4 ms·

If there’s one broad consensus in American policymaking circles today, it’s that global supply chains need to become less dependent on China. I agree, and the

by EGreg 3y ago

If there’s one broad consensus in American policymaking circles today, it’s that global supply chains need to become less dependent on China. I agree, and the other way, in many BRICS and other countries, there is a broad consensus that global economies need to become less dependent on US Dollars. Both efforts at decentralization and lessening concentration of power are probably going to lead to new good results, as hegemons are forced to compete rather than enjoy a near-monopoly worldwide.

dgb23 3y ago
What's the rationale behind this? Why specifically China?
- jpgvm 3y ago
  Because Americans need a bad guy for their political system to function.
- soligern 3y ago
  Too much dependency on a soft enemy?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- proudeu 3y ago
  Probably old fashioned Anglo-Saxon feeling of superiority and fear that world order where white Anglo Saxons dominate markets and geopolitical landscape goes away forever
nradov 3y ago
There is no consensus among the BRICS or other countries. All of them would like to have alternatives to the US Dollar for international trade settlement. None of them can agree on what that alternative should be. For example, there's no way that India will agree to widespread use of the Chinese Yuan.
- xvilka 3y ago
  In theory it can be done by creating a new currency, with no capital controls.
  - nradov 3y ago
    No, that can't be done without some sort of political monetary union. India and China will never agree to join the same monetary union. Their interests aren't aligned. Russia has to maintain good relations with both India and China, and can't afford to piss off either one. And South Africa is rapidly collapsing into a failed state with a dysfunctional economy; lately they can't even keep the lights on. It's all just talk, a total joke.
    - dotnet00 3y ago
      That's the funny thing about all the BRICS bluster, so many of the countries in (or soon to be in) the "group" either hate each other, are barely functioning or are just direct competitors in general. It's amazing anyone thinks they'll do anything that requires cooperation and mutual trust beyond making empty promises.
      - somenameforme 3y ago
        There were centuries of organizations that tried to prevent war by trust and cooperation. Before the UN was the League of Nations, before the LoN was the Concert of Europe and there were undoubtedly countless efforts prior. But they all failed completely abysmally. Do you know the one thing that actually worked? Countries having nuclear weapons. Suddenly there was a strong self-interest in avoiding war, and "real" war essentially disappeared - at least between nuclear powers. And I think that's generally true in everything, everywhere. The reason you can walk down the street safely in most places is not because of an implicit agreement of cooperation, but simply because we're all working in our best interest. You don't even consider messing with other people, because you'd just end up in prison for negligible gains. And indeed as soon as that threat and imminence of harsh consequence disappears, it suddenly becomes much less safe to walk down those streets. BRICS is not united in some ideological conformity, but instead in self interest. They don't want to be dominated by a single hegemon. And I think this form of cooperation based solely on self interest - is far more likely to persist and yield fruitful results. I also expect this is why agreements will, and should, take much longer. Instead of just bum-rushing some virtue filled "Treaty of Whatever" that'll get scrapped by any participating government when it becomes inconvenient, they want to ensure there are implicit self-interest motivated systems driving cooperation through any foreseeable circumstance.
davoneus 3y ago
Also aggregating the entire situation is Wall Streets unhealthy laser focus on each Quarter's profits. Because we all know if a company needs to spend 100mill and a year to bring up a new supply source, their stock price will plummet due to analysts negative ratings.

by EGreg 3y ago

dgb23 3y ago

What's the rationale behind this? Why specifically China?

jpgvm 3y ago
Because Americans need a bad guy for their political system to function.
soligern 3y ago
Too much dependency on a soft enemy?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
proudeu 3y ago
Probably old fashioned Anglo-Saxon feeling of superiority and fear that world order where white Anglo Saxons dominate markets and geopolitical landscape goes away forever

nradov 3y ago

There is no consensus among the BRICS or other countries. All of them would like to have alternatives to the US Dollar for international trade settlement. None of them can agree on what that alternative should be. For example, there's no way that India will agree to widespread use of the Chinese Yuan.

xvilka 3y ago
In theory it can be done by creating a new currency, with no capital controls.
- nradov 3y ago
  No, that can't be done without some sort of political monetary union. India and China will never agree to join the same monetary union. Their interests aren't aligned. Russia has to maintain good relations with both India and China, and can't afford to piss off either one. And South Africa is rapidly collapsing into a failed state with a dysfunctional economy; lately they can't even keep the lights on. It's all just talk, a total joke.
  - dotnet00 3y ago
    That's the funny thing about all the BRICS bluster, so many of the countries in (or soon to be in) the "group" either hate each other, are barely functioning or are just direct competitors in general. It's amazing anyone thinks they'll do anything that requires cooperation and mutual trust beyond making empty promises.
    - somenameforme 3y ago
      There were centuries of organizations that tried to prevent war by trust and cooperation. Before the UN was the League of Nations, before the LoN was the Concert of Europe and there were undoubtedly countless efforts prior. But they all failed completely abysmally. Do you know the one thing that actually worked? Countries having nuclear weapons. Suddenly there was a strong self-interest in avoiding war, and "real" war essentially disappeared - at least between nuclear powers. And I think that's generally true in everything, everywhere. The reason you can walk down the street safely in most places is not because of an implicit agreement of cooperation, but simply because we're all working in our best interest. You don't even consider messing with other people, because you'd just end up in prison for negligible gains. And indeed as soon as that threat and imminence of harsh consequence disappears, it suddenly becomes much less safe to walk down those streets. BRICS is not united in some ideological conformity, but instead in self interest. They don't want to be dominated by a single hegemon. And I think this form of cooperation based solely on self interest - is far more likely to persist and yield fruitful results. I also expect this is why agreements will, and should, take much longer. Instead of just bum-rushing some virtue filled "Treaty of Whatever" that'll get scrapped by any participating government when it becomes inconvenient, they want to ensure there are implicit self-interest motivated systems driving cooperation through any foreseeable circumstance.

davoneus 3y ago

Also aggregating the entire situation is Wall Streets unhealthy laser focus on each Quarter's profits. Because we all know if a company needs to spend 100mill and a year to bring up a new supply source, their stock price will plummet due to analysts negative ratings.