12 ms·

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I'll express a counterpoint - viewing the same situation through a different lens. Put simply, the Chinese understand w

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I'll express a counterpoint - viewing the same situation through a different lens. Put simply, the Chinese understand why American companies outsource their labor to China. Chinese labor is cheaper, and they are under no illusions - this outsourcing means that their own country experiences many of the negative externalities of Western consumption, including pollution. It's fair for American businesses to distrust Chinese companies and distrust the Chinese government, but can't we all agree that they brought it on themselves? Which multinational corporation reasonably expects that the Chinese government cares about their bottom line at all? And why do many ordinary Americans experience such outrage on behalf of these multinationals? Of course, I understand why their shareholders (and thus, many Americans) may be upset. If anything, I'm angry they jumped at the opportunity to eradicate their domestic workforce to a point where China has the opportunity to steal in the first place.

lsseckman 8y ago
> And why do many ordinary Americans experience such outrage on behalf of these multinationals These are companies we all helped build in one way or another. Their revenues boost our economy and pay for a lot of our govt services
- thr0waway2324 8y ago
  This. These countries also export to the rest of the world, strengthening the US dollar and making our nation richer.
edoo 8y ago
One of the primary reasons it is cheaper to build in China is they do not enforce pollution laws. We outlawed destroying the environment and all our friendly harmless corporations just moved production to where it is de facto legal. If we are not hypocrites we should be rejecting any products not built to our environmental standards.
- baybal2 8y ago
  No, have bothered to google for 5 minutes to check that zero enforcement was not the case for at least a decade?
  - edoo 8y ago
    No doubt there is some enforcement but it could get a lot better and still be a disaster. They need a zero tolerance policy backed up by jail time. I was in China 2 years ago and the Beijing air was gross and half the people were wearing surgical masks. In one part a few hundred miles from Beijing I experienced eye watering choking pollution hazes with 100m visibility that lasted for several hours. It was literally scary pollution.
ctvo 8y ago
You are conflating two things in this reply: There’s the official transfer of technology that happens in some circumstances when a western company wishes to do business in China, that is known and each company makes its own decisions on if this short term trade off is worthwhile. Americans should be angered that the Chinese, years after joining the WTO, still restrict their markets in this way while enjoying open access to other markets. This article does not touch the above. It’s about illegal, state sponsored theft of intellectual property. Are you asking why people should be upset another country is attacking companies based in the US and stealing their technology?
- shantanubala 8y ago
  You're right. I wasn't in any way trying to imply that the Chinese government was acting fairly - they are stealing and ought to be punished. My confusion stems from the American companies who readily jumped at the opportunity to heavily depend on supply chains inside of a country with 1) a relatively short history in the WTO 2) a previous history of market manipulation and 3) rampant human rights abuses And let's not mention that the entry into the WTO itself constituted a major overhaul of the Chinese economy, which should in itself be considered an experiment. I'm disappointed that the risks of trade in China have been understated for so long. And systematically underestimated by American firms. Or to put it a different way: how surprising is this situation? And does it belie a lack of proper enforcement and a lack of understanding of the risks of doing trade with China? It feels silly to only examine the narrative where the Chinese government is at fault because that narrative is obvious. What about the culpability of our own government for advocating for China's entry in the WTO? Or the immediate handoff of trade by American corporations when the decision produced short-term gains without examining how many rapid changes China was making to its economy?
  - ericd 8y ago
    I would say that the conditions the Chinese government sets are structured to exploit a large structural flaw in the American economy, in that the decision makers in most large companies are highly incentivized to achieve short term results even at the expense of long term. So the Chinese government offers to reward those decision makers handsomely in the short run, in exchange for essentially selling the tech lead the US has enjoyed and which underpins much of the value of US enterprises.
rgbrenner 8y ago
Americans are ok with companies outsourcing their labor to other countries... as long as those countries play fair. The assumption is that in a fair game, American's will find a way to win. But China doesn't play fair. This is like you and me playing a game, and I find out you're a cheater.. and you say, 'what are you upset about? You invited me here'
- Wowfunhappy 8y ago
  > The assumption is that in a fair game, Americans will find a way to win. Perhaps that's exactly why China feels the need to cheat? From their point of view, the deck was stacked against them. They need to even the odds.
  - jayd16 8y ago
    In every game, every player assumes they can find a way to win. That doesn't imply unfair odds.
    - thaumasiotes 8y ago
      What are you trying to say? This doesn't even pass the laugh test. You and Tiger Woods, golf, go! Good luck.
      - jayd16 8y ago
        Sorry, implied in my comment is "any game both parties would bother playing" they both expect a chance to win or they wouldn't play at all. But that aside, the point of my comment is "the opponent expecting to win, does not imply unfair odds." "America thinks trade is good" does not imply "China gets to steal IP"
  - phyller 8y ago
    The United States has given China preferential trade deals (deals that are unfair by benefitting China) since the Nixon era. It is truly a tragedy that these two countries don't get along better.
jayd16 8y ago
>the negative externalities of Western consumption, including pollution. That pollution is their own choice. Companies will take advantage but its certainly a choice of the Chinese. As for why China is treated differently...they act differently. America trades with many countries and China is unique in many ways.
friedman23 8y ago
>It's fair for American businesses to distrust Chinese companies and distrust the Chinese government, but can't we all agree that they brought it on themselves? And do you hold the same belief in reverse? That the Chinese have brought on this retaliation themselves? Your argument and assertion are pointless.
joefranklinsrs 8y ago
If we look at the history of how US dismantled its manufacturing after the 90s (yes it started way before, but it was in much smaller scope), it was WALL STREET manipulation that allowed jobs to escape to countries with lowest amount of human rights but cheapest wages. You see before then, companies did offshoring but it was in small quantities, because they feared the unions and especially the massive import tariffs that would have been thrusted on them by the government if they had gone mostly offshore. NAFTA, which was heavily pushed by wall street and also welcomed by certain corporations, snuck in through NAFTA-friendly advisors that Clinton surrounded himself with. By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers. Also by letting China into WTO in the 90s, China has been abusing the rules ever since, destroying manufacturing jobs in democratic countries around the world. Bush escalated the suffering by giving China most preferred status. Obama didn't do much to contest except some stern warnings against China. And now we have a belligerent China, lead by a dictator, that is more powerful than USSR in its heydays, with signs of third-reich behaviors (muslim concentration camps, technology-thought controls), vastly increasing its military and technological weapons to confront and attack US and its allies. And technology companies are still transferring technologies to China, either willingly, unwillingly or unknowingly. WALL STREET did this. Some corporations were complicit. Then most of them were. Bill Clinton destroyed the American workers. Every other presidents that followed didn't stand up. Trump actually confronted China. And now WALL STREET is trying to stop the full $600B trade tariffs against China.
neolefty 8y ago
Yes, as long as the US tries to maintain its advantage over other countries, of course other countries will claw back their own disadvantage. In the meantime, we're gradually building up a world community so that there isn't a sense of injustice or inequality on anyone's part. If your primary identity is human — rather than Chinese or American — then priorities are simpler. Do what's right for the world as a whole, and for humanity. That change is too disruptive to do all at once, but it's gradually coming, generation by generation.

