5 ms·

We've had decades of letting China walk all over us. I'm not sure why this is unwarranted. They ban our companies, we let their companies in with open arms.

We've had decades of letting China walk all over us. I'm not sure why this is unwarranted. They ban our companies, we let their companies in with open arms. They tariff our goods, we buy theirs up. They steal our IP, we respect theirs. They manipulate their currency, we let ours float. Open societies and open markets must remain open to each other. But that doesn't mean you roll over and allow a closed society to take advantage of you. Reciprocity is important.

faitswulff 7y ago
Reciprocity at the expense of principles is a loss for the US.
- Jorge1o1 7y ago
  Arguably, reciprocity and a strong independent nationalistic streak are the principles the US were founded on. For example, dumping tea into the Boston harbor to protest taxes imposed by a “””foreign””” government
carapace 7y ago
Ah, but that's "Captain Hindsight" eh? Many people (right or wrong) legitimately thought that opening up to China would crack the authoritarian government.
outside1234 7y ago
Our reciprocity should be asymmetric. We should hit them where it hurts them, not us. And it hurts us to compromise our values.
- drak0n1c 7y ago
  Congress removed RT’s press credentials and gallery access in 2017. Major US journalism outlets were supportive of the move. Unfortunately even our own media increasingly favors deplatforming. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-after-capitol-hill-press-credentials-pulled https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-afte...
ericjang 7y ago
I agree with you on tariffs, IP, currency. But I disagree on journalism: provoking China to expel American journalists is the last thing one wants when trying to serve American interests.
- tracker1 7y ago
  Agreed, for the most part, more spread of knowledge is the best option. Arresting and deporting actual journalists (not talking heads) is a horrible move.
DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
You present it as if the poor country that allows foreign companies to exploit its cheap labor is somehow the one taking advantage of the rich countries. Just ask yourself: is that a likely way for the world to work? Do you think the rich countries just let themselves get walked over in that way by much weaker, poorer countries? Point-by-point: > We've had decades of letting China walk all over us. It's hard to square your view with the fact that American companies have made massive sums of money by exploiting cheap Chinese labor, or with the fact that when you walk around any Chinese city, you see American brands everywhere (Apple, Starbucks, KfC, GM, Tesla, all the fashion brands whose names I don't know). > They tariff our goods, we buy theirs up. China has massively reduced tariffs since the early 1990s. Average Chinese tariffs are now around 3.4%, which is similar to tariff rates the US imposed in the mid-1990s.[1] > They steal our IP, we respect theirs. Your view of IP enforcement in China is behind the times. Back when China was a largely peasant society shut off from the outside world, it had virtually no IP law. That has changed quite dramatically in the last decades. China is the world's most active venue for IP litigation now. Specialist IP courts have been set up in major cities over the past several years, and the statistics show that foreign companies are quite successful in enforcing their IP.[2] American companies also take in billions of dollars in revenue by licensing patents to Chinese companies. > They manipulate their currency, we let ours float. Many countries intervene in the foreign exchange markets. China does so too, and limits capital flows in and out of the country. I'm not enough of an expert to know whether or not this is a wise economic policy, but I suspect they have good reasons (e.g., financial stability) for doing so. However, there's no doubt that the RMB floats to a far greater extent than it used to. You can see this pretty easily if you look at a CNY/USD chart showing the past 20 years. The RMB moved very smoothly until about 2012, and since then has fluctuated much more like a normal currency. Of course, like most central banks, the PBOC will pull the breaks when it feels that it's important. 1. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TM.TAX.MRCH.WM.AR.ZS?locations=CN-US https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TM.TAX.MRCH.WM.AR.ZS?lo... 2. https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/05/07/rapid-changes-chinese-legal-system-attractive-venue-ip-litigation https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/05/07/rapid-changes-chinese-...
- ardy42 7y ago
  > You present it as if the poor country that allows foreign companies to exploit its cheap labor is somehow the one taking advantage of the rich countries. Just ask yourself: is that a likely way for the world to work? Do you think the rich countries just let themselves get walked over in that way by much weaker, poorer countries? Your questions don't make a lot of sense, because the situation is much complicated than than a model with two monolithic actors ("poor country" and "rich country") can handle. For instance: "rich country" has powerful actors that work to benefit their own private interests against the national common good. At a national level, industrial capabilities are more valuable than currency and finished product, but for many private actors, the opposite is often true. National time horizons are longer (or should be longer, as in multiple lifetimes), but private time horizons are usually much shorter (fractions of a lifetime). > It's hard to square your view with the fact that American companies have made massive sums of money by exploiting cheap Chinese labor, or with the fact that when you walk around any Chinese city, you see American brands everywhere (Apple, Starbucks, KfC, GM, Tesla, all the fashion brands whose names I don't know). What the US has had with China is private interests trading industrial capabilities for short term increased profit. The US government hasn't kept those private interests in check (because they're powerful), and China has been happy to take advantage of the situation.
darkarmani 7y ago
> They manipulate their currency, we let ours float. Are you calling for us to manipulate our currency? We know they manipulate their currency, but that is not "letting them walk all over us". Economically, we let them get away with things as long as US corporations get very rich.

faitswulff 7y ago

Reciprocity at the expense of principles is a loss for the US.

