13 ms·

As much as I like Apple products, it looks like the privacy buck stops at China. The western world needs to desperately work on making their supply chains inde

As much as I like Apple products, it looks like the privacy buck stops at China. The western world needs to desperately work on making their supply chains independent of the CCP, lest they'd like their supply chains to be poisoned at some point in the future. I'm a big fan of Purism and everything that they are doing. I hope their software and hardware matures with the same level of polish we've come to know and expect from Apple products, and will be an early investor if they ever decide to IPO.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
topspin 6y ago
> The western world needs to desperately work on making their supply chains independent of the CCP The western world can't. The world is only so big and the remaining sites of refuge for cheap, exploitable labor and Potemkin regulatory regimes are few. Almost any alternative place you might cite is either already beholden to China (the viable parts of Africa) or too unstable (due to endemic corruption, external threats, etc.) to risk. Insourcing is obviously out of the question; the wealthy Western establishment is violently intolerant of industrial expansion.
- CountSessine 6y ago
  Yes - because manufacturing in the West is ultimately self-defeating. Success breeds complacency and labor unrest. This isn't just a China-thing (I have no idea what your Potemkin regulation is or why you would mix those metaphors). When Westerners see an absurdly profitable company, they think, "why aren't they paying their employees more??!" and start a union to parasitize earnings. When Asians (including the Japanese and Koreans) see an absurdly profitably company, they think, "why are they able to charge such high prices???!" and they kneecap the company's ability to exploit their market. It's an important difference for manufacturing physical things and it's why the West loses out to Asia in manufacturing outside cutting-edge tech. It's defective wetware in our heads and how we think about wealth and creating value, so don't expect manufacturing supply chains to return to Western countries any time soon.
  - elteto 6y ago
    > ... start a union to parasitize earnings. Yes, those pesky employees should just STFU and be thankful for the scraps.
    - CountSessine 6y ago
      Again - the fact that you can’t see both sides of the equation is why we don’t make things anymore.
      - majormajor 6y ago
        Terms like "parasitize earnings" don't sound like seeing both sides of the equation. Why's your anger and blame focused there for not seeing both sides? The people who outsourced things weren't simply trying to reduce gains made by unions, they were looking at price differences that could not exist in the US due to cost and standard of living. They certainly weren't looking at both sides of this in terms of long term effect either!
        CountSessine 6y ago
        Terms like "parasitize earnings" don't sound like seeing both sides of the equation I don't want employees to get those earnings. I don't want investors or shareholders to get them either. I want consumers to get lower prices. they were looking at price differences that could not exist in the US due to cost and standard of living Again, what does that mean, "standard of living"? That we indulge industrial labor monopolies and pay more for manufactured goods than we need or want to like the 60's? How do you feel about paying $5000 for that computer? Or that we reward landlords and enrich landowners for participating in the creation of dysfunctional regulations? I agree - Western industrialists have been able to play both sides of the equation - outsourcing production to places where industrial cost-control is effective and selling in to markets where there's a large upper-middle class of well-compensated credentialed professionals like us and entitled land-owners. But I don't think that the solution is to give more power to industrial labor unions. My own pet solution is German worker councils - if only because they empower workers and make managers and industrialists accountable to employee needs, but at the same time can't coordinate labor demands across an industry. Managers can't ignore employee welfare but also employees can't gang up on consumers. But no one else wants this - industrialists hate the idea of inviting unions in to C-level planning and unions at their core want labor monopolies.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  > Insourcing is obviously out of the question; the wealthy Western establishment is violently intolerant of industrial expansion. As far as I can tell, it’s simply more expensive to insource, taking into account wages, labor regulations, and environmental regulations. If and when other countries catch up to the production costs in the US, then there won’t be a reason to ship things halfway around the world.
  - pydry 6y ago
    It's frequently not cheaper and occasionally more expensive. One reason it is popular is that it gives the managers who oversee it a lot more power and control: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/05/more-on-the-myth-of-outsourcings-efficiency.html https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/05/more-on-the-myth-of-...
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      Managers can't force people to buy products based on how they like power and control. They either deliver an acceptable price to value ratio, or people buy something else. I couldn't figure out what point the article you linked to was trying to make, but the fact that pretty much everything you buy is not stamped with "Made in USA" means that the cost to make it in the US was higher than elsewhere, and presumably people would choose to not buy it. It wasn't because there was a manager's convention and they all agreed to send the work abroad so they could have more power and control. It's because if they didn't, their competitor would have, and Walmart would have chosen to put that cheaper product on their shelves rather than yours.
      - pydry 6y ago
