6 ms·

But they don't have the resources to build the infrastructure to extract it in a profitable way. So likely what will happen is that China will do it and pay be

But they don't have the resources to build the infrastructure to extract it in a profitable way. So likely what will happen is that China will do it and pay below market rate for the lithium. I would not be surprised if the entire Boric fiasco is just Chinese infiltration.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago
That's one outcome, but they may find lots of companies and governments are willing to invest at more favorable conditions; the US is a logical candidate as well.
- dandy23 4y ago
  Why would more companies/states be interested investing in Chile if Chile nationalizes and takes a bigger chunk of the profits than before?
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    Stability and political counterweights. Having a stable Chile as a source of resources to stack against other sources of resources may be worth the markup.
  - alvarezbjm-hn 4y ago
    Because it is still profitable. Chile is one of the most stable Latinamerican countries.
    - nickpp 4y ago
      So was Venezuela.
    - 29athrowaway 4y ago
      Was stable. Now it is the Monty Python Argument Clinic, constitutional version.
  - patrickk 4y ago
    They're probably hoping to emulate Norway + Statoil, which has made the Norwegian state extremely rich[1]. It didn't stop oil exploration in Norwegian waters, quite the opposite. [1] https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feabdc0 https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feab...
    - jasmer 4y ago
      [flagged]
    - kspacewalk2 4y ago
      They might end up emulating a petrodictatorship instead, because it's an open question whether they have the state capacity, institutions, and most importantly a populism-proof electorate to achieve what Norway has, instead of the default "resource curse" option most other oil-rich countries fell into.
      - MSFT_Edging 4y ago
        Its always a dictatorship when a global south country refuses to play extraction-ball that will need to be "liberated".
        kspacewalk2 4y ago
        I'm rooting for them to remain democratic, just saying the resource curse[0] is not a concept made up by evil dastardly westerners to keep "global south" countries down. It seems to be the default path, sadly. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse
      - fmajid 4y ago
        Chile is actually a pretty well run country with a First World GDP. Yes, their economy is heavily based on natural resources but so is Australia or Canada. Saudi Arabia on the other hand is fabulously corrupt but they were still able to take over their oil industry (Aramco) without problems and even go upmarket in petrochemicals with SABIC.
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    For the same reason oil and gas companies still explore and agree to contracts with landowners for access to the underground minerals; it's still profitable after paying the owner of the mineral their cut.
  - 29athrowaway 4y ago
    In a world where Santa Claus exists, sure. But in the real world, once you nationalize a company, it's a matter of time before it becomes a magnet for corrupt politicians. The only world in which I would be OK with nationalization is where politician had shock collars connected to a nepotism/corruption detection AI. And where even false positives of such AI were OK.
amrocha 4y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- swores 4y ago
  Not sure why you think the person you replied to wouldn't have issue with US doing it? I don't know enough about the situation to guess if their comment about China is 100% accurate or complete nonsense, but if it is the case then I'm against that and against many of the things the US has done to/in other countries over the past century. I'm not American, but even Americans are allowed to have views that don't align with how their country's political leaders have acted over the years.
  - amrocha 4y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35861316 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35861316 Because I'm right. It's not that hard to extrapolate what people think. It's hard for the "rationalist" crowd to understand but not everyone is arguing in good faith, and humans tend to regurgitate the last opinion they heard from a person they like. Of course, there's a small amount of time I'll be wrong, and I'm happy to apologize and have a proper discussion when that happens.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- 29athrowaway 4y ago
  Better the US than the Soviet Union, which were the 2 flavors at the time.
  - malermeister 4y ago
    [citation needed]
    - 4y ago
whitemary 4y ago
Installing state officials in South America is historically a US tactic, not a Chinese tactic.
- rodolphoarruda 4y ago
  It has been a Russian tactic as well before the fall of the Berlin wall. The presence of Russians in Brazil during the military regime (mid 1900s) is well documented in history.
  - tomi-b 4y ago
    [flagged]
  - moate 4y ago
    It's a "wealthier nation" tactic going back to Spanish/Portuguese first contact. Fuck, it's called "Latin America" and I'm pretty sure Latin isn't native language. Rich people love pillaging and raping resource laden countries in the global south, assuming history is any indicator. Edited for spelling
    - inglor_cz 4y ago
      "I'm pretty sure Latin isn't native language." Latin isn't native language anywhere except Latium. English isn't native language anywhere except England (even excluding places like Cornwall that used to speak Celtic languages until the modern era). Arabic isn't native language anywhere except the Arabian peninsula. Heck, Quechua isn't native language anywhere but a very small region around Cuzco and was deliberately introduced by the Incas to make management of their huge, multiethnic empire easier. I don't think that ancient imperial language policies in itself are particularly shameful. Possibly the opposite. You can pillage and rape people without even talking to them, but if you want to trade and develop deeper relations, mutual understanding is a must.
      - nordsieck 4y ago
        > English isn't native language anywhere except England (even excluding places like Cornwall that used to speak Celtic languages until the modern era) I mean, if you really want to play the game, the Angles (along with the Saxons) aren't native to England (i.e. Angle-land); they were a germanic tribe. Of course, old english is a pretty far cry from the modern incarnation of the language.
r00fus 4y ago
> I would not be surprised if the entire Boric fiasco is just Chinese infiltration. Large claims require citation. Got any?