Jorge1o1 7y ago
Arguably, reciprocity and a strong independent nationalistic streak are the principles the US were founded on. For example, dumping tea into the Boston harbor to protest taxes imposed by a “””foreign””” government

carapace 7y ago

Ah, but that's "Captain Hindsight" eh? Many people (right or wrong) legitimately thought that opening up to China would crack the authoritarian government.

outside1234 7y ago

Our reciprocity should be asymmetric. We should hit them where it hurts them, not us. And it hurts us to compromise our values.

drak0n1c 7y ago
Congress removed RT’s press credentials and gallery access in 2017. Major US journalism outlets were supportive of the move. Unfortunately even our own media increasingly favors deplatforming. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-after-capitol-hill-press-credentials-pulled https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-afte...

ericjang 7y ago

I agree with you on tariffs, IP, currency. But I disagree on journalism: provoking China to expel American journalists is the last thing one wants when trying to serve American interests.

tracker1 7y ago
Agreed, for the most part, more spread of knowledge is the best option. Arresting and deporting actual journalists (not talking heads) is a horrible move.

DiogenesKynikos 7y ago

You present it as if the poor country that allows foreign companies to exploit its cheap labor is somehow the one taking advantage of the rich countries. Just ask yourself: is that a likely way for the world to work? Do you think the rich countries just let themselves get walked over in that way by much weaker, poorer countries? Point-by-point: > We've had decades of letting China walk all over us. It's hard to square your view with the fact that American companies have made massive sums of money by exploiting cheap Chinese labor, or with the fact that when you walk around any Chinese city, you see American brands everywhere (Apple, Starbucks, KfC, GM, Tesla, all the fashion brands whose names I don't know). > They tariff our goods, we buy theirs up. China has massively reduced tariffs since the early 1990s. Average Chinese tariffs are now around 3.4%, which is similar to tariff rates the US imposed in the mid-1990s.[1] > They steal our IP, we respect theirs. Your view of IP enforcement in China is behind the times. Back when China was a largely peasant society shut off from the outside world, it had virtually no IP law. That has changed quite dramatically in the last decades. China is the world's most active venue for IP litigation now. Specialist IP courts have been set up in major cities over the past several years, and the statistics show that foreign companies are quite successful in enforcing their IP.[2] American companies also take in billions of dollars in revenue by licensing patents to Chinese companies. > They manipulate their currency, we let ours float. Many countries intervene in the foreign exchange markets. China does so too, and limits capital flows in and out of the country. I'm not enough of an expert to know whether or not this is a wise economic policy, but I suspect they have good reasons (e.g., financial stability) for doing so. However, there's no doubt that the RMB floats to a far greater extent than it used to. You can see this pretty easily if you look at a CNY/USD chart showing the past 20 years. The RMB moved very smoothly until about 2012, and since then has fluctuated much more like a normal currency. Of course, like most central banks, the PBOC will pull the breaks when it feels that it's important. 1. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TM.TAX.MRCH.WM.AR.ZS?locations=CN-US https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TM.TAX.MRCH.WM.AR.ZS?lo... 2. https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/05/07/rapid-changes-chinese-legal-system-attractive-venue-ip-litigation https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/05/07/rapid-changes-chinese-...

ardy42 7y ago
> You present it as if the poor country that allows foreign companies to exploit its cheap labor is somehow the one taking advantage of the rich countries. Just ask yourself: is that a likely way for the world to work? Do you think the rich countries just let themselves get walked over in that way by much weaker, poorer countries? Your questions don't make a lot of sense, because the situation is much complicated than than a model with two monolithic actors ("poor country" and "rich country") can handle. For instance: "rich country" has powerful actors that work to benefit their own private interests against the national common good. At a national level, industrial capabilities are more valuable than currency and finished product, but for many private actors, the opposite is often true. National time horizons are longer (or should be longer, as in multiple lifetimes), but private time horizons are usually much shorter (fractions of a lifetime). > It's hard to square your view with the fact that American companies have made massive sums of money by exploiting cheap Chinese labor, or with the fact that when you walk around any Chinese city, you see American brands everywhere (Apple, Starbucks, KfC, GM, Tesla, all the fashion brands whose names I don't know). What the US has had with China is private interests trading industrial capabilities for short term increased profit. The US government hasn't kept those private interests in check (because they're powerful), and China has been happy to take advantage of the situation.

darkarmani 7y ago

> They manipulate their currency, we let ours float. Are you calling for us to manipulate our currency? We know they manipulate their currency, but that is not "letting them walk all over us". Economically, we let them get away with things as long as US corporations get very rich.