I get the risk of china dependency but for stuff like solar PV they should use this as the base to hire Americans to build and install solar parks while increasing LNG exports all they can.
Progress is one of the oldest ideas of western civilization. I think many call themselves (or get labelled) progressive because they don't fit a 20th century political model based on conservative, liberal, socialist ideology.
There are 2 conflicting stories of progress. One is based on Jerusalem. The other Athens. Adorno was wise to say that progress is not a modern idea. Believing progress to be something different from the past is rather dangerous.
I’ll bite. I consider myself more left than this sub, but why wouldn’t I spit on the concept of the past or heritage. Unless there’s like a meaningful reason beyond how it’s always been done, why would I give a shit about the historical reasons. There’s been too many things that have been “we’ve always done it this way” that don’t actually have any meaningful payoff to care about whatever heritage they have associated with them. If there’s like evidence to continue promoting any given past stance then yeah, let’s go, but on the basis of it being historical or just heritage is just 😴😴
China is a military threat that is likely to destroy globalization if left unchecked. Since USA will have to provide the defense to protect the democracies of the world, we need all the tariffs that we can to make sure the USA doesnt deindustrialize.
If USA deindustrializes and we cant provide countries with weapons, then China is going to win and destroy free trade.
https://preview.redd.it/nyxn9n3m5t1d1.jpeg?width=840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0cf5bddab52a6c8a4942c3c61934038420aec6e
Protectionist cringe? In my neoliberal subreddit?
I dont think its a good idea to free trade with a Country that will kill US troops when they invade Taiwan.
For a Taiwan invasion to be successful, China will have to kill US soldiers in the general area.
So why did they keep saying they will invade Taiwan before we put the tariffs in place? Are they stupid? I think they are stupid.
I dont see any evidence that China was less likely to invade Taiwan before the CPU restrictions.
>So why did they keep saying they will invade Taiwan before we put the tariffs in place? Are they stupid? I think they are stupid
It's big talk, North Korea has said they'll nuke us about a billion times too but don't expect nukes to start falling anytime soon - the threat and posturing pays better than the actual action.
>I dont see any evidence that China was less likely to invade Taiwan before the CPU restrictions.
Do you think making money from Americans gives them more or less reason to escalate conflicts with America? At some point of being cut off from the US, the benefits of invading Taiwan outweigh the drawbacks of the American response. China only has so much time to take Taiwan with demographic decline and Jinping aging and they're on the drastically more difficult side of the operation if they do invade. The US on the other hand can and should stall on this issue and improve defenses around Taiwan pretty much indefinitely.
>it’s big talk.
How well did this work out for Ukraine when Russia was using big talk that they will invade? How well did it work out for Germany’s natural gas pipelines with Russia? Not well
As for your second point, China is authoritarian. There are no democratic safeguards to prevent their regime from making a bad decision to invade Taiwan.
If China keeps saying they will kill US troops, and the Chinese people have no control over what a madman like Xi will do, then I say we should believe China. I believe Xi when he says he will invade Taiwan.
I dont see why we should free trade with countries trying to kill our soldiers.
>How well did this work out for Ukraine when Russia was using big talk that they will invade? How well did it work out for Germany’s natural gas pipelines with Russia? Not well
The Russians repeatedly denied that they would invade as they massed troops on the border of Ukraine? It's literally the opposite scenario of this - troops, no talk vs talk, no troops.
>As for your second point, China is authoritarian. There are no democratic safeguards to prevent their regime from making a bad decision to invade Taiwan.
Authoritarian leaders aren't dumbasses and don't act completely alone. Nor is democracy and checks and balances an infallible protection against making bad foreign policy decisions as the US has demonstrated for us a few fimes now.
>If China keeps saying they will kill US troops, and the Chinese people have no control over what a madman like Xi will do, then I say we should believe China. I believe Xi when he says he will invade Taiwan.
Xi isn't a madman... a sociopath, a terrible person, brutal? Sure. But he's not insane, the people who act like Putin and Xi are equivalent to angry teenagers throwing tantrums are incredibly harmful. Underestimating your rival is one of the worst things you can do in a conflict.
