5 ms·

Because allowing Chinese companies to operate in the US is good for American consumers. This isn’t a zero-sum game.

by bradleybuda 6y ago

cwhiz 6y ago
This short sighted policy is what has led to the slow decay of the American middle class.
- vkou 6y ago
  No, the policy that lead to the decay of the American middle class is not China's rules on foreign investment. The policy that lead to that is American companies embracing globalism, which is, by the way, an American neo-liberal ideology.
  - cwhiz 6y ago
    You can embrace globalism without damaging your economy. You just have to choose to only deal with countries that play fairly. China does not play fairly and, as such, we should not do business with them.
    - marsrover 6y ago
      I'm not in agreement or disagreement but I'm genuinely curious how you can embrace globalism without damaging your economy? I have found myself leaning more towards neo-liberalism in some aspects but I don't know how this piece fits in.
      - yahnu 6y ago
        USA has embraced globalism and benefitting from it. American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders. "The recent stability in the share of adults living in middle-income households marks a shift from a decades-long downward trend. From 1971 to 2011, the share of adults in the middle class fell by 10 percentage points. But that shift was not all down the economic ladder. Indeed, the increase in the share of adults who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income over that period, a sign of economic progress overall." https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-american-middle-class-is-stable-in-size-but-losing-ground-financially-to-upper-income-families/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-america...
        njarboe 6y ago
        "American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders." As your quote says, it's not the wealth that has moved per say, but that people have moved upward out of the middle class and brought that wealth with them with more people moving up than moving down.
        yahnu 6y ago
        Right. I see how my wording can be wrong. I saw some comments (in this thread and some others) that seems to be of the opinion that USA has not benefitted by embracing globalization. That opinion is in contrast to what I have seen in data analysis/reports. So I wanted to say that maybe problem is not that USA hasn't benefitted from globalization but rather that benefit hasn't been distributed appropriately. I'm not from USA and my knowledge comes by reading about news reports and expert data analysis so I might be missing something.
    - vkou 6y ago
      Why should the American middle class give two shits about American businesses having to jump through hoops to operate in China? 90% of their income comes from wages, not investments. The last thing they want is for American businesses to operate in China, period - because operating in China typically means that manufacturing capacity gets moved there. This unfairness is only unfair to the owner class - the middle class is actually a net beneficiary of policies that make offshoring harder. China's policies that make foreign operation in it difficult are, in that sense, actually a gift to the American middle class.
  - 13415 6y ago
    Globalism is and always was inevitable and has in fact started already 200 years ago. It's also not a problem. A problem is how countries deal with the middle class and how they transform their society when there are shifts in production. For example, it's not China's fault that the average salary of a US CEO was 361 times higher than that of a factory worker in 2018, as opposed to only having been 20 times higher in the 1950s. What we see right now is really just the emergence of China as an economic super-power, thanks to their gigantic internal market and their technological advances. This was predicted for the past 40 years or so and it nothing to do with the problems that the US is facing. These problems are mostly internal.
    - novaRom 6y ago
      China is basically: low start + motivation + good education + low costs + state level protectionism + long term planning
AbrahamParangi 6y ago
Consider every concern about facebook having too much power on things like elections. Now imagine if facebook were controlled by an adversarial authoritarian regime.
- zolosa 6y ago
  Or looking at the PRISM program it's better to ban Facebook and it's children companies rather than imagining .
  - AbrahamParangi 6y ago
    It would not be at all unreasonable for other countries to ban US social media companies.
sidlls 6y ago
How is it good for American consumers? Their privacy is further eroded in service of a violently oppressive totalitarian state. Also, the companies these Chinese companies compete against do not have equal access to Chinese markets, providing a significant advantage to Chinese companies: the supposed benefit to the consumer (reduced prices due to competition) erodes quickly in such an environment.
- Cookingboy 6y ago
  > Also, the companies these Chinese companies compete against do not have equal access to Chinese markets That's just not true. All American tech companies can operate in China if they follow local laws, that's why Skype and iMessage are popular in China. Chinese companies have to follow the same local laws as well. Google/Facebook, etc voluntarily pulled out of the Chinese market because they don't want to follow China's draconian tech laws.
  - sidlls 6y ago
    Those laws require Chinese companies to have ownership stakes, sometimes majority ownership stakes, if not explicitly then effectively. That isn't "equal access".
    - Cookingboy 6y ago
      Again, complete lies. Ownership requirement is only for joint ventures. Both Apple and Microsoft operate in China in full capacity and neither companies are majority owned by the Chinese lol.
      - sidlls 6y ago
        You're quibbling over technicalities. For most tech companies, operating in China requires a substantial relationship with Chinese owned business entities and partners, often tacitly, if not explicitly written by law, also requiring some shareholding or officer/executive relationship to manage the tangled web of CCP corruption.
alexryan 6y ago
The CCP has a saying. Win-win means we win twice.

