5 ms·

The United States' brand is that we are an open, dynamic, stable place to do business in. If you have capital its safe here because of our respect of the rule o

The United States' brand is that we are an open, dynamic, stable place to do business in. If you have capital its safe here because of our respect of the rule of law, and private property rights. We should strive to be the best place on earth to do business in. We are an open country and we benefit from being open. We benefit from competition. We are literally richer by definition - when business like TikTok choose to operate in the United States. The decision to force transfer of business undermines our country's brand and our reputation. It's sad that Twitter is participating in this shake down. I posted this in another thread and colorfully illustrates that Twitter is no better than what they accuse TikTok of being. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24095334 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24095334

defen 6y ago
There are a lot of people out there who think that the Russians spending a couple hundred thousand dollars on shitty Facebook ads was an intolerable affront to democracy. So I have to imagine there would be a lot of support for not allowing a real geopolitical rival to completely control the next big social media platform.
magicsmoke 6y ago
Capital is only safe in the US if you respect it's economic, technological, and military primacy. Ask Russia or Iran if they would be willing to store their wealth in the US. Iran's on a permanent blacklist for nationalising US economic interests and challenging American military influence in the middle East, and Russia too for daring to use its military on Ukraine in a world where only the US has the prerogative to invade other countries. China's different from those two in that they've been exceptionally careful not to spark a shooting war and to keep enough profits flowing to US companies for the past few decades to keep them placated. But now China's shaking off the leash by building up an indigenous high tech ecosystem that can challenge the US and trying to be the dominant military power in East Asia. Any country that challenges the US can expect its wealth confiscated. Don't expect the current situation to defuse anytime soon. China's goal to be technologically independent eats into the profit margins and future R&D expenditures of US high tech industries, and China's goal to be the military leader of East Asia threatens America's post WW2 influence over Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines. Both countries want what they believe to be their fair share of the world, but the sum adds up to more than 100%. Both countries also believe they'll be the winner in the end. What better powderkeg could you ask for? Someone will have to give ground at the negotiating table eventually, but that'll only happen when both sides agree on what the actual balance of power between them is and it might take a war to find out.
- fermienrico 6y ago
  I read somewhere that it is difficult to get money out of China if you set up a business there, BMW/VW have been denied withdrawal of funds from China since 2016. At that rate, China seems like a pretty poor place to put your money. Doesn't matter if their domestic technological pace is impressive. Can anyone honestly think that in 10 years, they would trust the CCP enough to buy property or invest there?
  - yomly 6y ago
    I would happily take that risk if I could get exposure to the shenzhen property market...
  - powerapple 6y ago
    US and China are both safe to invest if you ask me. Their economies are big and militarily strong. I would put some money in both countries.
    - uranusjr 6y ago
      The difference is how you consider money on the paper. The problem with China is that you are limited in how you can spend the money you put there; if one of the choices they give suits you, great; otherwise it would be a very bad idea since it would only continue to get harder to make use of the “safe” assets you “own”.
  - magicsmoke 6y ago
    Big reason why the USD is still the world's reserve currency despite China being the bigger trading partner for many countries. The US is willing to let allied countries play freely in its financial markets and economy, China's not as generous. Frankly, if you have to pick between being aligned with the US or China the US gives more goodies away than China does. Full access to US markets, military umbrella, and no obnoxious sense of inherent superiority over smaller countries that's displayed overtly. The only benefit to allying with China is that China doesn't demand political reform. Everything else is very meh, especially if you're already using America's preferred political system.
Leary 6y ago
Yes. This will give a lot of countries incentives to be economic nationalists. For example, a country could lever a prohibitively high tax for all ads on an American social network. This is why Zuckerberg is now concerned about the Tiktok ban setting a bad precedent for other countries. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-tiktok-ban-all-hands-meeting-report-2020-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-tik...
tanilama 6y ago
And US tech companies will be the big loser, if the other countries are going to apply the same national security argument to themselves. Who would they sacrifice then? Obviously, it will be the Big Techs.
- mantas 6y ago
  Aren't Google and FB already banned in China?
  - bduerst 6y ago
    Yep, but Apple and Amazon would face major losses.
  - throw554354 6y ago
    Not exactly, they basically left because they didn’t want to comply with China’s censorship laws. Project Dragonfly was Google’s attempt to re-enter, but bad publicity forced them to stop.
  - tanilama 6y ago
    I am not think about China. Think of Europe. The EU has just realized that by letting US runs internet for itself is costing it money and its technological future. As what the current administration is doing, the tie is getting weakened and I don't see the trust re-established to its previous level again.
    - mantas 6y ago
      EU realised that we missed the internet revolution long time ago. Remember the EU-financed Google killer from mid-00s? :) Too bad Europe is having fucking hard time to kickstart startups ecosystem.
fermienrico 6y ago
United States' brand has been damaged by our own doing. Specifically, the executives that paid off the politicians whose job was to ensure a level playing field in terms of trade. I am really convinced of the following, open for critiques: US Executives paid off politicians who then allowed trade deficit to pile up, we saw one of the biggest wealth transfers in the history of mankind - Some 30 trillion dollars of growth in China. Whatever was returned then went into American executives' who made sure that the median wages were as low as possible (paid off politicians again) which lead to massive wealth inequality here domestically. I think the people to blame are not executives. These are the wolves. The real assholes of America are the politicians, both left and right, who put their own interest before public's. Infrastructure, education, building the nation to be capable to compete was put aside, instead they promoted consumerism, big-fat American dream and laughed off to their multimillion dollar estates. You make a good point about rule of law - yes, it is in favor of big corp. Not for medium and small businesses. Italy has some ridiculous % of GDP coming from companies less than 50 employees. I forgot what that % is, but it is like 50% or more. This is what America could have been. A powerhouse of innovation, extremely motivated workforce, excellent education system and health system, virtually no poverty and infrastructure could be unlike any other nation. Living here in Silicon Valley, it feels like a crumbling place ridden with crime, feces and homeless people everywhere. Depressing.
- refurb 6y ago
  we saw one of the biggest wealth transfers in the history of mankind - Some 30 trillion dollars of growth in China. Economic growth is not the same as a wealth transfer. It's not a zero sum game.
  - fermienrico 6y ago
    It is an opportunity cost though, no? That wealth could have resulted in domestic progress. If I am making Jeans in 1995 in America, but in 2000 I lay off workers, shut down cotton fields, dying processes, etc. and off shore it, while hiring 2 people instead of 50 - to manage suppliers, that indeed, unquestionably has resulted in loss of wealth. Can you explain how this would be a zero sum game? I know @naval keeps tooting that and it makes sense to me in macroeconomically, but I can't convince myself - I think of a closed thermodynamic system with system energy = work done + heat transfer out. That's how I think of the economic systems too when it comes to microeconomics.
refurb 6y ago
Don't disagree that an open business climate is optimal, but when a foreign power is using business to undermine our country, that puts our optimal business climate at risk.