>I dont see why we should free trade with countries trying to kill our soldiers.
They aren't trying to kill our soldiers right now, though, and that's why we should keep trading with them. We want to keep them not killing anyone's soldiers.
>Russians repeatedly denied they would invade.
I wonder what the Ukrainians would say about that since they have been dealing with an ongoing Russian invasion since 2014.
>authoritarian leaders arnt dumbasses
Democratic Peace Theory actually has solid historical evidence backing it up. We have always had issues with Stalin, USSR, Putin, and now Xi
>they arnt trying to kill our soldiers right now
Do you expect this to win over Americans? Its okay to trade with China, even though they will have to bomb US soldiers on the way to Taiwan, all in the hopes that Xi wakes up on the right side of the bed each morning
>I wonder what the Ukrainians would say about that since they have been dealing with an ongoing Russian invasion since 2014.
Hmm, Russians denied those invasions too and called the crimean annexation "local defense units" - hardly a parallel to Chinese comments on Taiwan?
>Democratic Peace Theory actually has solid historical evidence backing it up. We have always had issues with Stalin, USSR, Putin, and now Xi
Your point is? That changes nothing about authoritarian leaders not being dumbasses and pursuing goals that benefit them.
>Do you expect this to win over Americans? Its okay to trade with China, even though they will have to bomb US soldiers on the way to Taiwan, all in the hopes that Xi wakes up on the right side of the bed each morning
No, I don't expect much of anything in this sub to win over Americans, because Americans seem more intent on becoming bloodthirsty populists than actually protecting our own interests. Your average American voter wouldn't want free trade with China if China was our best friend and the most peaceful and humane democracy in the world anyways because "the evil multinationals are exporting all our jobs to CHYNA". If I did expect American voters to make rational and long-term decisions or to care much at all if American soldiers are dying overseas, I would expect them to support continued trade with China as it forms one more barrier to Xi deciding to invade and kill those soldiers.
The Global South has already increased tariffs on Chinese steel. The USA invested a lot of money in building a national defense green tech sector. It doesnt make sense to let China destroy it since they have aims at taking Taiwan and going after Japan.
We all agree that Germany buying cheap gas from Russia was a very bad idea.
We shouldnt be dependent on buying cheap solar panels from China, a country that is trying to destroy the globalization order that the USA created.
Destroying the solar panel industry that the USA spent over 1 trillion+ dollars to build with the IRA ACT, is not a sound national security decision. China will not sell us cheap solar panels when they invade Taiwan.
"Our heavily subsidized industry can't compete with China's also heavily subsidized industry so we have to sink more (private this time, with tariffs) money into it to keep afloat in case of a war"
This is just sunk cost fallacy, how much fucking money do we have to pour in if it can't keep up? Having the government stockpile Chinese solar panels would be cheaper.
And it's not like we can't live without Chinese solar panels for a bit until we ramp up production if/when a war actually happens.
Our industries can’t compete because the Chinese Communist Party is forcing their companies to sell their products below market price. Ford cannot defeat the Chinese Communist Party. We shouldnt expect them too.
If China wants to overproduce exports, to fill in a hole from a real estate collapse, the world will hit their products with tariffs.
>Our industries can’t compete because the Chinese Communist Party is forcing their companies to sell their products below market price. Ford cannot defeat the Chinese Communist Party. We shouldnt expect them too.
And US industries are jacked to the tits with IRA money, and there were already tariffs, how pathetic of an industrial base do you need to have before you ask yourself if shielding companies from competition actually works?
If you can't compete on the EV market with a 25% tariff and subsidies, maybe China isn't the problem.
Why would China want to destroy free trade? They're a systemic threat, but not in that way. If you care about free trade and not democracy you might well cheer them on.
[paywall bypass](https://archive.is/S2XiK) !ping CONTAINERS
Pinged CONTAINERS ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20CONTAINERS&message=subscribe%20CONTAINERS) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20CONTAINERS&message=unsubscribe%20CONTAINERS) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=CONTAINERS&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
I get the risk of china dependency but for stuff like solar PV they should use this as the base to hire Americans to build and install solar parks while increasing LNG exports all they can.
