It almost sounds like you guys are rooting for China, a totalitarian regime. Are you so certain we have no chance here, or are you just clouded by your views of Trump? Even a bad president can have a victory.
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
I won't claim to know much about this situation. But I'm reminded of a quote that supposedly (but probably not) was Stalin talking about Hitler, saying that Germany would run out of bullets before the Soviets ran out of men.
It just seems that it's less about who will win and more about who is willing to lose more.
It almost sounds like you guys are rooting for China, a totalitarian regime. Are you so certain we have no chance here, or are you just clouded by your views of Trump? Even a bad president can have a victory.
Speaking for myself I'm not rooting for China. I think it's an unwinnable war that shouldn't be fought in the first place. Things were fine no reason to upend the whole chessboard and piss everyone off. How do you "win" here? Trumps too stubborn to quit and China is too stubborn to quit. There's no winning.
What is winning? What does that even look like? Has anyone thought that through on Trumps side? I think not. Is China at the end going to say "gee I'm sorry you were right. Let us sign a one sided agreement where you guys take our money for nothing because we were wrong?" by antagonizing China it leaves them pissed how is that winning? We can have grievances sure, this isn't the way to "win". It is guaranteed that this leaves lasting hard feelings and damage between the China and the US. Over what? A pathological liars assertion that we're losing and need to be treated better. Great. You can feel that way, do something about it rather than complain. What we've seen so far is tariffs and complaining.
It just seems unlikely the US could win with this play. Do you have a scenario in mind?
Not particularly, but you can't test a theory if you never try. A maverick at the helm is an opportunity in that regard. As a scientist I find this extremely interesting. No damage will be done in the long-run unless it starts a war. If it's a disaster we'll know and Trump will be around for at worst, a few more years. That's time enough to try a few more unorthodox strategies also.
Four years to lay some conservative strategies to rest might be worthwhile in the grand scheme of things. I'm already starting to see things differently myself and I am conservative. The Bushes were too wimpy to push the envelope so I look at this as an opportunity to test the waters for the first time in 30 years.
Not particularly, but you can't test a theory if you never try. A maverick at the helm is an opportunity in that regard. As a scientist I find this extremely interesting. No damage will be done in the long-run unless it starts a war. If it's a disaster we'll know and Trump will be around for at worst, a few more years.
No damage will be done in the long-run? I think for sure China is going to be pissed for the next few years. They can hurt us. They may be motivated to do so. Isn't it better if we both prosper?
See to Trump everything is a zero sum game. You are great or you are terrible. We win or they win. You are winning or losing. That's not the case. China and the US can trade and both profit.
Trump (or the American economy) will crumple before China does in this situation. With the North Korea talks supposedly happening soon it is also poor timing. But it is a "we'll see" situation.
Agreed about poor timing. Still interesting though. Trump is anything but boring...
It's actually hard to quantify how much I miss having a boring President, which Obama generally was. I can't be the only one who feels this way.
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
China wouldn't really lose much by towing the line in the intellectual property circle. Europe doesn't steal ideas, Japan doesn't, Korea doesn't, Singapore doesn't, Taiwan doesn't, Hell, even India doesn't; why should China be able to do so with impunity? It's bullshit! They want to reap the benefits of free trade? Well, accept the responsibilities. Ditto for Russia. Two of the biggest markets in the world are acting like little babies wanting all of the benefits of freedom without any of the drawbacks. Given time they'll probably fall in line, but I'm not going to shed any tears when we test their resolve.
Four years to lay some conservative strategies to rest might be worthwhile in the grand scheme of things. I'm already starting to see things differently myself and I am conservative. The Bushes were too wimpy to push the envelope so I look at this as an opportunity to test the waters for the first time in 30 years.
Four years to lay some conservative strategies to rest might be worthwhile in the grand scheme of things. I'm already starting to see things differently myself and I am conservative. The Bushes were too wimpy to push the envelope so I look at this as an opportunity to test the waters for the first time in 30 years.