Cthulhu_ 4y ago

That's one outcome, but they may find lots of companies and governments are willing to invest at more favorable conditions; the US is a logical candidate as well.

dandy23 4y ago
Why would more companies/states be interested investing in Chile if Chile nationalizes and takes a bigger chunk of the profits than before?
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  Stability and political counterweights. Having a stable Chile as a source of resources to stack against other sources of resources may be worth the markup.
- alvarezbjm-hn 4y ago
  Because it is still profitable. Chile is one of the most stable Latinamerican countries.
  - nickpp 4y ago
    So was Venezuela.
  - 29athrowaway 4y ago
    Was stable. Now it is the Monty Python Argument Clinic, constitutional version.
- patrickk 4y ago
  They're probably hoping to emulate Norway + Statoil, which has made the Norwegian state extremely rich[1]. It didn't stop oil exploration in Norwegian waters, quite the opposite. [1] https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feabdc0 https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feab...
  - jasmer 4y ago
    [flagged]
  - kspacewalk2 4y ago
    They might end up emulating a petrodictatorship instead, because it's an open question whether they have the state capacity, institutions, and most importantly a populism-proof electorate to achieve what Norway has, instead of the default "resource curse" option most other oil-rich countries fell into.
    - MSFT_Edging 4y ago
      Its always a dictatorship when a global south country refuses to play extraction-ball that will need to be "liberated".
      - kspacewalk2 4y ago
        I'm rooting for them to remain democratic, just saying the resource curse[0] is not a concept made up by evil dastardly westerners to keep "global south" countries down. It seems to be the default path, sadly. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse
    - fmajid 4y ago
      Chile is actually a pretty well run country with a First World GDP. Yes, their economy is heavily based on natural resources but so is Australia or Canada. Saudi Arabia on the other hand is fabulously corrupt but they were still able to take over their oil industry (Aramco) without problems and even go upmarket in petrochemicals with SABIC.
- toomuchtodo 4y ago
  For the same reason oil and gas companies still explore and agree to contracts with landowners for access to the underground minerals; it's still profitable after paying the owner of the mineral their cut.
- 29athrowaway 4y ago
  In a world where Santa Claus exists, sure. But in the real world, once you nationalize a company, it's a matter of time before it becomes a magnet for corrupt politicians. The only world in which I would be OK with nationalization is where politician had shock collars connected to a nepotism/corruption detection AI. And where even false positives of such AI were OK.

amrocha 4y ago

[flagged]

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
swores 4y ago
Not sure why you think the person you replied to wouldn't have issue with US doing it? I don't know enough about the situation to guess if their comment about China is 100% accurate or complete nonsense, but if it is the case then I'm against that and against many of the things the US has done to/in other countries over the past century. I'm not American, but even Americans are allowed to have views that don't align with how their country's political leaders have acted over the years.
- amrocha 4y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35861316 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35861316 Because I'm right. It's not that hard to extrapolate what people think. It's hard for the "rationalist" crowd to understand but not everyone is arguing in good faith, and humans tend to regurgitate the last opinion they heard from a person they like. Of course, there's a small amount of time I'll be wrong, and I'm happy to apologize and have a proper discussion when that happens.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
29athrowaway 4y ago
Better the US than the Soviet Union, which were the 2 flavors at the time.
- malermeister 4y ago
  [citation needed]
  - 4y ago

whitemary 4y ago

Installing state officials in South America is historically a US tactic, not a Chinese tactic.

rodolphoarruda 4y ago
It has been a Russian tactic as well before the fall of the Berlin wall. The presence of Russians in Brazil during the military regime (mid 1900s) is well documented in history.
- tomi-b 4y ago
  [flagged]
- moate 4y ago
  It's a "wealthier nation" tactic going back to Spanish/Portuguese first contact. Fuck, it's called "Latin America" and I'm pretty sure Latin isn't native language. Rich people love pillaging and raping resource laden countries in the global south, assuming history is any indicator. Edited for spelling
  - inglor_cz 4y ago
    "I'm pretty sure Latin isn't native language." Latin isn't native language anywhere except Latium. English isn't native language anywhere except England (even excluding places like Cornwall that used to speak Celtic languages until the modern era). Arabic isn't native language anywhere except the Arabian peninsula. Heck, Quechua isn't native language anywhere but a very small region around Cuzco and was deliberately introduced by the Incas to make management of their huge, multiethnic empire easier. I don't think that ancient imperial language policies in itself are particularly shameful. Possibly the opposite. You can pillage and rape people without even talking to them, but if you want to trade and develop deeper relations, mutual understanding is a must.
    - nordsieck 4y ago
      > English isn't native language anywhere except England (even excluding places like Cornwall that used to speak Celtic languages until the modern era) I mean, if you really want to play the game, the Angles (along with the Saxons) aren't native to England (i.e. Angle-land); they were a germanic tribe. Of course, old english is a pretty far cry from the modern incarnation of the language.

r00fus 4y ago

> I would not be surprised if the entire Boric fiasco is just Chinese infiltration. Large claims require citation. Got any?