        Products low on the value chain that are unskilled-labor intensive are almost universally cheaper abroad. It wouldn't make economic sense to make t shirts in the US unless consumers paid a premium. Products high up on the value chain - the kind you don't dress up in your best slacks to go and buy at Walmart are a different story, however. I can count several software projects that were outsourced off the top of my head that were ostensibly done for cost savings purposes and were utter disasters. These disasters are routinely covered up and bullshitted, too. This has at the same time not dampened the appetite for outsourcing software much. Coordination (i.e. management) costs are higher. Consulting companies can bill millions for these projects. This is the point the article was making - pretty cogently. It's less of a smoke-filled room conspiracy and more of a mundane "conspiracy" to shape the supply/demand curve.
- jonathannat 6y ago
  > The western world can't. I'm not sure if you've been paying attention, but supply chains have been moving to Vietnam/Malaysia/Indonesia/India/Mexico for the last few years, and the trend is only increasing. There's literally a growing military alliance (US, India, Australia, Japan) against China right now. Also not to mention other countries (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, US) actively incentivizing their companies to onshore or move out of China. And because South China Sea is crucial to the growth of SE Asian economies, now France/UK/Germany along with Japan/US have warships sailing there to stop China's expansion. So yes, the western world can.
  - nomel 6y ago
    It appears that Apple is part of that trend: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-foxconn-vietnam-apple-exclusive/exclusive-foxconn-to-shift-some-apple-production-to-vietnam-to-minimise-china-risk-idUSKBN2860VN https://www.reuters.com/article/us-foxconn-vietnam-apple-exc...
    - jonathannat 6y ago
      Incomplete list of companies moving out of China. Adidas & Lacoste: https://www.glossy.co/fashion/lacoste-and-adidas-pledge-to-cut-forced-uighur-labor-from-supply-chain/ https://www.glossy.co/fashion/lacoste-and-adidas-pledge-to-c... Nike: https://www.gq.com/story/nike-adidas-shifting-production-asia https://www.gq.com/story/nike-adidas-shifting-production-asi... Hasbro: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/23/hasbro-to-cut-china-production-of-its-toys-looks-to-india-and-vietnam.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/23/hasbro-to-cut-china-producti... Samsung: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-samsung-elec-china/samsung-ends-mobile-phone-production-in-china-idUSKBN1WH0LR https://www.reuters.com/article/us-samsung-elec-china/samsun... GoPro: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/10/gopro-is-moving-camera-production-out-of-china-over-tariff-concerns.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/10/gopro-is-moving-camera-produ... LG Electronics: http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=51020 http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=5... Sharp: https://9to5mac.com/2019/08/02/out-of-china/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/08/02/out-of-china/ Hyundai: https://tfipost.com/2020/04/big-hyundai-steel-and-several-other-south-korean-majors-are-all-set-to-shut-china-factories-and-move-to-india/ https://tfipost.com/2020/04/big-hyundai-steel-and-several-ot... Nintendo: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2019/07/09/nintendo-tariffs-not-behind-moving-some-switch-production-china/1683130001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2019/07/09/ninten...
schiang 6y ago
China doesn't just provide supply chain anymore. They are also a huge market now because of its growing middle class. China has money to spend and US companies need to tap into that market.
- phone8675309 6y ago
  They're also now the market that all movies must target in order to be successful.
  - reaperducer 6y ago
    They're also now the market that all movies must target in order to be successful. It depends on your definition of "successful." You can have a successful movie and not distribute it in China. It won't make the absolute maximum number of dollars possible on planet Earth, but it can still be a successful movie.
    - phone8675309 6y ago
      > You can have a successful movie and not distribute it in China. It won't make the absolute maximum number of dollars possible on planet Earth, but it can still be a successful movie. The business success or failure of a movie is entirely determined by how much money it makes. To maximize that success (or even to be considered a success), you must publish in China.
      - reaperducer 6y ago
        The business success or failure of a movie is entirely determined by how much money it makes Even without your movement of goalposts, a movie can still be successful without being in China. The most successful movies in history were released, and massively profitable, before China's market opened to the rest of the world. To maximize that success (or even to be considered a success), you must publish in China. This is simply false. There are plenty of successful businesses, movies, video games, and other enterprises that never touch China. I hate to break it to you, but China is a non-factor for the vast majority of businesses on the planet.
smoldesu 6y ago
This is what made me stop using Apple products altogether. Their privacy and security bit is all smoke and mirrors, and I'd much rather just directly understand what my privacy model looks like instead of trying to surmise what's going on through the other side of the frosted glass. Their compliance with China's Uighur roundup is despicable, and I don't trust them in the slightest to defend tech in the long-term. They're out to make money, which is why they're the most profitable business in the world.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  > They're out to make money, which is why they're the most profitable business in the world. Everyone I know is out to make money. Apple is the most profitable because they’re selling something with high demand that people are willing and able to pay for.
jeofken 6y ago
