4 ms·

China bans exports to US of gallium, germanium in response to chip sanctions

21 points by tsujamin 2y ago

exabrial 2y ago
Good…? Buying these materials from state sponsored communist “labor” is plagued with ethical problems.
- jqpabc123 2y ago
  Not buying these materials from the low cost producer is plagued with economic problems. It increases costs for all consumers (aka inflation), makes American manufacturers and their products less competitive and hurts the overall economy. Bottom line: Tariffs ultimately hurt as much as they help --- if not more. Only a simpleton would think this sort of juvenile policy applied on a large scale is how you "Make America Great Again".
  - yetihehe 2y ago
    Not using slaves also makes products more costly and hurts consumers.
  - troyvit 2y ago
    For you personally, which is more important, the economic problems that come with this with having to re-source these materials from somewhere else, or the byproduct of (we assume) the US having less slave labor in its supply chain? I can see both sides. If we keep using slaves to produce materials that lessen our dependence non-renewables and help save us from a climate disaster, then maybe it's a question of perfect being the enemy of the good? On the other hand if we continue to rely on slave labor to get us these resources, then will we remain dependent on slave labor? Will we be endorsing slave labor, and by doing so help expand its use around the world? Or maybe, given our current record with slave labor in the U.S. [1] is this all just hand waving anyway? IOW if we use slaves, why should we complain if our economic partners do? [1] https://www.aclu.org/news/human-rights/captive-labor-exploitation-of-incarcerated-workers https://www.aclu.org/news/human-rights/captive-labor-exploit...
    - jqpabc123 2y ago
      For you personally, which is more important --- avoiding a world wide economic collapse or "the US having less slave labor in its supply chain". The latter option means stopping all trade with China and many other countries. Do you fully understand the implications and the magnitude of human suffering that your hard ethical stance will create?
      - troyvit 2y ago
        Oh totally -- I apologize if I came across as flippant or sarcastic I wasn't trying to; it's a serious question. For me personally, if the world's economy relies on slave labor then it's a pretty broken economy and it's going to collapse one way or another anyway, might as well rip the bandaid off now. But what I wanted to hear was the rationalization for the other side given that I don't know everything. And so I take from your response, when you say "plagued with economic problems" you actually mean "a world wide economic collapse." I disagree with that, but I'd learn from any expansion you give to your point.
        Kreutzer 2y ago
        What slave labor are you repeatedly referring to?
        troyvit 2y ago
        https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/against-their-will-the-situation-in-xinjiang https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/against-their-will-the-sit... is a good start
        jqpabc123 2y ago
        Virtually every individual and every business in the USA is heavily dependent on imported goods and products. TVs, phones, computers, household appliances and automobiles (both foreign and domestic) are filled with imported components. Even half of our food is imported. Neither the USA nor any other country is any position to "win" a broad scale tariff/trade war. The only sensible outcome is likely to be a lot of damage and suffering on all sides before a stalemate and eventual surrender. What "tariff man" has suggested is to shoot ourselves and the rest of the world in the foot. The word that best describes it is economic "sabotage".
- SapporoChris 2y ago
  Ethics has very little to do with business. One example, there are many others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Nazi_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Na...
  - salawat 2y ago
    You say that as if there's nothing that can be done about that. As it turns out, bad ethics can be turned into a one way trip to not being able to operate in respectable business circles. Remember, the race to the bottom does have an adjustable lower bar.
- DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
  What do you know about labor conditions at the Aluminum Corporation of China vs. alternative suppliers of Gallium? Are you speaking out of specific knowledge about this subject or out of generalized prejudices?

21 points by tsujamin 2y ago

exabrial 2y ago

Good…? Buying these materials from state sponsored communist “labor” is plagued with ethical problems.

jqpabc123 2y ago
Not buying these materials from the low cost producer is plagued with economic problems. It increases costs for all consumers (aka inflation), makes American manufacturers and their products less competitive and hurts the overall economy. Bottom line: Tariffs ultimately hurt as much as they help --- if not more. Only a simpleton would think this sort of juvenile policy applied on a large scale is how you "Make America Great Again".
- yetihehe 2y ago
  Not using slaves also makes products more costly and hurts consumers.
- troyvit 2y ago
  For you personally, which is more important, the economic problems that come with this with having to re-source these materials from somewhere else, or the byproduct of (we assume) the US having less slave labor in its supply chain? I can see both sides. If we keep using slaves to produce materials that lessen our dependence non-renewables and help save us from a climate disaster, then maybe it's a question of perfect being the enemy of the good? On the other hand if we continue to rely on slave labor to get us these resources, then will we remain dependent on slave labor? Will we be endorsing slave labor, and by doing so help expand its use around the world? Or maybe, given our current record with slave labor in the U.S. [1] is this all just hand waving anyway? IOW if we use slaves, why should we complain if our economic partners do? [1] https://www.aclu.org/news/human-rights/captive-labor-exploitation-of-incarcerated-workers https://www.aclu.org/news/human-rights/captive-labor-exploit...
  - jqpabc123 2y ago
    For you personally, which is more important --- avoiding a world wide economic collapse or "the US having less slave labor in its supply chain". The latter option means stopping all trade with China and many other countries. Do you fully understand the implications and the magnitude of human suffering that your hard ethical stance will create?
    - troyvit 2y ago
      Oh totally -- I apologize if I came across as flippant or sarcastic I wasn't trying to; it's a serious question. For me personally, if the world's economy relies on slave labor then it's a pretty broken economy and it's going to collapse one way or another anyway, might as well rip the bandaid off now. But what I wanted to hear was the rationalization for the other side given that I don't know everything. And so I take from your response, when you say "plagued with economic problems" you actually mean "a world wide economic collapse." I disagree with that, but I'd learn from any expansion you give to your point.
      - Kreutzer 2y ago
        What slave labor are you repeatedly referring to?
        troyvit 2y ago
        https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/against-their-will-the-situation-in-xinjiang https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/against-their-will-the-sit... is a good start
      - jqpabc123 2y ago
        Virtually every individual and every business in the USA is heavily dependent on imported goods and products. TVs, phones, computers, household appliances and automobiles (both foreign and domestic) are filled with imported components. Even half of our food is imported. Neither the USA nor any other country is any position to "win" a broad scale tariff/trade war. The only sensible outcome is likely to be a lot of damage and suffering on all sides before a stalemate and eventual surrender. What "tariff man" has suggested is to shoot ourselves and the rest of the world in the foot. The word that best describes it is economic "sabotage".
SapporoChris 2y ago
Ethics has very little to do with business. One example, there are many others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Nazi_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Na...
- salawat 2y ago
  You say that as if there's nothing that can be done about that. As it turns out, bad ethics can be turned into a one way trip to not being able to operate in respectable business circles. Remember, the race to the bottom does have an adjustable lower bar.
DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
What do you know about labor conditions at the Aluminum Corporation of China vs. alternative suppliers of Gallium? Are you speaking out of specific knowledge about this subject or out of generalized prejudices?