6 ms·

This may be controversial, but that would be one of the few parts of the trade war that I wouldn’t mind. Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partn

This may be controversial, but that would be one of the few parts of the trade war that I wouldn’t mind. Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partner to do business in the mainland. Many assume that this structure is intended to leak secrets and the Chinese company will end up taking over and competing. To be a “fair” actor in the global economy, China should allow foreign businesses to operate in the mainland, subject to Chinese law.

Mary-Ellen 7y ago
"China should allow foreign businesses to operate in the mainland, subject to Chinese law" Foreign companies are allowed to operate in China , subject to Chinese law
- wiggler00m 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterpris...
  - Mary-Ellen 7y ago
    Your link just confirms what I say
    - _pmf_ 7y ago
      Speech in China is also free, according to Chinese law, so you're technically correct.
      - Mary-Ellen 7y ago
        Same goes for your country Technically
    - analognoise 7y ago
      Artists/protesters don't get 'disappeared' in the US, unlike in China: https://www.hongkongfp.com/2018/07/23/chinese-protester-splashed-ink-xi-jinping-poster-sent-psychiatric-hospital-report/ https://www.hongkongfp.com/2018/07/23/chinese-protester-spla... How much 'free speech's is there in a place that bans Winnie the Pooh because of memes: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/07/china-bans-winnie-the-pooh-film-to-stop-comparisons-to-president-xi https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/... Let's just admit China doesn't have free speech in practice?
      - tide_ad 7y ago
        its 1,000 times more likely that a software engineer trying to do business in China would enjoy a life of privilege and exemption from socioeconomic issues in China just like someone from China would experience a life of privilege and exemption from socioeconomic issues in America after their parents paid a few million dollars for Stanford tuition, and I've met people that are afraid of America because of the civil rights issues seen on the news who are completely oblivious to the circumstances that would create them. there is a tendency to focus on things that aren't really indicative of the experience you would have, and this has nothing to do with China specifically
atr_gz 7y ago
Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partner to do business in the mainland. I see this repeated a lot on Hacker News, but it's no* longer true. Search WFOE (wholly foreign-owned enterprises). *Fixed a typo - thanks to below comment.
- Mary-Ellen 7y ago
  I think you mean, by the context of the comment, that is no longer true, maybe is not an ortographical skip and I am mistaken on this one Just to clarify, is not a misundertanding, usually in english if someone says " is longer true" it means it is true for a long time, but in the context of the comment, I guess what you want to say is that what many people repeat is no true for a long time, usually what you would write in this case is " Its no longer true" Or " Its long not true" But no misunderstanding, just a grammatical litle note, the meaning of your comment is simple to see by the context, so just a little note
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago
  It was never true. Some industries required JVs, some still do, some never did.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
threwawasy1228 7y ago
There are many countries in the world where this is the case though. Many countries also have similar constraints that a company operating in certain regions has to have so many native citizens on its board of directors. People often call out China specifically for this because it is successful but there are tons of countries that do this practice.
- phkahler 7y ago
  That's fine so long as nobody claims it's an even playing field.
  - threwawasy1228 7y ago
    I guess I've never understood why people think this matters. If they can get away with not having it a level playing field, with no adverse consequences for their markets, what incentive could they possibly have to level it? If there is no market incentive for an action they won't take it, simple as that. People who want to force regulation on them are literally trying to fight against the free market.
    - nwienert 7y ago
      I think the problem is those same people turn around and get worked up when Trump puts tariffs up, when the same exact logic applies. Both are rational self-preservation techniques, but China gets a lot more sympathy for some reason with many here.
      - edmundsauto 7y ago
        One reason people may not like the pushback against China (besides the source) is they are personally enriched in the status quo, and fear (correctly or not; time will tell) that a change will affect their enrichment. It seems obvious, but it's worth repeating, a trade agreement can be a massive net negative for an entire country, but incredibly profitable for a few people.
seanmcdirmid 7y ago
> Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partner to do business in the mainland. That isn’t true universally. Certain industries require (required?) JVs, most notably the car industry but also energy resources. Most industries are free and clear and don’t require JVs. Microsoft, for example, has always operated independently in China, nor does Apple. Starbucks started out as a JV but has been getting its own store, especially in 2nd tiers.
- JonathanMerklin 7y ago
  JV == Joint Venture (I had to look this up so I figured I'd comment to note it for anyone else who might, since the term isn't used in full anywhere in the article or parent comment chain - barring future edits.)
- comex 7y ago
  However, Microsoft and Apple’s cloud services (Azure and iCloud respectively) are operated as joint ventures.
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    Those aren’t JVs, which has a formal meaning anyways. They call it a partnership, or an operator agreement. Maybe the distinction is moot here, but they aren’t really working together, just they provide the machines and Microsoft provides everything else.
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
  As of last year, automobile manufacturers don't require joint ventures any more. As time goes on, the number of industries that require joint ventures is decreasing. The joint-venture requirement for automobile parts was removed in 1993, for example. The thinking of the Chinese government was that as an undeveloped country, Chinese companies had no hope of directly competing against companies from the developed world. Chinese car manufacturers in 1990 would have simply been wiped out by Toyota, Ford, BMV et al. The Chinese government wanted foreign investment, so they created a middle ground, where foreign companies could exploit cheap Chinese labor and gain access to the growing Chinese market, but in which they would have to work with Chinese companies. This sort of policy makes sense for a developing country, which aspires to be more than a platform for cheap labor, but also to develop its own domestic capabilities. It actually follows in the tradition of a theory advanced by Alexander Hamilton, the "infant industry argument." As know-how at Chinese companies has increased, however, these restrictions have started to make less sense. There are Chinese electric car companies (such as BYD) that can legitimately compete with foreign manufacturers now. As a consequence, JV requirements are also being scaled back.
fasthandle 7y ago
Your comment is not controversial, it is incorrect.
tanilama 7y ago
> Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partner to do business in the mainland Not really. But it is advised to better have one, because that makes operating in China easier.

