3 ms·

>You are going to need proof for this. Are you asking for proof China is not Communist? It is common knowledge Party Service Centers and State-Directed Indust

>You are going to need proof for this. Are you asking for proof China is not Communist? It is common knowledge Party Service Centers and State-Directed Industrial Policy support have been active for decades. One may talk with US customs about why industries had anti-dumping levies on China exports. Also, the PRC Party embeds advisors in almost every large successful domestic firm. So businesses couldn't really have 'free enterprise' even if they wanted a free market. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect >Regarding batteries, it's true that China had tax rebates for EV purchases That is a different subject, and part of a late stage market exploitation phase post state planning. BYD and DJI make some great products, but that success did not just magically appear out of thin air. Over 93% of Solar/EV/Battery industries are currently China based. That isn't going to change anytime soon, and wasn't by accident given its massive oil reserves are still finite. The Party wanted independence from global trade politics, and now produces most of the worlds "Green" power products. Communism is interesting, as such economies must control supply, demand, and public opinion to persist. =3 "In America you can change political parties, but you can't change policies. In China you cannot change the party, but you can change policies."

nl 2mo ago
>>> Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years >> You are going to need proof for this. > Are you asking for proof China is not Communist? No, I literally quoted exactly what I'm asking for proof for.
- Joel_Mckay 2mo ago
  I was not referring to the recently expanded NDRC programs https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3317637/china-offers-one-subsidy-those-hiring-unemployed-young-people https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3317637/c... Nor was it related to forced and or child labor political taboos https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods-print?items_per_page=10&combine=china&field_exp_exploitation_type_target_id_1=All&tid=All&field_exp_good_target_id=All&order=name&sort=desc https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-o... But it was a rather simple multi-year PRC Party labor partnership program for key industries. Very frustrating as I can't remember if it was for foreign owned firms only or not, as "AI" spam is insisting China never existed prior to 6 years ago. I will look into the matter again as time permits in a day or so. =3
  - nl 2mo ago
    So basically you made the whole thing up.
    - Joel_Mckay 2mo ago
      Which part of the forced unpaid labor noted in the trade policy notice do you think is imaginary? I can't immediately recall the program name my boss from Procter & Gamble worked under at the time. But it was similar to the XPCC labor programs cited in the provided links. One can believe whatever BS a naive LLM tells them, but in this case you were wrong. The import levies/fines/bans will stay until folks can provide proof of reasonable, legal, and humane working conditions for all Chinese people. Best of luck with that. =3
      - nl 2mo ago
        None of the links you provided talk about what you claimed at all. Instead they talk about forced labor in other industries. That's terrible and all forced labor - including in US prison system - should be stopped. But you made very specific allegations about wage subsidiaries for electric motor manufacturer and is zero evidence for that. Now you are moving the goal posts to random "China bad" talking points.
        Joel_Mckay 2mo ago
        Not really, but one may read a brief explanation of why there is a long history of anti-dumping mitigation with China exports https://kingcenter.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj16611/files/media/file/360wp_0.pdf https://kingcenter.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj16611/fi... Sealioning means you no longer had a point to make, bye. =3

nl 2mo ago

>>> Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years >> You are going to need proof for this. > Are you asking for proof China is not Communist? No, I literally quoted exactly what I'm asking for proof for.

Joel_Mckay 2mo ago
I was not referring to the recently expanded NDRC programs https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3317637/china-offers-one-subsidy-those-hiring-unemployed-young-people https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3317637/c... Nor was it related to forced and or child labor political taboos https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods-print?items_per_page=10&combine=china&field_exp_exploitation_type_target_id_1=All&tid=All&field_exp_good_target_id=All&order=name&sort=desc https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-o... But it was a rather simple multi-year PRC Party labor partnership program for key industries. Very frustrating as I can't remember if it was for foreign owned firms only or not, as "AI" spam is insisting China never existed prior to 6 years ago. I will look into the matter again as time permits in a day or so. =3
- nl 2mo ago
  So basically you made the whole thing up.
  - Joel_Mckay 2mo ago
    Which part of the forced unpaid labor noted in the trade policy notice do you think is imaginary? I can't immediately recall the program name my boss from Procter & Gamble worked under at the time. But it was similar to the XPCC labor programs cited in the provided links. One can believe whatever BS a naive LLM tells them, but in this case you were wrong. The import levies/fines/bans will stay until folks can provide proof of reasonable, legal, and humane working conditions for all Chinese people. Best of luck with that. =3
    - nl 2mo ago
      None of the links you provided talk about what you claimed at all. Instead they talk about forced labor in other industries. That's terrible and all forced labor - including in US prison system - should be stopped. But you made very specific allegations about wage subsidiaries for electric motor manufacturer and is zero evidence for that. Now you are moving the goal posts to random "China bad" talking points.
      - Joel_Mckay 2mo ago
        Not really, but one may read a brief explanation of why there is a long history of anti-dumping mitigation with China exports https://kingcenter.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj16611/files/media/file/360wp_0.pdf https://kingcenter.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj16611/fi... Sealioning means you no longer had a point to make, bye. =3