Granted, but Trump relied on the blue collar vote to put him over the top. That's what made him a maverick in the first place. The Democrats blew their opportunity to test the waters with Clinton and Obama. That lost the dems a lot of votes and is likely the number one reason Hillary lost.
Not particularly, but you can't test a theory if you never try. A maverick at the helm is an opportunity in that regard. As a scientist I find this extremely interesting. No damage will be done in the long-run unless it starts a war. If it's a disaster we'll know and Trump will be around for at worst, a few more years.
No damage will be done in the long-run? I think for sure China is going to be pissed for the next few years. They can hurt us. They may be motivated to do so. Isn't it better if we both prosper?
See to Trump everything is a zero sum game. You are great or you are terrible. We win or they win. You are winning or losing. That's not the case. China and the US can trade and both profit.
What does China have to be pissed about? No repercussions for stealing intellectual property? Tough shit!
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
China wouldn't really lose much by towing the line in the intellectual property circle. Europe doesn't steal ideas, Japan doesn't, Korea doesn't, Singapore doesn't, Taiwan doesn't, Hell, even India doesn't; why should China be able to do so with impunity? It's bullshit! They want to reap the benefits of free trade? Well, accept the responsibilities. Ditto for Russia. Two of the biggest markets in the world are acting like little babies wanting all of the benefits of freedom without any of the drawbacks. Given time they'll probably fall in line, but I'm not going to shed any tears when we test their resolve.
Most developing countries go through periods where they steal ideas to help their economies. In Europe one famous example of this was Switzerland, which had few natural resources and kick-started their industrialization in this way. I'm not an expert in this area, but I'm pretty sure that all the countries you refer to have gone through their own periods of intellectual property theft (and that still goes on today as the numerous international copyright infringement cases show).
As you suggest China has been moderating its behavior in recent years, but I doubt that a tariff war will help that process - I think it's more likely that they cut down on wider trade co-operation.
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
China wouldn't really lose much by towing the line in the intellectual property circle... Given time they'll probably fall in line, but I'm not going to shed any tears when we test their resolve.
We might shed tears if they kick our butts. Should China respect IP? Yes. Is insulting them and starting a trade war the best way to go about things? I'd vote no. We'll see. Trump is a objectively a lousy businessman, multiple bankruptcies and all. All he has had is flim flam and bluster and that's got him by. We'll see. I'm not thrilled about this clown gambling our money.
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
China wouldn't really lose much by towing the line in the intellectual property circle. Europe doesn't steal ideas, Japan doesn't, Korea doesn't, Singapore doesn't, Taiwan doesn't, Hell, even India doesn't; why should China be able to do so with impunity? It's bullshit! They want to reap the benefits of free trade? Well, accept the responsibilities. Ditto for Russia. Two of the biggest markets in the world are acting like little babies wanting all of the benefits of freedom without any of the drawbacks. Given time they'll probably fall in line, but I'm not going to shed any tears when we test their resolve.
Most developing countries go through periods where they steal ideas to help their economies. In Europe one famous example of this was Switzerland, which had few natural resources and kick-started their industrialization in this way. I'm not an expert in this area, but I'm pretty sure that all the countries you refer to have gone through their own periods of intellectual property theft (and that still goes on today as the numerous international copyright infringement cases show).
As you suggest China has been moderating its behavior in recent years, but I doubt that a tariff war will help that process - I think it's more likely that they cut down on wider trade co-operation.
You may be right, but I'm just saying that it's not wrong to push back. If nothing else it at least makes it look like we're not pushovers. At some point the West has to say enough is enough.
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
China wouldn't really lose much by towing the line in the intellectual property circle. Europe doesn't steal ideas, Japan doesn't, Korea doesn't, Singapore doesn't, Taiwan doesn't, Hell, even India doesn't; why should China be able to do so with impunity? It's bullshit! They want to reap the benefits of free trade? Well, accept the responsibilities. Ditto for Russia. Two of the biggest markets in the world are acting like little babies wanting all of the benefits of freedom without any of the drawbacks. Given time they'll probably fall in line, but I'm not going to shed any tears when we test their resolve.
