Thanks for the insightful reply. The pandemic has highlighted the fragility of global supply chains and the downside of being dependent on others for critical

Thanks for the insightful reply. The pandemic has highlighted the fragility of global supply chains and the downside of being dependent on others for critical goods. They are cheap when they are plentiful but they become unobtainable when they are desperately needed. That, China's beligerent diplomats, and their decision to ignore the Hong Kong treaty will hopefully be the impetus to reduce reliance on China's supply chains by developing and supporting other sources even if they are more expensive. Perhaps even local sources given that friendly faces seem to be able to to turn on you once they have some leverage, and it is difficult to re-start an industry once that know-how is lost forever. As the son of an economics professor I never thought I would argue for subsidies for uncompetitive natioanlized industry but it turns out there is some additional benefit other than the goods produced on a given day. Politicians need support for hardships they may bring upon us, such as reduced profits, more expensive goods, and subsidies for local industry, that may be the result of sanctions and moral high ground. I think "vote with your wallet" campaigns and boycotts can be a good indicator to politicians that their voters have the stomach for the sanctions, just like a demonstration or march in support of the Uighurs would. Even ineffective measures that show your support for a cause, such as wrapping a t-shirt around your face to avoid spreading covid-19 particles that are the same size as asbestos fibres and can sail right through, sends a message that you are willing to make some sacrifice for the greater good at the cost of some personal discomfort. I support goverment intervention, but I think the government needs to see they have the will of the voters behind them. Thanks again for your thoughts!