Because allowing Chinese companies to operate in the US is good for American consumers. This isn’t a zero-sum game.

cwhiz 6y ago

This short sighted policy is what has led to the slow decay of the American middle class.

vkou 6y ago
No, the policy that lead to the decay of the American middle class is not China's rules on foreign investment. The policy that lead to that is American companies embracing globalism, which is, by the way, an American neo-liberal ideology.
- cwhiz 6y ago
  You can embrace globalism without damaging your economy. You just have to choose to only deal with countries that play fairly. China does not play fairly and, as such, we should not do business with them.
  - marsrover 6y ago
    I'm not in agreement or disagreement but I'm genuinely curious how you can embrace globalism without damaging your economy? I have found myself leaning more towards neo-liberalism in some aspects but I don't know how this piece fits in.
    - yahnu 6y ago
      USA has embraced globalism and benefitting from it. American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders. "The recent stability in the share of adults living in middle-income households marks a shift from a decades-long downward trend. From 1971 to 2011, the share of adults in the middle class fell by 10 percentage points. But that shift was not all down the economic ladder. Indeed, the increase in the share of adults who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income over that period, a sign of economic progress overall." https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-american-middle-class-is-stable-in-size-but-losing-ground-financially-to-upper-income-families/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-america...
      - njarboe 6y ago
        "American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders." As your quote says, it's not the wealth that has moved per say, but that people have moved upward out of the middle class and brought that wealth with them with more people moving up than moving down.
        yahnu 6y ago
        Right. I see how my wording can be wrong. I saw some comments (in this thread and some others) that seems to be of the opinion that USA has not benefitted by embracing globalization. That opinion is in contrast to what I have seen in data analysis/reports. So I wanted to say that maybe problem is not that USA hasn't benefitted from globalization but rather that benefit hasn't been distributed appropriately. I'm not from USA and my knowledge comes by reading about news reports and expert data analysis so I might be missing something.
  - vkou 6y ago
    Why should the American middle class give two shits about American businesses having to jump through hoops to operate in China? 90% of their income comes from wages, not investments. The last thing they want is for American businesses to operate in China, period - because operating in China typically means that manufacturing capacity gets moved there. This unfairness is only unfair to the owner class - the middle class is actually a net beneficiary of policies that make offshoring harder. China's policies that make foreign operation in it difficult are, in that sense, actually a gift to the American middle class.
- 13415 6y ago
  Globalism is and always was inevitable and has in fact started already 200 years ago. It's also not a problem. A problem is how countries deal with the middle class and how they transform their society when there are shifts in production. For example, it's not China's fault that the average salary of a US CEO was 361 times higher than that of a factory worker in 2018, as opposed to only having been 20 times higher in the 1950s. What we see right now is really just the emergence of China as an economic super-power, thanks to their gigantic internal market and their technological advances. This was predicted for the past 40 years or so and it nothing to do with the problems that the US is facing. These problems are mostly internal.
  - novaRom 6y ago
    China is basically: low start + motivation + good education + low costs + state level protectionism + long term planning

AbrahamParangi 6y ago

Consider every concern about facebook having too much power on things like elections. Now imagine if facebook were controlled by an adversarial authoritarian regime.

zolosa 6y ago
Or looking at the PRISM program it's better to ban Facebook and it's children companies rather than imagining .
- AbrahamParangi 6y ago
  It would not be at all unreasonable for other countries to ban US social media companies.

sidlls 6y ago

How is it good for American consumers? Their privacy is further eroded in service of a violently oppressive totalitarian state. Also, the companies these Chinese companies compete against do not have equal access to Chinese markets, providing a significant advantage to Chinese companies: the supposed benefit to the consumer (reduced prices due to competition) erodes quickly in such an environment.

Cookingboy 6y ago
> Also, the companies these Chinese companies compete against do not have equal access to Chinese markets That's just not true. All American tech companies can operate in China if they follow local laws, that's why Skype and iMessage are popular in China. Chinese companies have to follow the same local laws as well. Google/Facebook, etc voluntarily pulled out of the Chinese market because they don't want to follow China's draconian tech laws.
- sidlls 6y ago
  Those laws require Chinese companies to have ownership stakes, sometimes majority ownership stakes, if not explicitly then effectively. That isn't "equal access".
  - Cookingboy 6y ago
    Again, complete lies. Ownership requirement is only for joint ventures. Both Apple and Microsoft operate in China in full capacity and neither companies are majority owned by the Chinese lol.
    - sidlls 6y ago
      You're quibbling over technicalities. For most tech companies, operating in China requires a substantial relationship with Chinese owned business entities and partners, often tacitly, if not explicitly written by law, also requiring some shareholding or officer/executive relationship to manage the tangled web of CCP corruption.

alexryan 6y ago

The CCP has a saying. Win-win means we win twice.