Most developing countries go through periods where they steal ideas to help their economies. In Europe one famous example of this was Switzerland, which had few natural resources and kick-started their industrialization in this way. I'm not an expert in this area, but I'm pretty sure that all the countries you refer to have gone through their own periods of intellectual property theft (and that still goes on today as the numerous international copyright infringement cases show).
As you suggest China has been moderating its behavior in recent years, but I doubt that a tariff war will help that process - I think it's more likely that they cut down on wider trade co-operation.
The US has stolen IP as well in the past. When we broke free from England you think we respected intellectual property? When you are developing what incentives do you have to not innovate based on other people's ideas. It's only when you are developed that you want to protect your success.
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
China wouldn't really lose much by towing the line in the intellectual property circle... Given time they'll probably fall in line, but I'm not going to shed any tears when we test their resolve.
We might shed tears if they kick our butts. Should China respect IP? Yes. Is insulting them and starting a trade war the best way to go about things? I'd vote no. We'll see. Trump is a objectively a lousy businessman, multiple bankruptcies and all. All he has had is flim flam and bluster and that's got him by. We'll see. I'm not thrilled about this clown gambling our money.
There is not as much of a gamble as you seem to believe. China holds almost $3 trillion in US bonds. I'm pretty sure that's enough of an investment to ensure that they don't want to destroy our economy. Besides that, we're their biggest market. If you think we don't have any arrows in our quiver you're sorely mistaken. I can't predict the end result but I'm certain that China doesn't hold all the cards.
You may be right, but I'm just saying that it's not wrong to push back. If nothing else it at least makes it look like we're not pushovers. At some point the West has to say enough is enough.
That may be true, though as I said I think things were improving anyway. If we want to fight over intellectual property theft though we should take action based on that. Instead Trump has put tariffs on a totally different area using the dubious excuse of national security to justify taking action on his campaign promises. I suspect that when that case is eventually heard by the WTO that they will rule against the US and declare the tariffs illegal. At that point I guess that Trump's likely reaction would be to want to withdraw from the WTO - that's not going to help stem the loss of international influence the US is currently undergoing.
The talk of winners and losers seems odd to me. The underlying logic of this argument is that China is ripping off the US by selling them goods too cheaply - is that really such a bad thing to happen to you? If there was even a remote prospect of protectionism reviving home grown US industries there might be some justification for increasing the cost of goods, but I can't see even that remote prospect.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
China wouldn't really lose much by towing the line in the intellectual property circle. Europe doesn't steal ideas, Japan doesn't, Korea doesn't, Singapore doesn't, Taiwan doesn't, Hell, even India doesn't; why should China be able to do so with impunity? It's bullshit! They want to reap the benefits of free trade? Well, accept the responsibilities. Ditto for Russia. Two of the biggest markets in the world are acting like little babies wanting all of the benefits of freedom without any of the drawbacks. Given time they'll probably fall in line, but I'm not going to shed any tears when we test their resolve.
Most developing countries go through periods where they steal ideas to help their economies. In Europe one famous example of this was Switzerland, which had few natural resources and kick-started their industrialization in this way. I'm not an expert in this area, but I'm pretty sure that all the countries you refer to have gone through their own periods of intellectual property theft (and that still goes on today as the numerous international copyright infringement cases show).
As you suggest China has been moderating its behavior in recent years, but I doubt that a tariff war will help that process - I think it's more likely that they cut down on wider trade co-operation.
The US has stolen IP as well in the past. When we broke free from England you think we respected intellectual property? When you are developing what incentives do you have to not innovate based on other people's ideas. It's only when you are developed that you want to protect your success.
That's not exactly a fair comparison. If a country breaks away from their parent are they supposed to forget everything they already know or is the 'intellectual property' in the brains of the new regime? Does India, Sri Lanka or Singapore pay Britain for the 'intellectual property' that was in existence in their countries when they broke away from the Empire?
You may be right, but I'm just saying that it's not wrong to push back. If nothing else it at least makes it look like we're not pushovers. At some point the West has to say enough is enough.