Mary-Ellen 7y ago

"China should allow foreign businesses to operate in the mainland, subject to Chinese law" Foreign companies are allowed to operate in China , subject to Chinese law

wiggler00m 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterpris...
- Mary-Ellen 7y ago
  Your link just confirms what I say
  - _pmf_ 7y ago
    Speech in China is also free, according to Chinese law, so you're technically correct.
    - Mary-Ellen 7y ago
      Same goes for your country Technically
  - analognoise 7y ago
    Artists/protesters don't get 'disappeared' in the US, unlike in China: https://www.hongkongfp.com/2018/07/23/chinese-protester-splashed-ink-xi-jinping-poster-sent-psychiatric-hospital-report/ https://www.hongkongfp.com/2018/07/23/chinese-protester-spla... How much 'free speech's is there in a place that bans Winnie the Pooh because of memes: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/07/china-bans-winnie-the-pooh-film-to-stop-comparisons-to-president-xi https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/... Let's just admit China doesn't have free speech in practice?
    - tide_ad 7y ago
      its 1,000 times more likely that a software engineer trying to do business in China would enjoy a life of privilege and exemption from socioeconomic issues in China just like someone from China would experience a life of privilege and exemption from socioeconomic issues in America after their parents paid a few million dollars for Stanford tuition, and I've met people that are afraid of America because of the civil rights issues seen on the news who are completely oblivious to the circumstances that would create them. there is a tendency to focus on things that aren't really indicative of the experience you would have, and this has nothing to do with China specifically

atr_gz 7y ago

Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partner to do business in the mainland. I see this repeated a lot on Hacker News, but it's no* longer true. Search WFOE (wholly foreign-owned enterprises). *Fixed a typo - thanks to below comment.

