4 ms·

The real issue isn’t the size of China or its financial power housing, it’s that it’s market isn’t open. If it was you’d see all the western oligarchs abandoni

by moksly 5y ago

The real issue isn’t the size of China or its financial power housing, it’s that it’s market isn’t open. If it was you’d see all the western oligarchs abandoning us in favour for better markets in a heartbeat.

oblio 5y ago
That wasn't a problem until China started moving up the economic food chain.
- AzzieElbab 5y ago
  Of course it was. It is a completely different issue now after it became clear that China will not open its markets, and went openly adversarial
  - oblio 5y ago
    It was a minor issue at the time and the second part should have been obvious to any half decent intelligence agency. Greed.
  - FooBarWidget 5y ago
    China "will not open its markets", yet foreign direct investments in 2020 were at an all time high. There are serious problems with the narrative that "China will not open its markets".
    - moksly 5y ago
      The money people still think they can change China. Maybe it’ll turn out they were right, maybe not. I think it fits rather perfectly into a narrative with 30 years of western investments into China with the expectancy of it opening up more. The money men are just rustling their swords because it’s not happening fast enough, maybe some are even beginning to worry a little about the past year of not being capable of exploiting their insanely long supply lines, but it’s probably mostly just impatience still. Either way it’s not like they won’t do anything to keep making what money they can at the same time.
      - FooBarWidget 5y ago
        How does that make sense? How do you surge foreign direct investments to record highs when markets are not open? Your statement is also based on a false premise. Companies don't invest in China to change China. They invest in China to make a profit. And making a profit, they did and they do. Wanting to change China is, ironically, something which mostly non-businesspeople want. Which makes the narrative that "we're being hostile to China because they don't open up markets" all the more insane. China has opened up. Walk down the street in China for 10 minutes and you see a ton of foreign companies. There are so much more foreign companies in China now than 30 years ago that the entire statement "China hasn't opened up" makes absolutely no sense. Not everything is open, sure, but that's still a far cry from "China hasn't opened up". China is also continuing to open up more parts of the markets. This comment here is on point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27333819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27333819 The fact is, even if China isn't opening up as quickly or as much as you like, the trade agreement with China was never based on symmetry in the first place. It wasn't the goal, and more importantly, symmetry isn't needed for both parties to get what they want. Both parties did get what they want. What the US now wants has changed. It's entirely possible to renegotiate and get what you want, without devolving into useless, illogical and dishonest aggression rherotic. This whole cold war is entirely unnecessary, but I guess people care more about making up an enemy and being able to moral grandstand, than to address actual issues.

by moksly 5y ago

oblio 5y ago

That wasn't a problem until China started moving up the economic food chain.

AzzieElbab 5y ago
Of course it was. It is a completely different issue now after it became clear that China will not open its markets, and went openly adversarial
- oblio 5y ago
  It was a minor issue at the time and the second part should have been obvious to any half decent intelligence agency. Greed.
- FooBarWidget 5y ago
  China "will not open its markets", yet foreign direct investments in 2020 were at an all time high. There are serious problems with the narrative that "China will not open its markets".
  - moksly 5y ago
    The money people still think they can change China. Maybe it’ll turn out they were right, maybe not. I think it fits rather perfectly into a narrative with 30 years of western investments into China with the expectancy of it opening up more. The money men are just rustling their swords because it’s not happening fast enough, maybe some are even beginning to worry a little about the past year of not being capable of exploiting their insanely long supply lines, but it’s probably mostly just impatience still. Either way it’s not like they won’t do anything to keep making what money they can at the same time.
    - FooBarWidget 5y ago
      How does that make sense? How do you surge foreign direct investments to record highs when markets are not open? Your statement is also based on a false premise. Companies don't invest in China to change China. They invest in China to make a profit. And making a profit, they did and they do. Wanting to change China is, ironically, something which mostly non-businesspeople want. Which makes the narrative that "we're being hostile to China because they don't open up markets" all the more insane. China has opened up. Walk down the street in China for 10 minutes and you see a ton of foreign companies. There are so much more foreign companies in China now than 30 years ago that the entire statement "China hasn't opened up" makes absolutely no sense. Not everything is open, sure, but that's still a far cry from "China hasn't opened up". China is also continuing to open up more parts of the markets. This comment here is on point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27333819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27333819 The fact is, even if China isn't opening up as quickly or as much as you like, the trade agreement with China was never based on symmetry in the first place. It wasn't the goal, and more importantly, symmetry isn't needed for both parties to get what they want. Both parties did get what they want. What the US now wants has changed. It's entirely possible to renegotiate and get what you want, without devolving into useless, illogical and dishonest aggression rherotic. This whole cold war is entirely unnecessary, but I guess people care more about making up an enemy and being able to moral grandstand, than to address actual issues.