4 ms·

I disagree. Some of Trumps policies were ridiculed by the same people who now have the power and choose to continue the exact same policies. In some cases even

I disagree. Some of Trumps policies were ridiculed by the same people who now have the power and choose to continue the exact same policies. In some cases even more extreme. Keeping history within view helps to view current events in perspective. Reagan was ridiculed as well. He did a pretty good job at guiding the end of the cold war into a remarkably non-eventful event ( this could be worded better, not a native speaker ).

throwaway4good 5y ago
The problem with the tech sanctions is that the bullet has left the chamber. Even if the Biden administration were to say fine - Huawei, you can produce your chips at TSMC, and SMIC, you can buy an EUVL machine from ASML. China would still persue a completely US influence free semiconductor supply chain, as the US has clearly demonstrated its willingness weaponize its dominance. From a Chinese perspective, the interest of state and its big unruly tech companies are now aligned. Alibaba, Xiaomi, etc. are all making chips now. It is not all given that the escalated tech war is a longterm winning move from a US perspective. But time will tell.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "It is not all given that the escalated tech war is a longterm winning move from a US perspective." This is what bothers me most about 'tough on China' folks, whats the next move? Foreign policy has to think few steps ahead. This is not looking much better than 'invade X country in middle east and figure out what to do next later"
  - the-dude 5y ago
    Disagreeing is easy. Coming up with reasonable alternatives is not. Two steps ahead is bringing critical manufacturing back under one's control. Guess who wanted that?
    - eru 5y ago
      Why does manufacturing need to be under government control?
      - fmajid 5y ago
        He meant on your own shores where critical supplies are not at the mercy of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
        CamperBob2 5y ago
        Meanwhile, the status quo worked well for almost everyone including Taiwan.
        eru 5y ago
        Funny enough during the pandemic, it was better for manufacturing to be off-shore. That's because American price-controls and anti-price-gouging laws (and chilling effects from fear of them) don't really apply to foreign importers to the US, only to domestic companies. US lawmakers haven't quite gotten around to legislating world market prices yet after all. So the prices of imported goods could rise to clear the markets. For domestically produced goods you were more likely to see empty shelves, lines and (informal) rationing; like super markets only selling you limited quantities.
    - N1H1L 5y ago
      Countries with manufacturing under government control haven't fared that well. The US has led a lot of fab investments over the past 1-2 years, with at least seven new fabs under construction from Intel and TSMC. The America Competes Act, if passed will be a great fillip, and the chances are that it will be passed looks high at the moment. The previous president, (not naming him just to keep things a bit apolitical) also had tons of bad ideas. A huge amount of the US advanced tech industry (such as semiconductors or EVs) depends on foreign talent, and publishing a Stephen Miller drafted Executive Order (No. 13940 - August 2020) with the stated purpose of disallowing any visa holders to work in a government contractor (which includes almost every tech company from Intel to Nvidia to Google) is a stupid move, and would have been suicidal.
- the-dude 5y ago
  Agreed about the harm already been done, even if sanctions would be retracted now. > It is not all given that the escalated tech war is a longterm winning move from a US perspective. But the alternative of not doing anything gives no guarantees either. Trump was not alone in his view that 'something had to be done about China' with regards to trade and IP ( WTO ). It already was a hairy situation for everybody in the West and some even stated that apparently it took 'a Trump' to confront this situation.
- vimy 5y ago
  This was already China’s plan before the sanctions. Sanctions only slowed them down but that was the goal so it worked. To buy some time before the US loses one of the few technological edges it still has.
  - throwaway4good 5y ago
    Sure, for the authoritarian state not being dependent on foreign supply has always been the goal. However it used to be that China's big tech (DJI, Xiaomi, Alibaba, Huawei etc.) had no problem being dependent on US-controlled tech. Now they see it as an existential threat.
YorkshireSeason 5y ago
"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle. One thing that helps toward it is to keep a diary, or, at any rate, to keep some kind of record of one's opinions about important events. Otherwise, when some particularly absurd belief is exploded by events, one may simply forget that one ever held it. Political predictions are usually wrong. But even when one makes a correct one, to discover why one was right can be very illuminating. In general, one is only right when either wish or fear coincides with reality." G. Orwell, In Front Of Your Nose

