• Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Because it leaves the industry vulnerable in case China decides to start withholding sales to the US. Especially if they invade Taiwan and trigger a chain reaction of treaties that launches into a huge US vs China slugging match. One which China would likely lose painfully to, but would inflict crippling damage to our military. Anything coming out of China will be stopped for as long as the war goes on, and then even longer depending on how much of what I’m China actually got destroyed.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      That’s what diversity in supply is for. If we’re at war with China, we can probably still ship stuff in from LATAM and Africa.

      We don’t need to make stuff in the US to be secure, we just need to not rely on one country.

      • Alpha71@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        It’s already happening. Alot of manufacturing has moved from China to India already.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        And that’s why only Chinese stuff is banned, not all ex-US drones / electric cars.

        China only has themselves to blame. They intentionally break WTO rules regarding unfair subsidies for their domestic companies. Plus they steal technology and ideas from every company manufacturing there. It doesn’t matter for toasters or t-shirts, but high tech stuff is more important.

        No other country does this, especially not with government support.

        • pop@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Plus they steal technology and ideas from every company manufacturing there.

          Stealing is the norm for every developed nation. They didn’t just spin out of nowhere and became a super-power. Heard anything about hiring literal Nazis for space program? Does that count as unethical or stealing for you?

          No?

          I mean Nazis are bad, right? They were supposed to pay for what they did. But not these ones, these were the “good ones”, so it’s fine?

          What about tech and knowledge stolen from colonial eras? Too old? it was the norm, not relevant anymore, it’s okay when we did it or any other bs reason you come up with. However, doing the same now is unethical because the colonials created the “WTO” to protect their interests, but others arent playing your game, you’re losing, and it’s just not fair?

          It’s fine when you steal tech and talent (even if they were helped cause genocide) and US isn’t shy supporting Israel do genocide again.

          But as soon as other country uses what’s made made available to them, use spies, and steals, It’s unethical. The IPs that few countries arbitrarily created after looting through the whole world? How fucking convenient, eh?

          Suck it!

          I don’t particularly like China but it’s hilarious to think they’d be western puppet and do as they were told forever. Every other nation would do the same if roles were reversed.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 days ago

          That’s what tariffs are for. If a country is doing unfair pricing, force the pricing up to account for their subsidies. They can shoot themselves in the foot if they want.

          If we can prove they steal trade secrets, we should sue them and block business with them until they pay or prove innocence. But just blocking products isn’t the way, we need clear rules for when and how we do such things.

          • slickgoat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            14 days ago

            The country that makes ALL your shit has nothing to fear in a trade war. Unless you want to forgo ALL your shit?

            Who would have thought that sending all those jobs overseas to increase company profits and depress wages would have a downside?

          • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            14 days ago

            Retaliatory tariffs are not really allowed by the WTO. They are really destructive for trade and just create scenarios where a third country is used to bypass the tariffs.

            China has been proven to steal technology for years, it’s just that the benefits of manufacturing there outweigh the costs on an individual company level. No one company can “sue China” as you suggest. They’re too big and can just ban that country from manufacturing anything there. So most companies put up with it.

            Your comment actually illuminates the need for US government action. Since no particular company is actually hurting China, they can’t be individually retaliated against by the Chinese government.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              14 days ago

              I’m not a fan of retaliatory tariffs, I’m a fan of corrective tariffs. The tariffs should be calculated from transparent facts, or at least good estimates. And they need to be consistent regardless of origin country. If we tariff Chinese EVs and drones due to being subsidized, we should also tariff AirBus airplanes for the same reason.

              Tariffs are a problem when they target a country as a punitive measure, I think they can be effective when they correct unfairness in the market. I’m a fan of carbon tariffs, for example, where estimates of carbon emissions are used to calculate a tariff on an imported good so local products with higher regulatory expectations are competing on an even field. Maybe high income areas compete with low labor cost through automation and better QC, but they shouldn’t need to compete with subsidies.