|
|
|
|
|
by yourbandsucks
2583 days ago
|
|
Cheers, at least you're honest about it being pure Thucididean rivalry. Although I'd be willing to bet, again, that there's a significant personal component for Trump, that seems to generally be his highest motivator and we're singling out a particular company here. Counterpoint on the broader prescription: Mercantilist systems are historically way less stable. They brought us WWI. Then the cold war brought us dozens of bloody proxy wars. Maybe there's a win-win possibility instead? I'd contend that if we could do a better job of sharing the pie on our side, we could take the profits from trade and not have a pissed-off middle class electing demagogues. |
|
Now it turns out that the Chinese have been profiting from this, often by illegal means and on a basis that exactly isn't free trade and competition.
So what do you tell your voters if you are the Donald? Sorry we got duped by China, but trade is still good? Sorry its the CEO's fault for caring about short term goals?
I mean is it even ethical to continue with China? Buy Huawei after they stole all their tech from Cisco (or whatever example you want to bring here)?
I think the goal, beyond fair intra-US distribution, must be to force China to play fair. Market access, both import and export, must be tit-for-tat. IP theft and license infringement must be handled in the same way. This would give China a legitimate way to act in the same way if an US company acts out. If that occurs, we may have a mutually beneficial equilibrium.
Currently, it is not. And it is also not stable. The more wealth, production and IP shifts - or seems to shift - from US to China based on seemingly unfair advantages, the closer we are to war.