The pine phone is afaik built around a pretty off-the-shelves system-on-a-chip and made in China, exported with a Hong Kong company. Sadly a SOC far from what you’d get in a smartphone by Samsung or Apple, as they can swing with much larger wallets. If anyone knows the specific SOC version I’d appreciate the product ID
jonathannat 6y ago
For those who wants to stop supporting China, don't lose hope. Supply chains are migrating, due to tariffs, sanctions, and hatred towards CCP. Don't let naysayers who may have a vested interest in China talk you down. Just keep checking where the product you are buying is coming from. - check https://chinalawblog.com https://chinalawblog.com and you will see that companies are indeed moving out of China at a quick pace. In fact, the site advocates that you do not think of China as the default manufacturing... - most citizens in other countries hates China now. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/10/06/unfavorable-views-of-china-reach-historic-highs-in-many-countries/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/10/06/unfavorable-vi.... this dictates shifting consumer behavior (more and more people will choose items made not in China). US citizens has a 20% favorable view of China. https://thehill.com/homenews/news/543354-view-of-china-as-greatest-us-enemy-hits-record-high-gallup https://thehill.com/homenews/news/543354-view-of-china-as-gr... - No one wants to go to China right now. If you want to go, you are subjected to an anal swab covid test, mandatory spyware on your phone, plus visa incentive that requires you to use their state covid vaccine (50% efficacy!). Not to mention foreigner kidnappings and disbar from leaving the country. No company in their right mind would send their staff to China to increase footprint there - from footwear https://footwearnews.com/2021/business/trade/us-footwear-imports-2021-forecasts-1203107796/ https://footwearnews.com/2021/business/trade/us-footwear-imp..., to furniture https://www.furnituretoday.com/opinion/sourcing-strategies/blog-as-production-moves-out-of-china-logjams-mount-in-vietnam-and-malaysia/ https://www.furnituretoday.com/opinion/sourcing-strategies/b... to electronics https://www.wsj.com/articles/samsungs-shift-away-from-china-looked-smartthen-the-coronavirus-hit-11584610202 https://www.wsj.com/articles/samsungs-shift-away-from-china-..., there's a steady pace of companies (big and small) moving out of china
Shadonototro 6y ago
china, usa, i see no differences different words, but same techniques
coliveira 6y ago
Americans need to realize that, outside the US, nobody really cares anymore about the trope "China is tracking mobile apps". The reason is that everyone knows that US agencies are already doing this (remember Snowden?). So non-US customers feel that is just fine for competition if other countries can provide them with technology, even with the downside of the sporadic spying thing. It basically is better to have competition than being in the hands of a single superpower which, as Donald Trump has shown, can easily become out of control. By the way, nothing was better for China than the big show provided by Trump and his minions in the US during the last four years. It showed that nobody can trust 100% on the US to uphold democratic values.
gfiorav 6y ago
You'll see how the west is going to "rebrand" globalization from the "world savior" to "a dependency issue". We're going back. Everyone thought that as new countries got richer, they would follow in the steps of western values (democracy, free markets, etc.). Yet, all we really achieved is to fund the CCP. And now they're not letting investors get their money out and they're putting military bases where they swore they would never. Great. Of course, the world is more "equal" in general, but not in the concrete edge cases. For already developed countries, it's a nightmare that destroyed the industry and the middle class. For developing countries, it's a nightmare where a powerful few (CCP) have more resources than ever to suppress their people and relinquish power. The only way forward is back. Let's keep the diversity and the share of information and progress. Let's reverse the economic dependency hell we've cornered ourselves into. P.D: I have nothing but sympathy for the Chinese people. I admire their resolve and creativity. I hate the CCP and how people all over the world have come to relativize even our core values as a society (democracy, freedom of speech, etc). We're really close to a middle-ages screw up if we don't remember what we stand for.
- api 6y ago
  > Everyone thought that as new countries got richer, they would follow in the steps of western values (democracy, free markets, etc.). This is the key idea that has failed: the idea that prosperity equals or leads to social liberalism and human rights, or that the two are interdependent. This idea appears to be wrong, having been disproven by China. Totalitarianism and prosperity can co-exist just fine. Totalitarianism and capitalism can even co-exist to a degree, with the totalitarian tendency to kneecap the extremely wealthy being outweighed by the totalitarian ability to forcibly suppress workers' rights movements and pushes for higher wages. Totalitarians can also backstop the economy, stepping in in the event of a crash and forcing number to go up by edict. That benefits the investor class at the expense of the working class by effectively writing down wages and inflating assets. This means utilitarian arguments for freedom and human rights fail. That's a big deal and undermines at least a half century of libertarian and neoliberal talking points. It means human rights must be argued for on purely spiritual, moral/ethical, or hedonic grounds, not utilitarian grounds. I think the collapse of this key idea is as much a driver of the global push-back against globalism as working class economic concerns and cultural xenophobia, if not more. Human beings are philosophical beings and coherent narratives and ideas matter to us. When China showed that you could have totalitarianism and prosperity, the bottom fell out of the argument for the whole project.
hertzrat 6y ago
The article doesn’t really talk about supply chain constraints. It talks more about the threat of losing market access

