3 ms·
Losing the Chinese market is a double punch. Initially it guts their growth but over the longer term it will spawn state-sponsored competitors with access to ne
by jpgvm 3y ago
Losing the Chinese market is a double punch. Initially it guts their growth but over the longer term it will spawn state-sponsored competitors with access to near unlimited funds that can compete everywhere the US can't block them.
Sucks for ASML, they got no choice in the matter.
- throwaway290 3y ago> everywhere the US can't block them You're talking like countries can't choose not to do business for reasons other than US blocking it. This is a very globalist and US-centric view. For a random example if PRC consistently violates Philippines integrity then US does not need to block anything, Philippines will just rather not pay money somewhere that directly sponsors PLA
- pjmlp 3y agoThe world is slowly back at full scale war, or at best a second cold war, globalisation is over.
- flohofwoe 3y agoThe Cold War wasn't really over (of course hindsight is 20/20, but I always found the naive "we won the Cold War" mindset of the US and Western European countries a bit naive as an East German). If anybody "won the Cold War" it was the Eastern European countries which managed to escape the Soviet/Russian influence (which also never really stopped of course, but just moved underground). And also: globalisation was already a thing during the Cold War, just with different poor countries to be exploited. I guess globalisation will only be over when all countries reach the same economic equilibrium, or as Neal Stephenson put it so eloquently in Snow Crash: "...once the Invisible Hand has taken away all those historical inequities and smeared them out into a broad global layer of what a Pakistani brickmaker would consider to be prosperity..." ;)