[LatteLazy]

I find the fact talks fell through particularly concerning as right now we should all be presenting a united front against China.

I also think they should call this a digital tax or apply it only to digital services. I understand that’s where the biggest impact will be felt but a minimum corporation tax rate shouldn’t depend on business type and I dislike the idea people are free to target companies for being “too successful”.

[Youden]

> I find the fact talks fell through particularly concerning as right now we should all be presenting a united front against China.

Honest question: why? Why should Europe unite with the US against China?

I don't mean this as a challenge, I'm not trying to argue either way¸ I'm just curious about the reasoning behind your statement.

[LatteLazy]

It's a fair question.

I don't think the US (or the EU) can change Chinese policies on a list of issues alone. At least not without a tonne of backlash at home over the economic results. So the EU (/US) (plus a list of othets) either need to unite on those issues or accept them happening.

The issues I'm thinking about are: Hong Kong, freedoms in wider China, treatment of minorities, coronavirus and the recent clashes in India (I don't want to take sides, I just want two nuclear powers to stop shooting at each other). You may disagree with one or more of these issues. But I'd be surprised if you think nothing on this list warrents at least some international pressure?

I'm more than happy to admit that none of the places I've listed are perfect. And we all have bones to pick with each other. But right now we're squabbling over very little while China sets up camps and deployed troops...

[noir-york]

Because China is threatening the global order on which peace and prosperity lies, starting with the freedom of the seas.

China is already harassing and sinking fishing vessels and trying to close the South China Sea. It may soon try to enforce an ADIZ over the SC Sea as well. Not great.

China is a growing aggressive power with cyber attacks across a multitude of countries and is running, like Russia, disinformation campaigns to undermine democracy.

It is in the interest of EU and the US, and indeed many countries, to have a rules-based international order. It is increasingly in the interests of the US as its power is in relative decline.

[Youden]

Those are some reasons for "against China" but how about "with the US"?

The US isn't the only potential ally against Chinese influence, why should Europe align itself with America instead of other countries?

Also, do you think there's no argument to be made for changing China's behaviour through a partnership?

[noir-york]

> The US isn't the only potential ally against Chinese influence, why should Europe align itself with America instead of other countries?

Of course! All countries that value a rules-based order should ally, and that would include the EU, the US, India, Australia, and the many other smaller countries.

> Also, do you think there's no argument to be made for changing China's behaviour through a partnership?

Been tried. India was trying that by letting China have a stake in the economy. It hasn't ummmm worked out so well.

China uses the economy as a tool for its own political aims.

[fxtentacle]

For me, it reads like they wanted to discuss the rules for the new order, but then the US suspended talks over what might be called greed.

[noir-york]

I was replying to the point about why EU and the US should form an alliance against China - and the reason being the wider geostrategic context.

[NicoJuicy]

But he is correct. US withdrew current alliances, so the trust to create new ones is partially gone.

There is a reason that the next president will have to restore trust to the US as world leader and will have a tougher job than normal.

[NicoJuicy]

We all know this, but Europe has no trust in the US under Trump.

How can you not see that they are waiting till trust re-appears.

1 example: If Europe would really partner up, Trump would require Russia to be in the table ( G7). The current situation is nuts and it's not Europe's fault.

Ps. Trump has no interest in peace and prosperity. Haven't you been paying attention? The US has never been this divided and the current leader thinks tweeting is more important.

[noir-york]

> Ps. Trump has no interest in peace and prosperity. Haven't you been paying attention? The US has never been this divided and the current leader thinks tweeting is more important.

Trump's only interest is re-election.

The US govt is a huge entity with may players of which the president is one, albeit an important one. The US military, State, academia and other institutions are all actors and they do have an interest in peace and prosperity.

Presidents come and go, but institutions remain and it is important that the relevant institutions adopt a common posture towards China.

[noir-york]

> How can you not see that they are waiting till trust re-appears.

The EU cannot afford to wait that long. China isn't taking a pause on its aggression. Indeed, its exploiting the US under Trump, Covid, etc to move aggressively now.

> The current situation is nuts and it's not Europe's fault.

"fault"? It doesn't have to be your fault if the mess still ends on your lap. And Europe (and I'm a European) being neighbours with Eurasia doesnt have the luxury of huge oceans separating it from revanchist powers.

[NicoJuicy]

I'm European too.

The thing about democracy is, it's a slow process.

Currently the best thing is to wait till November and China knows that.

They are exploiting the situation, but in contrast. I think the "one road, one belt" will fail if they continue their exploitive behaviour.

Taiwan is not an easy topic right now, because it's a bit too early. Since Western democracy under Trump is not United :(

As soon as we can, harder measures should be employed.

[noir-york]

Trump is a moron - threatening to withdraw US troops out of Germany is a gift to Russia.

But the EU cannot wait for Trump to go away because if he wins reelection that could be 5 years away. We don't have that time. The EU needs to work with what its got - work with India, Australia, PacRim countries.