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

topspin 6y ago

> The western world needs to desperately work on making their supply chains independent of the CCP The western world can't. The world is only so big and the remaining sites of refuge for cheap, exploitable labor and Potemkin regulatory regimes are few. Almost any alternative place you might cite is either already beholden to China (the viable parts of Africa) or too unstable (due to endemic corruption, external threats, etc.) to risk. Insourcing is obviously out of the question; the wealthy Western establishment is violently intolerant of industrial expansion.

CountSessine 6y ago
Yes - because manufacturing in the West is ultimately self-defeating. Success breeds complacency and labor unrest. This isn't just a China-thing (I have no idea what your Potemkin regulation is or why you would mix those metaphors). When Westerners see an absurdly profitable company, they think, "why aren't they paying their employees more??!" and start a union to parasitize earnings. When Asians (including the Japanese and Koreans) see an absurdly profitably company, they think, "why are they able to charge such high prices???!" and they kneecap the company's ability to exploit their market. It's an important difference for manufacturing physical things and it's why the West loses out to Asia in manufacturing outside cutting-edge tech. It's defective wetware in our heads and how we think about wealth and creating value, so don't expect manufacturing supply chains to return to Western countries any time soon.
- elteto 6y ago
  > ... start a union to parasitize earnings. Yes, those pesky employees should just STFU and be thankful for the scraps.
  - CountSessine 6y ago
    Again - the fact that you can’t see both sides of the equation is why we don’t make things anymore.
    - majormajor 6y ago
      Terms like "parasitize earnings" don't sound like seeing both sides of the equation. Why's your anger and blame focused there for not seeing both sides? The people who outsourced things weren't simply trying to reduce gains made by unions, they were looking at price differences that could not exist in the US due to cost and standard of living. They certainly weren't looking at both sides of this in terms of long term effect either!
      - CountSessine 6y ago
        Terms like "parasitize earnings" don't sound like seeing both sides of the equation I don't want employees to get those earnings. I don't want investors or shareholders to get them either. I want consumers to get lower prices. they were looking at price differences that could not exist in the US due to cost and standard of living Again, what does that mean, "standard of living"? That we indulge industrial labor monopolies and pay more for manufactured goods than we need or want to like the 60's? How do you feel about paying $5000 for that computer? Or that we reward landlords and enrich landowners for participating in the creation of dysfunctional regulations? I agree - Western industrialists have been able to play both sides of the equation - outsourcing production to places where industrial cost-control is effective and selling in to markets where there's a large upper-middle class of well-compensated credentialed professionals like us and entitled land-owners. But I don't think that the solution is to give more power to industrial labor unions. My own pet solution is German worker councils - if only because they empower workers and make managers and industrialists accountable to employee needs, but at the same time can't coordinate labor demands across an industry. Managers can't ignore employee welfare but also employees can't gang up on consumers. But no one else wants this - industrialists hate the idea of inviting unions in to C-level planning and unions at their core want labor monopolies.
lotsofpulp 6y ago
> Insourcing is obviously out of the question; the wealthy Western establishment is violently intolerant of industrial expansion. As far as I can tell, it’s simply more expensive to insource, taking into account wages, labor regulations, and environmental regulations. If and when other countries catch up to the production costs in the US, then there won’t be a reason to ship things halfway around the world.
- pydry 6y ago
  It's frequently not cheaper and occasionally more expensive. One reason it is popular is that it gives the managers who oversee it a lot more power and control: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/05/more-on-the-myth-of-outsourcings-efficiency.html https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/05/more-on-the-myth-of-...