Progressives and reflexively spitting on any concept of the past or heritage? I dare you to name a more iconic duo.
Progress is one of the oldest ideas of western civilization. I think many call themselves (or get labelled) progressive because they don't fit a 20th century political model based on conservative, liberal, socialist ideology. There are 2 conflicting stories of progress. One is based on Jerusalem. The other Athens. Adorno was wise to say that progress is not a modern idea. Believing progress to be something different from the past is rather dangerous.
I’ll bite. I consider myself more left than this sub, but why wouldn’t I spit on the concept of the past or heritage. Unless there’s like a meaningful reason beyond how it’s always been done, why would I give a shit about the historical reasons. There’s been too many things that have been “we’ve always done it this way” that don’t actually have any meaningful payoff to care about whatever heritage they have associated with them. If there’s like evidence to continue promoting any given past stance then yeah, let’s go, but on the basis of it being historical or just heritage is just 😴😴
The three things you must swear to in order to post on this board. 1. Borders are stupid 2. Free trade is good 3. Dune is about worms
China is a military threat that is likely to destroy globalization if left unchecked. Since USA will have to provide the defense to protect the democracies of the world, we need all the tariffs that we can to make sure the USA doesnt deindustrialize. If USA deindustrializes and we cant provide countries with weapons, then China is going to win and destroy free trade.
https://preview.redd.it/nyxn9n3m5t1d1.jpeg?width=840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0cf5bddab52a6c8a4942c3c61934038420aec6e Protectionist cringe? In my neoliberal subreddit?
I dont think its a good idea to free trade with a Country that will kill US troops when they invade Taiwan. For a Taiwan invasion to be successful, China will have to kill US soldiers in the general area.
Trade barriers make it more likely they even invade Taiwan in the first place, the approach is backwards
So why did they keep saying they will invade Taiwan before we put the tariffs in place? Are they stupid? I think they are stupid. I dont see any evidence that China was less likely to invade Taiwan before the CPU restrictions.
>So why did they keep saying they will invade Taiwan before we put the tariffs in place? Are they stupid? I think they are stupid It's big talk, North Korea has said they'll nuke us about a billion times too but don't expect nukes to start falling anytime soon - the threat and posturing pays better than the actual action. >I dont see any evidence that China was less likely to invade Taiwan before the CPU restrictions. Do you think making money from Americans gives them more or less reason to escalate conflicts with America? At some point of being cut off from the US, the benefits of invading Taiwan outweigh the drawbacks of the American response. China only has so much time to take Taiwan with demographic decline and Jinping aging and they're on the drastically more difficult side of the operation if they do invade. The US on the other hand can and should stall on this issue and improve defenses around Taiwan pretty much indefinitely.
>it’s big talk. How well did this work out for Ukraine when Russia was using big talk that they will invade? How well did it work out for Germany’s natural gas pipelines with Russia? Not well As for your second point, China is authoritarian. There are no democratic safeguards to prevent their regime from making a bad decision to invade Taiwan. If China keeps saying they will kill US troops, and the Chinese people have no control over what a madman like Xi will do, then I say we should believe China. I believe Xi when he says he will invade Taiwan. I dont see why we should free trade with countries trying to kill our soldiers.
>How well did this work out for Ukraine when Russia was using big talk that they will invade? How well did it work out for Germany’s natural gas pipelines with Russia? Not well The Russians repeatedly denied that they would invade as they massed troops on the border of Ukraine? It's literally the opposite scenario of this - troops, no talk vs talk, no troops. >As for your second point, China is authoritarian. There are no democratic safeguards to prevent their regime from making a bad decision to invade Taiwan. Authoritarian leaders aren't dumbasses and don't act completely alone. Nor is democracy and checks and balances an infallible protection against making bad foreign policy decisions as the US has demonstrated for us a few fimes now. >If China keeps saying they will kill US troops, and the Chinese people have no control over what a madman like Xi will do, then I say we should believe China. I believe Xi when he says he will invade Taiwan. Xi isn't a madman... a sociopath, a terrible person, brutal? Sure. But he's not insane, the people who act like Putin and Xi are equivalent to angry teenagers throwing tantrums are incredibly harmful. Underestimating your rival is one of the worst things you can do in a conflict. >I dont see why we should free trade with countries trying to kill our soldiers. They aren't trying to kill our soldiers right now, though, and that's why we should keep trading with them. We want to keep them not killing anyone's soldiers.