lsseckman 8y ago

> And why do many ordinary Americans experience such outrage on behalf of these multinationals These are companies we all helped build in one way or another. Their revenues boost our economy and pay for a lot of our govt services

thr0waway2324 8y ago
This. These countries also export to the rest of the world, strengthening the US dollar and making our nation richer.

edoo 8y ago

One of the primary reasons it is cheaper to build in China is they do not enforce pollution laws. We outlawed destroying the environment and all our friendly harmless corporations just moved production to where it is de facto legal. If we are not hypocrites we should be rejecting any products not built to our environmental standards.

baybal2 8y ago
No, have bothered to google for 5 minutes to check that zero enforcement was not the case for at least a decade?
- edoo 8y ago
  No doubt there is some enforcement but it could get a lot better and still be a disaster. They need a zero tolerance policy backed up by jail time. I was in China 2 years ago and the Beijing air was gross and half the people were wearing surgical masks. In one part a few hundred miles from Beijing I experienced eye watering choking pollution hazes with 100m visibility that lasted for several hours. It was literally scary pollution.

ctvo 8y ago

You are conflating two things in this reply: There’s the official transfer of technology that happens in some circumstances when a western company wishes to do business in China, that is known and each company makes its own decisions on if this short term trade off is worthwhile. Americans should be angered that the Chinese, years after joining the WTO, still restrict their markets in this way while enjoying open access to other markets. This article does not touch the above. It’s about illegal, state sponsored theft of intellectual property. Are you asking why people should be upset another country is attacking companies based in the US and stealing their technology?