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    Managers can't force people to buy products based on how they like power and control. They either deliver an acceptable price to value ratio, or people buy something else. I couldn't figure out what point the article you linked to was trying to make, but the fact that pretty much everything you buy is not stamped with "Made in USA" means that the cost to make it in the US was higher than elsewhere, and presumably people would choose to not buy it. It wasn't because there was a manager's convention and they all agreed to send the work abroad so they could have more power and control. It's because if they didn't, their competitor would have, and Walmart would have chosen to put that cheaper product on their shelves rather than yours.
    - pydry 6y ago
      Products low on the value chain that are unskilled-labor intensive are almost universally cheaper abroad. It wouldn't make economic sense to make t shirts in the US unless consumers paid a premium. Products high up on the value chain - the kind you don't dress up in your best slacks to go and buy at Walmart are a different story, however. I can count several software projects that were outsourced off the top of my head that were ostensibly done for cost savings purposes and were utter disasters. These disasters are routinely covered up and bullshitted, too. This has at the same time not dampened the appetite for outsourcing software much. Coordination (i.e. management) costs are higher. Consulting companies can bill millions for these projects. This is the point the article was making - pretty cogently. It's less of a smoke-filled room conspiracy and more of a mundane "conspiracy" to shape the supply/demand curve.
jonathannat 6y ago
> The western world can't. I'm not sure if you've been paying attention, but supply chains have been moving to Vietnam/Malaysia/Indonesia/India/Mexico for the last few years, and the trend is only increasing. There's literally a growing military alliance (US, India, Australia, Japan) against China right now. Also not to mention other countries (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, US) actively incentivizing their companies to onshore or move out of China. And because South China Sea is crucial to the growth of SE Asian economies, now France/UK/Germany along with Japan/US have warships sailing there to stop China's expansion. So yes, the western world can.
- nomel 6y ago
  It appears that Apple is part of that trend: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-foxconn-vietnam-apple-exclusive/exclusive-foxconn-to-shift-some-apple-production-to-vietnam-to-minimise-china-risk-idUSKBN2860VN https://www.reuters.com/article/us-foxconn-vietnam-apple-exc...
  - jonathannat 6y ago
    Incomplete list of companies moving out of China. Adidas & Lacoste: https://www.glossy.co/fashion/lacoste-and-adidas-pledge-to-cut-forced-uighur-labor-from-supply-chain/ https://www.glossy.co/fashion/lacoste-and-adidas-pledge-to-c... Nike: https://www.gq.com/story/nike-adidas-shifting-production-asia https://www.gq.com/story/nike-adidas-shifting-production-asi... Hasbro: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/23/hasbro-to-cut-china-production-of-its-toys-looks-to-india-and-vietnam.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/23/hasbro-to-cut-china-producti... Samsung: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-samsung-elec-china/samsung-ends-mobile-phone-production-in-china-idUSKBN1WH0LR https://www.reuters.com/article/us-samsung-elec-china/samsun... GoPro: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/10/gopro-is-moving-camera-production-out-of-china-over-tariff-concerns.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/10/gopro-is-moving-camera-produ... LG Electronics: http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=51020 http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=5... Sharp: https://9to5mac.com/2019/08/02/out-of-china/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/08/02/out-of-china/ Hyundai: https://tfipost.com/2020/04/big-hyundai-steel-and-several-other-south-korean-majors-are-all-set-to-shut-china-factories-and-move-to-india/ https://tfipost.com/2020/04/big-hyundai-steel-and-several-ot... Nintendo: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2019/07/09/nintendo-tariffs-not-behind-moving-some-switch-production-china/1683130001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2019/07/09/ninten...