throwaway4good 5y ago

The problem with the tech sanctions is that the bullet has left the chamber. Even if the Biden administration were to say fine - Huawei, you can produce your chips at TSMC, and SMIC, you can buy an EUVL machine from ASML. China would still persue a completely US influence free semiconductor supply chain, as the US has clearly demonstrated its willingness weaponize its dominance. From a Chinese perspective, the interest of state and its big unruly tech companies are now aligned. Alibaba, Xiaomi, etc. are all making chips now. It is not all given that the escalated tech war is a longterm winning move from a US perspective. But time will tell.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"It is not all given that the escalated tech war is a longterm winning move from a US perspective." This is what bothers me most about 'tough on China' folks, whats the next move? Foreign policy has to think few steps ahead. This is not looking much better than 'invade X country in middle east and figure out what to do next later"
- the-dude 5y ago
  Disagreeing is easy. Coming up with reasonable alternatives is not. Two steps ahead is bringing critical manufacturing back under one's control. Guess who wanted that?
  - eru 5y ago
    Why does manufacturing need to be under government control?
    - fmajid 5y ago
      He meant on your own shores where critical supplies are not at the mercy of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
      - CamperBob2 5y ago
        Meanwhile, the status quo worked well for almost everyone including Taiwan.
      - eru 5y ago
        Funny enough during the pandemic, it was better for manufacturing to be off-shore. That's because American price-controls and anti-price-gouging laws (and chilling effects from fear of them) don't really apply to foreign importers to the US, only to domestic companies. US lawmakers haven't quite gotten around to legislating world market prices yet after all. So the prices of imported goods could rise to clear the markets. For domestically produced goods you were more likely to see empty shelves, lines and (informal) rationing; like super markets only selling you limited quantities.
  - N1H1L 5y ago
    Countries with manufacturing under government control haven't fared that well. The US has led a lot of fab investments over the past 1-2 years, with at least seven new fabs under construction from Intel and TSMC. The America Competes Act, if passed will be a great fillip, and the chances are that it will be passed looks high at the moment. The previous president, (not naming him just to keep things a bit apolitical) also had tons of bad ideas. A huge amount of the US advanced tech industry (such as semiconductors or EVs) depends on foreign talent, and publishing a Stephen Miller drafted Executive Order (No. 13940 - August 2020) with the stated purpose of disallowing any visa holders to work in a government contractor (which includes almost every tech company from Intel to Nvidia to Google) is a stupid move, and would have been suicidal.
the-dude 5y ago
Agreed about the harm already been done, even if sanctions would be retracted now. > It is not all given that the escalated tech war is a longterm winning move from a US perspective. But the alternative of not doing anything gives no guarantees either. Trump was not alone in his view that 'something had to be done about China' with regards to trade and IP ( WTO ). It already was a hairy situation for everybody in the West and some even stated that apparently it took 'a Trump' to confront this situation.
vimy 5y ago
This was already China’s plan before the sanctions. Sanctions only slowed them down but that was the goal so it worked. To buy some time before the US loses one of the few technological edges it still has.
- throwaway4good 5y ago
  Sure, for the authoritarian state not being dependent on foreign supply has always been the goal. However it used to be that China's big tech (DJI, Xiaomi, Alibaba, Huawei etc.) had no problem being dependent on US-controlled tech. Now they see it as an existential threat.

YorkshireSeason 5y ago

"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle. One thing that helps toward it is to keep a diary, or, at any rate, to keep some kind of record of one's opinions about important events. Otherwise, when some particularly absurd belief is exploded by events, one may simply forget that one ever held it. Political predictions are usually wrong. But even when one makes a correct one, to discover why one was right can be very illuminating. In general, one is only right when either wish or fear coincides with reality." G. Orwell, In Front Of Your Nose