shantanubala 8y ago
You're right. I wasn't in any way trying to imply that the Chinese government was acting fairly - they are stealing and ought to be punished. My confusion stems from the American companies who readily jumped at the opportunity to heavily depend on supply chains inside of a country with 1) a relatively short history in the WTO 2) a previous history of market manipulation and 3) rampant human rights abuses And let's not mention that the entry into the WTO itself constituted a major overhaul of the Chinese economy, which should in itself be considered an experiment. I'm disappointed that the risks of trade in China have been understated for so long. And systematically underestimated by American firms. Or to put it a different way: how surprising is this situation? And does it belie a lack of proper enforcement and a lack of understanding of the risks of doing trade with China? It feels silly to only examine the narrative where the Chinese government is at fault because that narrative is obvious. What about the culpability of our own government for advocating for China's entry in the WTO? Or the immediate handoff of trade by American corporations when the decision produced short-term gains without examining how many rapid changes China was making to its economy?
- ericd 8y ago
  I would say that the conditions the Chinese government sets are structured to exploit a large structural flaw in the American economy, in that the decision makers in most large companies are highly incentivized to achieve short term results even at the expense of long term. So the Chinese government offers to reward those decision makers handsomely in the short run, in exchange for essentially selling the tech lead the US has enjoyed and which underpins much of the value of US enterprises.

rgbrenner 8y ago

Americans are ok with companies outsourcing their labor to other countries... as long as those countries play fair. The assumption is that in a fair game, American's will find a way to win. But China doesn't play fair. This is like you and me playing a game, and I find out you're a cheater.. and you say, 'what are you upset about? You invited me here'

Wowfunhappy 8y ago
> The assumption is that in a fair game, Americans will find a way to win. Perhaps that's exactly why China feels the need to cheat? From their point of view, the deck was stacked against them. They need to even the odds.
- jayd16 8y ago
  In every game, every player assumes they can find a way to win. That doesn't imply unfair odds.
  - thaumasiotes 8y ago
    What are you trying to say? This doesn't even pass the laugh test. You and Tiger Woods, golf, go! Good luck.
    - jayd16 8y ago
      Sorry, implied in my comment is "any game both parties would bother playing" they both expect a chance to win or they wouldn't play at all. But that aside, the point of my comment is "the opponent expecting to win, does not imply unfair odds." "America thinks trade is good" does not imply "China gets to steal IP"
- phyller 8y ago
  The United States has given China preferential trade deals (deals that are unfair by benefitting China) since the Nixon era. It is truly a tragedy that these two countries don't get along better.

jayd16 8y ago

>the negative externalities of Western consumption, including pollution. That pollution is their own choice. Companies will take advantage but its certainly a choice of the Chinese. As for why China is treated differently...they act differently. America trades with many countries and China is unique in many ways.

friedman23 8y ago

>It's fair for American businesses to distrust Chinese companies and distrust the Chinese government, but can't we all agree that they brought it on themselves? And do you hold the same belief in reverse? That the Chinese have brought on this retaliation themselves? Your argument and assertion are pointless.

joefranklinsrs 8y ago

If we look at the history of how US dismantled its manufacturing after the 90s (yes it started way before, but it was in much smaller scope), it was WALL STREET manipulation that allowed jobs to escape to countries with lowest amount of human rights but cheapest wages. You see before then, companies did offshoring but it was in small quantities, because they feared the unions and especially the massive import tariffs that would have been thrusted on them by the government if they had gone mostly offshore. NAFTA, which was heavily pushed by wall street and also welcomed by certain corporations, snuck in through NAFTA-friendly advisors that Clinton surrounded himself with. By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers. Also by letting China into WTO in the 90s, China has been abusing the rules ever since, destroying manufacturing jobs in democratic countries around the world. Bush escalated the suffering by giving China most preferred status. Obama didn't do much to contest except some stern warnings against China. And now we have a belligerent China, lead by a dictator, that is more powerful than USSR in its heydays, with signs of third-reich behaviors (muslim concentration camps, technology-thought controls), vastly increasing its military and technological weapons to confront and attack US and its allies. And technology companies are still transferring technologies to China, either willingly, unwillingly or unknowingly. WALL STREET did this. Some corporations were complicit. Then most of them were. Bill Clinton destroyed the American workers. Every other presidents that followed didn't stand up. Trump actually confronted China. And now WALL STREET is trying to stop the full $600B trade tariffs against China.

neolefty 8y ago

Yes, as long as the US tries to maintain its advantage over other countries, of course other countries will claw back their own disadvantage. In the meantime, we're gradually building up a world community so that there isn't a sense of injustice or inequality on anyone's part. If your primary identity is human — rather than Chinese or American — then priorities are simpler. Do what's right for the world as a whole, and for humanity. That change is too disruptive to do all at once, but it's gradually coming, generation by generation.