[icsllaf]

Well it worked for China, they now have large corporations of similar (enough) caliber to their Western counterparts creating a lot more jobs than if Amazon or Google were allowed to run free.

It's hard enough to compete against these established Tech Giants if they just come in and buy all the domestic companies. Not to mention the companies are starting with a massive head start.

[vezycash]

> Well it worked for China

What worked for China was acting a fool for a few decades. No rules, no regulations, nothing.

Like a boa constrictor, staying motionless, allowing its prey to feel completely relaxed, then slowly but surely, tighten its grip until it's too late for the prey to escape.

With its proximity to China, India could have had China's business.

[elfexec]

Goodness, you can count on the weirdiest analogies on social media when it comes to china. But I guess it's par for the course in any trade war.

What china did was nothing special. It wasn't revolutionary. It was what every industrial power today did - from the US in the 1800s to germany and japan and the asian tigers like south korea and taiwan did. Protectionism + foreign investment + manufacturing.

The united states created the blueprint for success in the 1800s. All the smart nations have copied it and gotten successful.

One of the first things the US did was to place tariffs to protect local industry. And for 100 years, protectionism was how the US rose from a relatively insignificant nation to the largest economy in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_St...

Without the tariffs and protectionism, the US industries would have been owned by britain, france, etc. Or maybe it was like a boa constrictor. I don't know.

[true_religion]

US tarrifs were originally intended to hurt Britain, as the US had recently rebelled against them.

The tarrifs then increased during every war the US had with Britain.

It’s no surprise that the US talks of trade wars, due to the way its history of tarrif is entangled with warfare, and dislike of the nations a tarrif is aimed against,

[bernawil]

It was quite literally a rallying point for Lincon and a reason for the civil war. Southerners wanted free trade to export tobacco and cotton. Northerners wanted tariffs and protection for their industries (both to make their factories more competitive against European manufactures as to get cheaper raw materials from American farmers).

[raverbashing]

A lot of countries apply protectionist measures and have stagnating industries, protectionism is not enough to win the game.

[NicoJuicy]

He's addressing the issue that China joined the WTO, but is not following up on their promises since >20 years.

[zzzzzzzza]

you are wrong on foreign investment.. what you mean is domestic bank credit (see size of china's banking system)