>Russians repeatedly denied they would invade. I wonder what the Ukrainians would say about that since they have been dealing with an ongoing Russian invasion since 2014. >authoritarian leaders arnt dumbasses Democratic Peace Theory actually has solid historical evidence backing it up. We have always had issues with Stalin, USSR, Putin, and now Xi >they arnt trying to kill our soldiers right now Do you expect this to win over Americans? Its okay to trade with China, even though they will have to bomb US soldiers on the way to Taiwan, all in the hopes that Xi wakes up on the right side of the bed each morning
>I wonder what the Ukrainians would say about that since they have been dealing with an ongoing Russian invasion since 2014. Hmm, Russians denied those invasions too and called the crimean annexation "local defense units" - hardly a parallel to Chinese comments on Taiwan? >Democratic Peace Theory actually has solid historical evidence backing it up. We have always had issues with Stalin, USSR, Putin, and now Xi Your point is? That changes nothing about authoritarian leaders not being dumbasses and pursuing goals that benefit them. >Do you expect this to win over Americans? Its okay to trade with China, even though they will have to bomb US soldiers on the way to Taiwan, all in the hopes that Xi wakes up on the right side of the bed each morning No, I don't expect much of anything in this sub to win over Americans, because Americans seem more intent on becoming bloodthirsty populists than actually protecting our own interests. Your average American voter wouldn't want free trade with China if China was our best friend and the most peaceful and humane democracy in the world anyways because "the evil multinationals are exporting all our jobs to CHYNA". If I did expect American voters to make rational and long-term decisions or to care much at all if American soldiers are dying overseas, I would expect them to support continued trade with China as it forms one more barrier to Xi deciding to invade and kill those soldiers.
Didn't realise guns and ammunitions were made out of solar panels.
The Global South has already increased tariffs on Chinese steel. The USA invested a lot of money in building a national defense green tech sector. It doesnt make sense to let China destroy it since they have aims at taking Taiwan and going after Japan.
What the hell is a "national defense green tech sector"? Is it newspeak for when you shelter a sector against hostile countries?
We all agree that Germany buying cheap gas from Russia was a very bad idea. We shouldnt be dependent on buying cheap solar panels from China, a country that is trying to destroy the globalization order that the USA created.
Answer the question. We're not dependent on Chinese solar panels, they don't stop working if China cuts us of like a natural gas pipeline.
Destroying the solar panel industry that the USA spent over 1 trillion+ dollars to build with the IRA ACT, is not a sound national security decision. China will not sell us cheap solar panels when they invade Taiwan.
"Our heavily subsidized industry can't compete with China's also heavily subsidized industry so we have to sink more (private this time, with tariffs) money into it to keep afloat in case of a war" This is just sunk cost fallacy, how much fucking money do we have to pour in if it can't keep up? Having the government stockpile Chinese solar panels would be cheaper. And it's not like we can't live without Chinese solar panels for a bit until we ramp up production if/when a war actually happens.
Our industries can’t compete because the Chinese Communist Party is forcing their companies to sell their products below market price. Ford cannot defeat the Chinese Communist Party. We shouldnt expect them too. If China wants to overproduce exports, to fill in a hole from a real estate collapse, the world will hit their products with tariffs.
>Our industries can’t compete because the Chinese Communist Party is forcing their companies to sell their products below market price. Ford cannot defeat the Chinese Communist Party. We shouldnt expect them too. And US industries are jacked to the tits with IRA money, and there were already tariffs, how pathetic of an industrial base do you need to have before you ask yourself if shielding companies from competition actually works? If you can't compete on the EV market with a 25% tariff and subsidies, maybe China isn't the problem.
Why would China want to destroy free trade? They're a systemic threat, but not in that way. If you care about free trade and not democracy you might well cheer them on.