5 ms·

When everything is produced on US soil, what stops the US from proclaiming that "What stands on US soil is owned by the US" and all the investments foreigners d

When everything is produced on US soil, what stops the US from proclaiming that "What stands on US soil is owned by the US" and all the investments foreigners did were for nothing?

dpratt 2y ago
In the same range of the probability of it happening anywhere else, but (if you’re honest with yourself) a bit lower. Seizure of property and/or nationalization of whole industries is not a novel concept.
toomuchtodo 2y ago
Nothing. Build elsewhere and accept the loss of the market as a risk reduction premium.
focusgroup0 2y ago
Remember what happened to ARM? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28329731 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28329731
- jxjnskkzxxhx 2y ago
  Wild read, thanks for sharing.
- RickJWagner 2y ago
  I have no idea why you’ve been downvoted. Downvotes are now a measure of emotion more than anything else. Validity isn’t a consideration.
credit_guy 2y ago
Maybe the US Constitution?
- vander_elst 2y ago
  Serious and genuine question, how? It seems that some of the layoffs in the administration might be illegal, however they still happened and there are no legal consequences yet. High ranked officials discussing national security matters on non approved platforms *is* illegal, yet nothing happened and I bet nothing will happen at all. Given this background, how will the Constitution prevent such a case?
  - pstuart 2y ago
    The constitution is meaningless to the current admin, except where they can use it to their advantage. The current admin has made no secret that they don't believe in democracy and want to have a strong man king rule instead. This is well-documented.
    - jopython 2y ago
      United States is a Constitutional Republic. Not a democracy according to the US constitution. $ grep -i democra us_constitution.txt $ grep -i republic us_constitution.txt The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. ```
      - michaelcampbell 2y ago
        > > The current admin has made no secret that they don't believe in democracy and want to have a strong man king rule instead. > United States is a Constitutional Republic. Not a democracy according to the US constitution. Your statement is not a refutation of what you replied to.
      - pstuart 2y ago
        Bike-shedding is your counter argument? Here's an interview with Thiel and Vance's guru on "democracy": https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-in... -- the word democracy is used there as it is by most who use it in the context of the US (including myself). And the person they picked for this is a charismatic narcissist who clearly only cares about himself? The examples of previous "dictators" all clearly believed that what they were doing was for the benefit of the country as a whole. Those opposed to Trump holding office don't do so because he's in the "wrong party", they oppose him because he is eminently unsuitable for the job. Note that even hard core conservative members of his party advocated for voting for his opponent. That's a first, and there's a reason why. Note as well that he's making noise about ignoring a constitutional amendment that would prohibit him from the office after this term.
lumost 2y ago
Same thing that stops other countries from doing this. It would create a (multi) generational block against all foreign investment and devastating sanctions. Cuba did this as part of the revolution. The nationalization of American owned businesses was a major contributor to later hostilities. We don't have an embargo on Russia, yet we still maintain the trade embargo on Cuba.
- t-writescode 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - lazyeye 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - t-writescode 2y ago
      How about "with the rapid ascent and descent of tariffs against trade partners and allies heretofore unseen in their magnitude, as well as the frequent changes in directions to those tariffs - seeming to use them as threats - again, to our allies and trade partners", the United States has changed its behavior in a way that most people would see as untrustworthy (and if they were a friend or dating partner, most would recommend a temporary cutoff)? Does that sound less "partisan"?
      - xedrac 2y ago
        If we had fair trade coming into January, then I would agree with you. But we didn't have fair and balanced trade with many nations. So Trump's actions are at least understandable.
        lazyeye 2y ago
        Agreed. People don't seem to understand that unfair trade practices having been going on for decades. It's just that Trump appears to be the first president to actually take action on the problem. And it's pointless debating Trump-haters on day 2 of what will be a much longer process to restructure global trade to be more fair and balanced.
SiempreViernes 2y ago
Under this administration? Mainly that Trump doesn't want to directly own everything. What's stopping the current admin from saying "we don't like you, you gotta sell", now that's another question! Currently the main answer is "your willingness to pay bribes".
postepowanieadm 2y ago
Like what China does? ARM is well known example.
spwa4 2y ago
You just found the central tactic China has been using for 10+ years now.

