|
|
|
|
|
by rjf72
2663 days ago
|
|
Economic systems aren't built on benevolence. The reason the US has the economic system it does is because they believe it to be the most 'effective' system by various metrics. Incidentally that's the exact same reason that China has the system it does. As a comparable example the reason the founding fathers built freedom of speech deep into the US constitution was not because they liked people saying naughty or unpopular things, but because they felt that systems in which those in power could control what those out of power could say was counter-productive to building and maintaining a strong nation. We do these things not because they are 'good' but because they are optimal. That's what makes this issue so interesting. On paper we've fully embraced globalism while China has embraced outward globalism and inward nationalism. In reality the US market is still completely dominated by US companies or by companies from 'friendly' nations. E.g. in smartphones South Korea and USA make up the vast majority of all sales. But now 'unfriendly' nations are increasingly creating products that are becoming not only competitive but in some cases industry leading. So we find ourselves in the position of countries such as China. Do you allow companies from 'unfriendly' nations to setup and start on what may be a path to dominance, or do you give unfair preference to domestic/'friendly' products? We never had this issue before because final product competition from 'unfriendly' nations was negligible! And this is before you get into all the intelligence intrigue going on behind the scenes. The NSA has stated they have access to "extensive, in-depth surveillance on live communications and stored information" [1] on the products of 'participating' companies including Google, Apple, Microsoft, and others. Suffice to say companies such as Huawei are less likely to 'participate' in such activities. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) |
|