schiang 6y ago

China doesn't just provide supply chain anymore. They are also a huge market now because of its growing middle class. China has money to spend and US companies need to tap into that market.

phone8675309 6y ago
They're also now the market that all movies must target in order to be successful.
- reaperducer 6y ago
  They're also now the market that all movies must target in order to be successful. It depends on your definition of "successful." You can have a successful movie and not distribute it in China. It won't make the absolute maximum number of dollars possible on planet Earth, but it can still be a successful movie.
  - phone8675309 6y ago
    > You can have a successful movie and not distribute it in China. It won't make the absolute maximum number of dollars possible on planet Earth, but it can still be a successful movie. The business success or failure of a movie is entirely determined by how much money it makes. To maximize that success (or even to be considered a success), you must publish in China.
    - reaperducer 6y ago
      The business success or failure of a movie is entirely determined by how much money it makes Even without your movement of goalposts, a movie can still be successful without being in China. The most successful movies in history were released, and massively profitable, before China's market opened to the rest of the world. To maximize that success (or even to be considered a success), you must publish in China. This is simply false. There are plenty of successful businesses, movies, video games, and other enterprises that never touch China. I hate to break it to you, but China is a non-factor for the vast majority of businesses on the planet.

smoldesu 6y ago

This is what made me stop using Apple products altogether. Their privacy and security bit is all smoke and mirrors, and I'd much rather just directly understand what my privacy model looks like instead of trying to surmise what's going on through the other side of the frosted glass. Their compliance with China's Uighur roundup is despicable, and I don't trust them in the slightest to defend tech in the long-term. They're out to make money, which is why they're the most profitable business in the world.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
> They're out to make money, which is why they're the most profitable business in the world. Everyone I know is out to make money. Apple is the most profitable because they’re selling something with high demand that people are willing and able to pay for.

jeofken 6y ago

The pine phone is afaik built around a pretty off-the-shelves system-on-a-chip and made in China, exported with a Hong Kong company. Sadly a SOC far from what you’d get in a smartphone by Samsung or Apple, as they can swing with much larger wallets. If anyone knows the specific SOC version I’d appreciate the product ID

