5 ms·

One good thing that could change from the tariffs is finally breaking the forced sharing of intellectual property with Chinese companies before allowing product

One good thing that could change from the tariffs is finally breaking the forced sharing of intellectual property with Chinese companies before allowing production. That was supposedly going to end around the end of 2018 already. A second positive change would be ending requiring selling a part of any foreign venture to a local Chinese company, which I don't think was planned to change. But the overall idea that trade deficits were generally bad for the us is a silly idea, so wrong. The us has done a terrible job helping workers find new employment when their old factory or similar manufacturing jobs were lost to another country. It's hard to see how we'll ever do a good job on that because half the country has an ideological resistance to helping each other (social security, medical insurance, a job, those are all things we should make on our own). I can't see that these tariffs can ever bring back many factory jobs to the us. We need a strategy to find new jobs and industries. The current plan is just not going to accomplish much of anything. But, and it's a big but, lets not forget that trade between countries has a good chance of reducing the potential of wars between them. I really believe that extensive international trade between the us and china will have a good tampering effect on potential war between the two countries. Chinese building of military bases in the south china sea against the wishes of your neighbors and and asserting your power won't help anyone to trust china, but when there was extensive and growing trade between the two powerful countries war should be less likely.

baybal2 8y ago
>A second positive change would be ending requiring selling a part of any foreign venture to a local Chinese company, which I don't think was planned to change. It was not a requirement for many many years already, and before that on case by case basis. The list of industries in which it is still a requirement is well known. On Qualcomm and NXP, that's kinda bizarre - nor Qualcomm, nor NXP is a listed company in China, nevertheless, China orders a block on merger of their units in USA. But were they not be compliant, they could've fared worse: remember Sigmatel, they tried to bully a Chinese competitor with patent trolling, but instead got shipments of their chips tracelessly vanishing at Chinese customs. That was a death sentence for them as a company: it doesn't matter that they were selling chips to foreign companies for as the final product was assembled in China
euroclydon 8y ago
> But, and it's a big but, lets not forget that trade between countries has a good chance of reducing the potential of wars between them. Was this ever true? The old saying, "If goods don't cross borders, then troops soon will." Europe was very commercially integrated before WW1. I think nukes are what will prevent a war.
- mrguyorama 8y ago
  Nukes cannot prevent war as long as military higher ups believe that a nuclear war is "winable"/surviveable, and seeing as they get special bunkers in the event of said nuclear war, I don't think they will smarten up any time soon
denverkarma 8y ago
Saying the other political party has “ideological resistance to helping each other,” is ridiculous. That kind of bigoted dismissive ignorance just fuels our bitter partisan gridlock and helps nothing. Of course are fringe nutters in the world and unfortunately some of them even get elected, but the vast majority of Americans, Republicans and Democrats, are just ordinary people who care about their kids and their neighbors, want to see everyone prosper, and even agree about a lot more than they disagree about.
- Latteland 8y ago
  But Paul Ryan, leader of the house, wants to cut social security, medicare and medicaid. He's against unemployment. He's the titular leader of 1/3 of the govt. That's not an exaggeration, those are his stated goals in multiple interviews over many years. I agree that the vast majority of Americans want those things but the leader of the house does not. He's not just a fringe figure that managed to get elected but has no real power.
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    But Paul Ryan, leader of the house, wants to cut social security, medicare and medicaid. I don't think that he's against helping people. Rather, he thinks that those programs have long term externalities which outweigh their benefits. We're talking about actual people here, not villains from a 60's cartoon.
    - influx 8y ago
      Good point, in fact there's plenty of folks on the other side who would like to replace all these programs with a more efficient system (aka basic income).
      - robdachshund 8y ago
        I'm sure welfare for everyone will be great for the economy
      - 8y ago
stcredzero 8y ago
I really believe that extensive international trade between the us and china will have a good tampering effect on potential war between the two countries. The article could be interpreted thus: Extensive international trade between the us and china will have a good tampering effect on trade war between the two countries. Chinese building of military bases in the south china sea against the wishes of your neighbors and and asserting your power won't help anyone to trust china The long term plan of US strategic planners is to keep China bottled up behind their coastal waters with the help of Taiwan, Korea, Japan, and other allies and neutral parties who want to avoid Chinese hegemony. As a distant hegemon, the US is much preferred. On the other hand, China wants to realize the Greater Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere envisioned by pre-WWII imperial Japan, but with China as the head and local hegemon.

baybal2 8y ago

>A second positive change would be ending requiring selling a part of any foreign venture to a local Chinese company, which I don't think was planned to change. It was not a requirement for many many years already, and before that on case by case basis. The list of industries in which it is still a requirement is well known. On Qualcomm and NXP, that's kinda bizarre - nor Qualcomm, nor NXP is a listed company in China, nevertheless, China orders a block on merger of their units in USA. But were they not be compliant, they could've fared worse: remember Sigmatel, they tried to bully a Chinese competitor with patent trolling, but instead got shipments of their chips tracelessly vanishing at Chinese customs. That was a death sentence for them as a company: it doesn't matter that they were selling chips to foreign companies for as the final product was assembled in China

euroclydon 8y ago

> But, and it's a big but, lets not forget that trade between countries has a good chance of reducing the potential of wars between them. Was this ever true? The old saying, "If goods don't cross borders, then troops soon will." Europe was very commercially integrated before WW1. I think nukes are what will prevent a war.

mrguyorama 8y ago
Nukes cannot prevent war as long as military higher ups believe that a nuclear war is "winable"/surviveable, and seeing as they get special bunkers in the event of said nuclear war, I don't think they will smarten up any time soon

denverkarma 8y ago

Saying the other political party has “ideological resistance to helping each other,” is ridiculous. That kind of bigoted dismissive ignorance just fuels our bitter partisan gridlock and helps nothing. Of course are fringe nutters in the world and unfortunately some of them even get elected, but the vast majority of Americans, Republicans and Democrats, are just ordinary people who care about their kids and their neighbors, want to see everyone prosper, and even agree about a lot more than they disagree about.

Latteland 8y ago
But Paul Ryan, leader of the house, wants to cut social security, medicare and medicaid. He's against unemployment. He's the titular leader of 1/3 of the govt. That's not an exaggeration, those are his stated goals in multiple interviews over many years. I agree that the vast majority of Americans want those things but the leader of the house does not. He's not just a fringe figure that managed to get elected but has no real power.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  But Paul Ryan, leader of the house, wants to cut social security, medicare and medicaid. I don't think that he's against helping people. Rather, he thinks that those programs have long term externalities which outweigh their benefits. We're talking about actual people here, not villains from a 60's cartoon.
  - influx 8y ago
    Good point, in fact there's plenty of folks on the other side who would like to replace all these programs with a more efficient system (aka basic income).
    - robdachshund 8y ago
      I'm sure welfare for everyone will be great for the economy
    - 8y ago

stcredzero 8y ago

I really believe that extensive international trade between the us and china will have a good tampering effect on potential war between the two countries. The article could be interpreted thus: Extensive international trade between the us and china will have a good tampering effect on trade war between the two countries. Chinese building of military bases in the south china sea against the wishes of your neighbors and and asserting your power won't help anyone to trust china The long term plan of US strategic planners is to keep China bottled up behind their coastal waters with the help of Taiwan, Korea, Japan, and other allies and neutral parties who want to avoid Chinese hegemony. As a distant hegemon, the US is much preferred. On the other hand, China wants to realize the Greater Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere envisioned by pre-WWII imperial Japan, but with China as the head and local hegemon.