The problem is that the EU is itself split with different interests. Someone has to provide leadership. The US president is the natural option but Trump has not stepped up. Someone else needs to - it cannot be Merkel as she's stepping down soon, but we urgently need leadership on the issue.

[Mirioron]

How is it not Europe's fault? When it comes to digital businesses it's almost entirely Europe's fault. It's European countries that have been trying left and right to somehow squeeze more money out of largely American digital businesses. From the new digital taxes in France and Italy to the Google News row in Germany and Spain. This stuff started by Europe way before Trump ever entered the picture.

[NicoJuicy]

> squeeze more money out of largely American digital businesses

It's European money, that is taxed. Not money earned outside of the country.

American corporations squeezing money out of European countries would be a more accurate description.

Basic economic insight :)

[Mirioron]

No, it's not European money at that point. It's the corporation's money, but that's beside the point. The point is that those companies tend to not have the same representation as the local companies do and that some of those governments are willing to use their rules to benefit those local companies, especially when it gets then extra revenue.

It's not like those European countries have a gun to their head. They can always just create their own Google, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Sony etc and stop using the products of foreign corporations. As a European, I personally very much like the services provided by these foreign corporations. I have many issues with them, but they are way better than (most of) the things I've seen made here.

[boudin]

I'm with you, i don't get this neither.

[NicoJuicy]

Better question: Why would Europe/Canada partner with the US now, under Trump.

They will do so when someone more trustworthy appears, but that is not the case currently.

You can't get trust, if you just take all pre-existing agreements and throw it out of the window.

[boudin]

There is already different tax regimes based on business type, it's not something new. I personally think it's a good idea. Our current tax regime has not been thought for this kind of business. Businesses like Google are something totally new, trying to apply the current tax system on it just doesn't work. I find it perfectly logical to create a new tax system that is a better fit, will stop this cat and mouse game of optimisation and finally have those companies contributing to the country they operate into the same way other conpanies does.

After, i'm not an expert so I can't say that the system pushed by EU is the best idea or not.

[Mirioron]

But they already do contribute to those countries. This is simply protectionism plus at work. Squeeze more money out of foreign companies operating locally, because you can. It'll just lead to the world becoming clustered again like before. We're already seeing it happening with the internet - China is already apart from the rest of the world. Russia has been testing the same thing. Europe is essentially trying to isolate itself from the rest of the world by making rules nobody else has. The trend is moving towards separation, which also means that everyone will have to figure out their own technology.

[boudin]

This is just not true. Google for example routes the profit it makes in France to other countries to avoid paying taxes. That's where the current tax systen doesn't work and a new one is needed.

[Mirioron]

Yes, they avoid paying some French corporate taxes. The French have been fully aware of this for decades. Even if they somehow missed everything else, the Lisbon Treaty was rejected by the Irish until they got assurances from the EU that it won't affect taxation. Part of the reason the EU exists in the form it does is due to this taxation.

[fxtentacle]

I don't get your point.

The talks are mainly about an additional 5% in taxes on the European profits of Facebook, Google, Apple, Netflix, or Amazon.

How does a small tax increase for highly profitable companies get into the way of standing together against China?

[LatteLazy]

I'm just lamenting that we have huge mutual interests and can't get over a 5% tax difference.

[jka]

To follow on from your mention of China, it seems like TikTok could provide instructive discussion questions here.

Does the U.S. and silicon valley want to continue to manoeuvre and lobby to exempt tech companies from tax dues on revenues generated from digital attention and data gathered from users overseas?

And if so, does TikTok have to pay tax dues in return for similar revenues generated from U.S. user data?

The short-term balance sheet benefit to tech companies from avoiding overseas taxes seems understandable, but the longer-term implications of setting a precedent like that on an international stage seem less clear to me.

[NicoJuicy]

You are missing the point.

Because of Trump, US allies have to guard more corners than before. It's a serious problem and I think Trump is actually giving Russia/China an unfair advantage.

He has already destroyed the Asian partnerships against China that Obama started, he also got out of numerous Western partnerships because it wasn't his signature on it.

I would say that the problem is not Europe, it's 100% Trump. Allies won't back him since they can't trust him. Everyone knows he's trying to have as much as personal gain as possible. Even meddling in European affairs,. Eg. Ukraine for the clear sake of money).

Every time Trump suggests to help countries handle their affairs, you know he's going for the "pay Trump, get US military assistance" card, it's nuts.

The Western alliance since WO II can't survive in it's current form if Trump would get another term, they are all waiting till someone sane comes back. If it doesn't happen, it will become a serious problem :(

TLDR; If you wouldn't trust Trump as a business partner, how can other countries trust him. You can't unite/partner with a person like that.

Edit: if down vote. Please share something that Trump seems trustworthy without personal gain. I haven't seen any situation during his entire term, trying to redirect US-money to his pockets.

[paulsutter]

Russia’s economy is smaller than Canada, they’re just not terribly relevant globally.