Mary-Ellen 7y ago
I think you mean, by the context of the comment, that is no longer true, maybe is not an ortographical skip and I am mistaken on this one Just to clarify, is not a misundertanding, usually in english if someone says " is longer true" it means it is true for a long time, but in the context of the comment, I guess what you want to say is that what many people repeat is no true for a long time, usually what you would write in this case is " Its no longer true" Or " Its long not true" But no misunderstanding, just a grammatical litle note, the meaning of your comment is simple to see by the context, so just a little note
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
seanmcdirmid 7y ago
It was never true. Some industries required JVs, some still do, some never did.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

threwawasy1228 7y ago

There are many countries in the world where this is the case though. Many countries also have similar constraints that a company operating in certain regions has to have so many native citizens on its board of directors. People often call out China specifically for this because it is successful but there are tons of countries that do this practice.

phkahler 7y ago
That's fine so long as nobody claims it's an even playing field.
- threwawasy1228 7y ago
  I guess I've never understood why people think this matters. If they can get away with not having it a level playing field, with no adverse consequences for their markets, what incentive could they possibly have to level it? If there is no market incentive for an action they won't take it, simple as that. People who want to force regulation on them are literally trying to fight against the free market.
  - nwienert 7y ago
    I think the problem is those same people turn around and get worked up when Trump puts tariffs up, when the same exact logic applies. Both are rational self-preservation techniques, but China gets a lot more sympathy for some reason with many here.
    - edmundsauto 7y ago
      One reason people may not like the pushback against China (besides the source) is they are personally enriched in the status quo, and fear (correctly or not; time will tell) that a change will affect their enrichment. It seems obvious, but it's worth repeating, a trade agreement can be a massive net negative for an entire country, but incredibly profitable for a few people.

seanmcdirmid 7y ago

> Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partner to do business in the mainland. That isn’t true universally. Certain industries require (required?) JVs, most notably the car industry but also energy resources. Most industries are free and clear and don’t require JVs. Microsoft, for example, has always operated independently in China, nor does Apple. Starbucks started out as a JV but has been getting its own store, especially in 2nd tiers.

JonathanMerklin 7y ago
JV == Joint Venture (I had to look this up so I figured I'd comment to note it for anyone else who might, since the term isn't used in full anywhere in the article or parent comment chain - barring future edits.)
comex 7y ago
However, Microsoft and Apple’s cloud services (Azure and iCloud respectively) are operated as joint ventures.
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago
  Those aren’t JVs, which has a formal meaning anyways. They call it a partnership, or an operator agreement. Maybe the distinction is moot here, but they aren’t really working together, just they provide the machines and Microsoft provides everything else.
DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
As of last year, automobile manufacturers don't require joint ventures any more. As time goes on, the number of industries that require joint ventures is decreasing. The joint-venture requirement for automobile parts was removed in 1993, for example. The thinking of the Chinese government was that as an undeveloped country, Chinese companies had no hope of directly competing against companies from the developed world. Chinese car manufacturers in 1990 would have simply been wiped out by Toyota, Ford, BMV et al. The Chinese government wanted foreign investment, so they created a middle ground, where foreign companies could exploit cheap Chinese labor and gain access to the growing Chinese market, but in which they would have to work with Chinese companies. This sort of policy makes sense for a developing country, which aspires to be more than a platform for cheap labor, but also to develop its own domestic capabilities. It actually follows in the tradition of a theory advanced by Alexander Hamilton, the "infant industry argument." As know-how at Chinese companies has increased, however, these restrictions have started to make less sense. There are Chinese electric car companies (such as BYD) that can legitimately compete with foreign manufacturers now. As a consequence, JV requirements are also being scaled back.

fasthandle 7y ago

Your comment is not controversial, it is incorrect.

tanilama 7y ago

> Non-Chinese business must operate with a Chinese partner to do business in the mainland Not really. But it is advised to better have one, because that makes operating in China easier.