←back to thread

China

(drewdevault.com)
847 points kick | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.83s | source
Show context
mc32 ◴[] No.21585110[source]
>”It’s economically productive for the 1% to maintain a trade relationship with China. The financial incentives don’t help any Americans, and in fact, most of us are hurt by this relationship...”

So true, since its inception with GHW, its execution and realization through Clinton and then once fully engaged the timid, supplicant responses from GW and BO, China has contributed to the stagnation of the blue collar worker on America with the full complicity of Democrats, Republicans and most of Industry and even unions who didn’t oppose their cozy politicians. They all only saw starry dollar signs...

That’s where we are now. People have had enough. That’s why they put up with the guy no one likes because he’s willing to sever that codependent relationship.

Now, if you ask any pol running for the nomination who the greatest threat to America is... it’s not going to be China...

replies(15): >>21585140 #>>21585157 #>>21585158 #>>21585323 #>>21585326 #>>21585341 #>>21585355 #>>21585449 #>>21585659 #>>21585680 #>>21586024 #>>21586078 #>>21586407 #>>21586727 #>>21587541 #
koube ◴[] No.21585323[source]
The article focuses on human rights abuses which I think is a cogent criticism of China-US trade.

On the economics issue though, readers should know he disagrees with economists, who nearly universally agree that trade with China benefits Americans as a whole, with the caveat that there are concentrated losses in certain populations. Economists are highly certain on this, with uncharacteristically few people responding "uncertain" on the survey [0]. You can go through the other surveys on the IGM Forum to see what more common distributions looks like.

[0] http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/china-us-trade

replies(4): >>21585361 #>>21585670 #>>21586808 #>>21587459 #
keiferski ◴[] No.21585361[source]
I’m not sure these economists have spent time in the Rust Belt, then. Entire cities were economically destroyed from the offshoring of jobs to China and other low-cost areas.
replies(6): >>21585415 #>>21585646 #>>21586050 #>>21586247 #>>21586706 #>>21586887 #
1. Aunche ◴[] No.21585646[source]
It's not just China. It started with Japan, and even without China, it will continue in Pakistan, Indonesia, and Vietnam, and eventually it will be replaced by automation.
replies(1): >>21585798 #
2. mc32 ◴[] No.21585798[source]
So we know international trade is a thing and we know specialization is a thing. We know economies will over time become more value add and go up the chain.

That’s not a problem if we put in place policies and regulations that put our workers on even footing with foreign workers. Benefits, protections (OSHA), anti-dumping, market-based pay (no institutional labor), IP protections, even access to markets, etc. that is handicap any imports proportionately for not meeting those baselines.

replies(2): >>21585864 #>>21587028 #
3. Aunche ◴[] No.21585864[source]
I don't follow. How would increasing the cost of labor in the US make it more competitive against foreign labor?
4. natch ◴[] No.21587028[source]
Our workers would not want to be on even footing with workers who have few to nil safety standards and poor labor laws.