defen 6y ago

There are a lot of people out there who think that the Russians spending a couple hundred thousand dollars on shitty Facebook ads was an intolerable affront to democracy. So I have to imagine there would be a lot of support for not allowing a real geopolitical rival to completely control the next big social media platform.

magicsmoke 6y ago

Capital is only safe in the US if you respect it's economic, technological, and military primacy. Ask Russia or Iran if they would be willing to store their wealth in the US. Iran's on a permanent blacklist for nationalising US economic interests and challenging American military influence in the middle East, and Russia too for daring to use its military on Ukraine in a world where only the US has the prerogative to invade other countries. China's different from those two in that they've been exceptionally careful not to spark a shooting war and to keep enough profits flowing to US companies for the past few decades to keep them placated. But now China's shaking off the leash by building up an indigenous high tech ecosystem that can challenge the US and trying to be the dominant military power in East Asia. Any country that challenges the US can expect its wealth confiscated. Don't expect the current situation to defuse anytime soon. China's goal to be technologically independent eats into the profit margins and future R&D expenditures of US high tech industries, and China's goal to be the military leader of East Asia threatens America's post WW2 influence over Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines. Both countries want what they believe to be their fair share of the world, but the sum adds up to more than 100%. Both countries also believe they'll be the winner in the end. What better powderkeg could you ask for? Someone will have to give ground at the negotiating table eventually, but that'll only happen when both sides agree on what the actual balance of power between them is and it might take a war to find out.