jonathannat 6y ago

For those who wants to stop supporting China, don't lose hope. Supply chains are migrating, due to tariffs, sanctions, and hatred towards CCP. Don't let naysayers who may have a vested interest in China talk you down. Just keep checking where the product you are buying is coming from. - check https://chinalawblog.com https://chinalawblog.com and you will see that companies are indeed moving out of China at a quick pace. In fact, the site advocates that you do not think of China as the default manufacturing... - most citizens in other countries hates China now. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/10/06/unfavorable-views-of-china-reach-historic-highs-in-many-countries/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/10/06/unfavorable-vi.... this dictates shifting consumer behavior (more and more people will choose items made not in China). US citizens has a 20% favorable view of China. https://thehill.com/homenews/news/543354-view-of-china-as-greatest-us-enemy-hits-record-high-gallup https://thehill.com/homenews/news/543354-view-of-china-as-gr... - No one wants to go to China right now. If you want to go, you are subjected to an anal swab covid test, mandatory spyware on your phone, plus visa incentive that requires you to use their state covid vaccine (50% efficacy!). Not to mention foreigner kidnappings and disbar from leaving the country. No company in their right mind would send their staff to China to increase footprint there - from footwear https://footwearnews.com/2021/business/trade/us-footwear-imports-2021-forecasts-1203107796/ https://footwearnews.com/2021/business/trade/us-footwear-imp..., to furniture https://www.furnituretoday.com/opinion/sourcing-strategies/blog-as-production-moves-out-of-china-logjams-mount-in-vietnam-and-malaysia/ https://www.furnituretoday.com/opinion/sourcing-strategies/b... to electronics https://www.wsj.com/articles/samsungs-shift-away-from-china-looked-smartthen-the-coronavirus-hit-11584610202 https://www.wsj.com/articles/samsungs-shift-away-from-china-..., there's a steady pace of companies (big and small) moving out of china

Shadonototro 6y ago

china, usa, i see no differences different words, but same techniques

coliveira 6y ago

Americans need to realize that, outside the US, nobody really cares anymore about the trope "China is tracking mobile apps". The reason is that everyone knows that US agencies are already doing this (remember Snowden?). So non-US customers feel that is just fine for competition if other countries can provide them with technology, even with the downside of the sporadic spying thing. It basically is better to have competition than being in the hands of a single superpower which, as Donald Trump has shown, can easily become out of control. By the way, nothing was better for China than the big show provided by Trump and his minions in the US during the last four years. It showed that nobody can trust 100% on the US to uphold democratic values.

gfiorav 6y ago

You'll see how the west is going to "rebrand" globalization from the "world savior" to "a dependency issue". We're going back. Everyone thought that as new countries got richer, they would follow in the steps of western values (democracy, free markets, etc.). Yet, all we really achieved is to fund the CCP. And now they're not letting investors get their money out and they're putting military bases where they swore they would never. Great. Of course, the world is more "equal" in general, but not in the concrete edge cases. For already developed countries, it's a nightmare that destroyed the industry and the middle class. For developing countries, it's a nightmare where a powerful few (CCP) have more resources than ever to suppress their people and relinquish power. The only way forward is back. Let's keep the diversity and the share of information and progress. Let's reverse the economic dependency hell we've cornered ourselves into. P.D: I have nothing but sympathy for the Chinese people. I admire their resolve and creativity. I hate the CCP and how people all over the world have come to relativize even our core values as a society (democracy, freedom of speech, etc). We're really close to a middle-ages screw up if we don't remember what we stand for.

api 6y ago
> Everyone thought that as new countries got richer, they would follow in the steps of western values (democracy, free markets, etc.). This is the key idea that has failed: the idea that prosperity equals or leads to social liberalism and human rights, or that the two are interdependent. This idea appears to be wrong, having been disproven by China. Totalitarianism and prosperity can co-exist just fine. Totalitarianism and capitalism can even co-exist to a degree, with the totalitarian tendency to kneecap the extremely wealthy being outweighed by the totalitarian ability to forcibly suppress workers' rights movements and pushes for higher wages. Totalitarians can also backstop the economy, stepping in in the event of a crash and forcing number to go up by edict. That benefits the investor class at the expense of the working class by effectively writing down wages and inflating assets. This means utilitarian arguments for freedom and human rights fail. That's a big deal and undermines at least a half century of libertarian and neoliberal talking points. It means human rights must be argued for on purely spiritual, moral/ethical, or hedonic grounds, not utilitarian grounds. I think the collapse of this key idea is as much a driver of the global push-back against globalism as working class economic concerns and cultural xenophobia, if not more. Human beings are philosophical beings and coherent narratives and ideas matter to us. When China showed that you could have totalitarianism and prosperity, the bottom fell out of the argument for the whole project.

hertzrat 6y ago

The article doesn’t really talk about supply chain constraints. It talks more about the threat of losing market access