When everything is produced on US soil, what stops the US from proclaiming that "What stands on US soil is owned by the US" and all the investments foreigners did were for nothing?

dpratt 2y ago

In the same range of the probability of it happening anywhere else, but (if you’re honest with yourself) a bit lower. Seizure of property and/or nationalization of whole industries is not a novel concept.

toomuchtodo 2y ago

Nothing. Build elsewhere and accept the loss of the market as a risk reduction premium.

focusgroup0 2y ago

Remember what happened to ARM? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28329731 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28329731

jxjnskkzxxhx 2y ago
Wild read, thanks for sharing.
RickJWagner 2y ago
I have no idea why you’ve been downvoted. Downvotes are now a measure of emotion more than anything else. Validity isn’t a consideration.

credit_guy 2y ago

Maybe the US Constitution?

vander_elst 2y ago
Serious and genuine question, how? It seems that some of the layoffs in the administration might be illegal, however they still happened and there are no legal consequences yet. High ranked officials discussing national security matters on non approved platforms *is* illegal, yet nothing happened and I bet nothing will happen at all. Given this background, how will the Constitution prevent such a case?
- pstuart 2y ago
  The constitution is meaningless to the current admin, except where they can use it to their advantage. The current admin has made no secret that they don't believe in democracy and want to have a strong man king rule instead. This is well-documented.
  - jopython 2y ago
    United States is a Constitutional Republic. Not a democracy according to the US constitution. $ grep -i democra us_constitution.txt $ grep -i republic us_constitution.txt The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. ```
    - michaelcampbell 2y ago
      > > The current admin has made no secret that they don't believe in democracy and want to have a strong man king rule instead. > United States is a Constitutional Republic. Not a democracy according to the US constitution. Your statement is not a refutation of what you replied to.
    - pstuart 2y ago
      Bike-shedding is your counter argument? Here's an interview with Thiel and Vance's guru on "democracy": https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-in... -- the word democracy is used there as it is by most who use it in the context of the US (including myself). And the person they picked for this is a charismatic narcissist who clearly only cares about himself? The examples of previous "dictators" all clearly believed that what they were doing was for the benefit of the country as a whole. Those opposed to Trump holding office don't do so because he's in the "wrong party", they oppose him because he is eminently unsuitable for the job. Note that even hard core conservative members of his party advocated for voting for his opponent. That's a first, and there's a reason why. Note as well that he's making noise about ignoring a constitutional amendment that would prohibit him from the office after this term.

lumost 2y ago

Same thing that stops other countries from doing this. It would create a (multi) generational block against all foreign investment and devastating sanctions. Cuba did this as part of the revolution. The nationalization of American owned businesses was a major contributor to later hostilities. We don't have an embargo on Russia, yet we still maintain the trade embargo on Cuba.

t-writescode 2y ago
[flagged]
- lazyeye 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - t-writescode 2y ago
    How about "with the rapid ascent and descent of tariffs against trade partners and allies heretofore unseen in their magnitude, as well as the frequent changes in directions to those tariffs - seeming to use them as threats - again, to our allies and trade partners", the United States has changed its behavior in a way that most people would see as untrustworthy (and if they were a friend or dating partner, most would recommend a temporary cutoff)? Does that sound less "partisan"?
    - xedrac 2y ago
      If we had fair trade coming into January, then I would agree with you. But we didn't have fair and balanced trade with many nations. So Trump's actions are at least understandable.
      - lazyeye 2y ago
        Agreed. People don't seem to understand that unfair trade practices having been going on for decades. It's just that Trump appears to be the first president to actually take action on the problem. And it's pointless debating Trump-haters on day 2 of what will be a much longer process to restructure global trade to be more fair and balanced.

SiempreViernes 2y ago

Under this administration? Mainly that Trump doesn't want to directly own everything. What's stopping the current admin from saying "we don't like you, you gotta sell", now that's another question! Currently the main answer is "your willingness to pay bribes".

postepowanieadm 2y ago

Like what China does? ARM is well known example.

spwa4 2y ago

You just found the central tactic China has been using for 10+ years now.