China on the other hand will eclipse the US significantly both economically and militarily, reshaping the world.

[NicoJuicy]

I didn't say that Russia is relevant. But they do have a "more deep" ( one-sided) partnership with China to influence Western democracy.

They were a lot stronger during the USSR and even then the call for democracy broke it up.

Europe has never been closer to Moscow. Important: Without firing even a single gunshot.

[mamon]

Russian economy is weak, agreed, but militarily they are still the only significant threat to US global dominance. China's military is much weaker in comparison.

[paulsutter]

China is a vastly bigger consideration. If China decides to invade Taiwan the US could lose access to most semiconductors. China’s military is developing rapidly.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-0...

[catalogia]

If Russia were so inclined (I don't think they are and don't see why they would be) they could turn the Island of Taiwan into a pile of gravel on the floor of the China Sea. They have several thousand nuclear warheads with the means to deliver them; more than enough to overwhelm any extant ABM system.

For that reason if for no other, I think an American conflict with China is more likely than a conflict with Russia. China still has hundreds of nukes too, which is hundreds too many, but that's many times less than what Russia has.

To be clear, a direct war between any three of these countries would be a stupid, horrible idea.

[paulsutter]

There no motive for Russia to do that.

This Russia obsession is bizarre

[redis_mlc]

This is not well-understood by the general public, but Trump's power as a statesman is his unpredictability.

If you don't know what or where he will be next, how do you counter him?

Reagan kept the Soviet Union off balance to the point of dissolving it. He's considered one of America's greatest statesman today, but called a clown by the elites at the time.

The CCP should be concerned about the same fate if they trifle with Trump. They have given every reason for him to isolate that country.

[fxtentacle]

Merkel did an excellent job at countering him. Or at least, she earned a lot of respect with voters and other European politicians for it.

Basically, she was just presenting it as if she's babysitting a naughty kid.

So the way to counter Trump is to make obvious the irrelevance of what he's saying or tweeting at any given moment, because he might change his opinion an hour later.

[NicoJuicy]

> Trump's power as a statesman is his unpredictability.

Please don't mistake unpredictability to untrustworthy, ego-centrism and self gain driven behaviour. The guy clearly lacks any social decency that toddlers even know.

Reagan did this only as a strategy to USSR, but Trump is clearly influenced by self-gain and ego-centric. He is very predictable, if you use that as a variable.

Reagan also supported anti-communism countries and saw the strength in allies. Trump stands alone, every where he goes and doesn't have the brain capacity to lead a country.

I think you haven't been paying attention the last months. The US has never been this divided, Trump resembles a con-man/lunatic a lot more.

Ps. A divided nation is a weak one.

[NicoJuicy]

> My book doesn't come out until later in the summer, but I'm going to tell you now one thing that you'll find in it: all of the reporting indicates that Barr is involved in the dubious funding of the Trump 2020 campaign by foreign sources. This is all a lot worse than you realize.

Didn't surprise me

> Trump's power as a statesman is his unpredictability

As said earlier

> Please don't mistake unpredictability to untrustworthy, ego-centrism and self gain driven behaviour.

[082349872349872]

Trump's power as a statesman is that he doesn't feel the need to ride a horse.

    Starace rode a horse.
    Reagan rode a horse.
    Putin rode a horse.
    Le Pen rode a horse.
    Kim rode a horse.
    Kadyrov rode a horse.
    Johnson sat on a horse.
    Bolsonaro rode a horse.

Do you ever see Trump on a horse? No, that's unpredictability for you. He doesn't need to do what the cool kids do. He's a leader, not a follower.

[NicoJuicy]

Lol.

Trump is the most failed businessman ever, he burned through all of daddy's money.

No sane person ever gave him any credibility after following him. Eg. When he tried to influence the stock market consistently in 1987, they just started ignoring him.

He's just a one-trick pony, trying to do the same thing over and over again on a bigger scale ( he has some experience with it by now).

But the only consistency in his life is his failure.

[LatteLazy]

Trump has been exceptionally predictable. He's unreliable as an ally, he has no plan on any subject, but he'll do anything for a dollar or a flattering headline. That's it. You think Putin is predictable because he did a horse photoshoot? Jesus.

[082349872349872]

Horse sense in 1779: https://www.loc.gov/resource/ppmsca.33532/

Equines have not much cortex, but they do prefer their allies reliable.

(the counter argument here would be Animal Farm's Boxer. We'll all discover which model had a better fit, later this year.)

[NicoJuicy]

China is taking the opening that the failed con-man is creating, not because of leadership. But by sheer incompetence.

https://www.economist.com/special-report/2020/06/18/who-runs...

Just one of many examples.

You will indeed see it in November, not long anymore :)

Edit:

> My book doesn't come out until later in the summer, but I'm going to tell you now one thing that you'll find in it: all of the reporting indicates that Barr is involved in the dubious funding of the Trump 2020 campaign by foreign sources. This is all a lot worse than you realize.

Perhaps sooner :)