fermienrico 6y ago
I read somewhere that it is difficult to get money out of China if you set up a business there, BMW/VW have been denied withdrawal of funds from China since 2016. At that rate, China seems like a pretty poor place to put your money. Doesn't matter if their domestic technological pace is impressive. Can anyone honestly think that in 10 years, they would trust the CCP enough to buy property or invest there?
- yomly 6y ago
  I would happily take that risk if I could get exposure to the shenzhen property market...
- powerapple 6y ago
  US and China are both safe to invest if you ask me. Their economies are big and militarily strong. I would put some money in both countries.
  - uranusjr 6y ago
    The difference is how you consider money on the paper. The problem with China is that you are limited in how you can spend the money you put there; if one of the choices they give suits you, great; otherwise it would be a very bad idea since it would only continue to get harder to make use of the “safe” assets you “own”.
- magicsmoke 6y ago
  Big reason why the USD is still the world's reserve currency despite China being the bigger trading partner for many countries. The US is willing to let allied countries play freely in its financial markets and economy, China's not as generous. Frankly, if you have to pick between being aligned with the US or China the US gives more goodies away than China does. Full access to US markets, military umbrella, and no obnoxious sense of inherent superiority over smaller countries that's displayed overtly. The only benefit to allying with China is that China doesn't demand political reform. Everything else is very meh, especially if you're already using America's preferred political system.

Leary 6y ago

Yes. This will give a lot of countries incentives to be economic nationalists. For example, a country could lever a prohibitively high tax for all ads on an American social network. This is why Zuckerberg is now concerned about the Tiktok ban setting a bad precedent for other countries. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-tiktok-ban-all-hands-meeting-report-2020-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-tik...

tanilama 6y ago

And US tech companies will be the big loser, if the other countries are going to apply the same national security argument to themselves. Who would they sacrifice then? Obviously, it will be the Big Techs.

mantas 6y ago
Aren't Google and FB already banned in China?
- bduerst 6y ago
  Yep, but Apple and Amazon would face major losses.
- throw554354 6y ago
  Not exactly, they basically left because they didn’t want to comply with China’s censorship laws. Project Dragonfly was Google’s attempt to re-enter, but bad publicity forced them to stop.
- tanilama 6y ago
  I am not think about China. Think of Europe. The EU has just realized that by letting US runs internet for itself is costing it money and its technological future. As what the current administration is doing, the tie is getting weakened and I don't see the trust re-established to its previous level again.
  - mantas 6y ago
    EU realised that we missed the internet revolution long time ago. Remember the EU-financed Google killer from mid-00s? :) Too bad Europe is having fucking hard time to kickstart startups ecosystem.

fermienrico 6y ago

United States' brand has been damaged by our own doing. Specifically, the executives that paid off the politicians whose job was to ensure a level playing field in terms of trade. I am really convinced of the following, open for critiques: US Executives paid off politicians who then allowed trade deficit to pile up, we saw one of the biggest wealth transfers in the history of mankind - Some 30 trillion dollars of growth in China. Whatever was returned then went into American executives' who made sure that the median wages were as low as possible (paid off politicians again) which lead to massive wealth inequality here domestically. I think the people to blame are not executives. These are the wolves. The real assholes of America are the politicians, both left and right, who put their own interest before public's. Infrastructure, education, building the nation to be capable to compete was put aside, instead they promoted consumerism, big-fat American dream and laughed off to their multimillion dollar estates. You make a good point about rule of law - yes, it is in favor of big corp. Not for medium and small businesses. Italy has some ridiculous % of GDP coming from companies less than 50 employees. I forgot what that % is, but it is like 50% or more. This is what America could have been. A powerhouse of innovation, extremely motivated workforce, excellent education system and health system, virtually no poverty and infrastructure could be unlike any other nation. Living here in Silicon Valley, it feels like a crumbling place ridden with crime, feces and homeless people everywhere. Depressing.

refurb 6y ago
we saw one of the biggest wealth transfers in the history of mankind - Some 30 trillion dollars of growth in China. Economic growth is not the same as a wealth transfer. It's not a zero sum game.
- fermienrico 6y ago
  It is an opportunity cost though, no? That wealth could have resulted in domestic progress. If I am making Jeans in 1995 in America, but in 2000 I lay off workers, shut down cotton fields, dying processes, etc. and off shore it, while hiring 2 people instead of 50 - to manage suppliers, that indeed, unquestionably has resulted in loss of wealth. Can you explain how this would be a zero sum game? I know @naval keeps tooting that and it makes sense to me in macroeconomically, but I can't convince myself - I think of a closed thermodynamic system with system energy = work done + heat transfer out. That's how I think of the economic systems too when it comes to microeconomics.

refurb 6y ago

Don't disagree that an open business climate is optimal, but when a foreign power is using business to undermine our country, that puts our optimal business climate at risk.