←back to thread

China

(drewdevault.com)
847 points kick | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.879s | 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 #
codingslave ◴[] No.21585326[source]
I am still shocked by how many people do not give Trump credit for putting China on the political issue radar. Both sides of the aisle were destroying the American economy and middle class, and literally no one was talking about it. The guy has issues, and even if he fails in his endeavors, he brought trade and immigration into the national conversation. For all we know, he saved the USA
replies(4): >>21585384 #>>21585465 #>>21585553 #>>21588077 #
throwaway34241 ◴[] No.21588077[source]
Because automation is an even bigger factor in the decline of manufacturing jobs than China. Because focusing on China specifically will not lead to outsourced jobs coming back to the US when there are many, many other countries with cheap labor (many cheaper than China at this point). Because even if you banned foreign trade altogether, automation would probably happen 10x faster since then the incentives would be so high. Because manufacturing has many steps, and sometimes the US is in the middle (buy steel from China, make motorcycle, sell to Europe) and lack of access to trade can put these jobs in jeopardy. Because even if by some miracle all these issues disappear, manufacturing is a small percent of employment so you don't fix the problems for the rest of the middle/lower class.

Because the expenses that are killing us (housing, health care, education) aren't outsourced at all.

As far as I can tell (and according to most economists), the idea that "we can fix the middle class by going after China trade" is intuitive, simple, and wrong. And it's popular on both sides of the aisle. And historically, it's always been easier to find some group to blame than to fix structural economic issues.

So I think the further we go along this path, the less likely it is we will end up fixing our actual problems, and the more likely countries will be distracted by trade wars and maybe real wars in various parts of the world as those problems increase, and various groups are blamed instead of fixing economic policy.

This is separate from the human rights issues. But I think if we want to put penalties to try to address the human rights issues, we should be clear about that. Because if the penalty is for other political reasons it doesn't add an incentive to improve human rights, since that wouldn't make the penalty go away.

replies(1): >>21596026 #
codingslave ◴[] No.21596026[source]
The alternative to allowing manufacturing to move to China is higher prices for goods in the United States. Instead of having really cheap TVs, TVs are more expensive -- they are manufactured here.

Why would we want this?

Because the alternative is a destruction of the USA manufacturing sector. Moving those jobs overseas only helps two groups:

1.) The Chinese 2.) The owners of capital in America, high up business men (the so described 1%).

The third group who may be helped, are everyday Americans who benefit from cheap goods.

What would imposing large tariffs do?

Goods are more expensive, so people can buy less. TVs, Clothes, Cars etc are more expensive. But middle class Americans keep middle class jobs. Right now the policies are ultra capitalist, the middle class is being gutted and replaced with a heroin epidemic.

Why dont we replace their jobs and retrain the workers?

The retraining of older workers for new industries has never been shown to work. Its an economic theory that has yet to play out in any economy on a large scale. I believe the root of Americas economic woes among the middle classes is this concept, which was conceived of and pushed hard in the 90s. Behind the scenes academics like Noam Chomsky fought hard against this concept, but the arguments never trickled down into the public.

In short, tariffs stop the outsourcing and middle class destruction. Things get more expensive, we accept that. If automation kills the jobs here, it still holds off the destruction of the middle class for another 15 - 30 years. Which is better than nothing.

replies(1): >>21625969 #
1. throwaway34241 ◴[] No.21625969[source]
For your argument to make sense, I'm going to assume by "China" you actually mean "all inexpensive 3rd world countries". So this isn't about the current trade war but tariffs in general.

I agree that retraining doesn't work. But I disagree that stopping trade can save the middle class. Manufacturing is only 7.9% of jobs [1] and stopping all trade will only slow the decline, with huge amounts of collateral damage for other jobs. Almost all jobs used to be in farming, but now they aren't. Manufacturing isn't going to be something that employs a huge number of people anymore. In China they're automating away jobs that pay $10,000 a year.

How are you going to help retail workers, 9.8% of jobs [1], as automation (Amazon warehouses) takes their jobs? Tariffs don't help them any although they'll pay for them.

There's real problems for the middle class and/or certain geographic regions, but stopping trade is a solution that almost no economists think will work. I'd rather try something more promising like UBI.

[1] https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/employment-by-major-industry-...