem with him is his abuse of office for personal gain, including the incompetently attempted coup), has been his protectionist policies with regards to tariffs. The real question is, "why were republicans suddenly for tariffs?" Democrats actually remained consistent, and they actually agreed with Trump on that front, even during his presidency. Here's an example: S [thehill.com]
Re:Great timing Joe! (Score:5, Informative)
They threaten that from time to time.
They actually did it once. It didn't work. "rare" doesn't mean hard to find - many countries have these resources and could mine them if they wanted to. When China stopped exporting, they wanted to, so other mines opened and life went on.
Of course, the longer the mines and refineries are idle, the harder it will be to get them back online, so maybe the threat has more teeth now than it did then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Completely wrong. Almost all processing is done in China. If China decides to stop processing it would definitely be an issue.
There's a solution to that, too. There is no black art here, merely laws that made it more cost effective to export production elsewhere.
Maybe it's time that certain segments of society learned that if we want $THINGS then sometimes we have to bear the negative burden those $THINGS bring to the table (like pollution) rather than simply moving the pollution somewhere else (and creating more net pollution, since now we have to transport $THINGS halfway around the planet).
Re: (Score:2)