That may be true, though as I said I think things were improving anyway. If we want to fight over intellectual property theft though we should take action based on that. Instead Trump has put tariffs on a totally different area using the dubious excuse of national security to justify taking action on his campaign promises. I suspect that when that case is eventually heard by the WTO that they will rule against the US and declare the tariffs illegal. At that point I guess that Trump's likely reaction would be to want to withdraw from the WTO - that's not going to help stem the loss of international influence the US is currently undergoing.
if the WTO favors a totalitarian regime over the US then maybe we DO need to withdraw. Sorry, I don't have much faith in the WTO. A bunch of vampires lining their pockets under cover of the UN. Whoop-de-doo...
I really wish we could do something to stop Chinese intellectual property theft, which has taken billions from our economy and benefited no one but the Chinese. I just don't know how we could achieve that.
China has specifically targeted alot of goods that are produced in red districts. Soy bean farmers for starters, pork farmers for another. Neither of which are likely big Democratic constituencies.
That's a disturbing prospect. It's bad enough that Putin has seen fit to bolster Trump; it would be even worse if the Chinese were trying to undermine Trump at the same time. China shouldn't have a say in our elections any more than Russia does.
@Balrog99 the US introduced copyright protection within the US as early as 1790, but for many years they had a deliberate policy of not providing any protection for international copyright (in other words following exactly the Chinese strategy you're complaining about). A systematic international system of copyright registration (though centred on Europe) was introduced by the Berne convention in 1891: the US signed up to that in 1988. Here is a timeline of US copyright legislation.
@Balrog99 the US introduced copyright protection within the US as early as 1790, but for many years they had a deliberate policy of not providing any protection for international copyright (in other words following exactly the Chinese strategy you're complaining about). A systematic international system of copyright registration (though centred on Europe) was introduced by the Berne convention in 1891: the US signed up to that in 1988. Here is a timeline of US copyright legislation.
I will concede your point. However, Europe was free to not trade with us or put tariffs on our goods as they saw fit when we didn't comply with their trade laws. We have the same right with regards to China.
if the WTO favors a totalitarian regime over the US then maybe we DO need to withdraw. Sorry, I don't have much faith in the WTO. A bunch of vampires lining their pockets under cover of the UN. Whoop-de-doo...
I don't think it's a question of favoring one country over another, but considering whether the US is adhering to the rules of the treaty. If the US doesn't believe in free trade then it clearly should withdraw. If it does believe in free trade it should accept that means there are limitations on the protectionist measures it can take.
There's a specific nerdy example I was thinking of. I'm a fan of Gilbert and Sullivan they made their plays, many of which are still popular, around the 1870s. Just wanting to know more about them I looked into their history they had serious problems with unauthorized American reproductions of their works. They would open a play in England and a week later there would be unauthorized reproductions all over the US. Gilbert and Sullivan spent considerable time money and effort trying to enforce their copyrights in the US usually in vain.
I'm sure there's plenty of other examples just one I'd stumbled on looking into them
I will concede your point. However, Europe was free to not trade with us or put tariffs on our goods as they saw fit when we didn't comply with their trade laws. We have the same right with regards to China.
That would have been true before WWII. However, the US signed up to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947 and the subsequent morph into the WTO in 1998. As long as that is the case the US needs to follow the established rules. China also signed up to the WTO in 2001 and the improvement in their behavior in relation to intellectual copyright in recent years is largely because of the WTO processes.
There's a specific nerdy example I was thinking of. I'm a fan of Gilbert and Sullivan they made their plays, many of which are still popular, around the 1870s. Just wanting to know more about them I looked into their history they had serious problems with unauthorized American reproductions of their works. They would open a play in England and a week later there would be unauthorized reproductions all over the US.
Bollywood does the same thing as does Turkey. The arts aren't the greatest example of intellectual property theft however. I'm far more concerned with stealing scientific and engineering ideas.
I will concede your point. However, Europe was free to not trade with us or put tariffs on our goods as they saw fit when we didn't comply with their trade laws. We have the same right with regards to China.
That would have been true before WWII. However, the US signed up to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947 and the subsequent morph into the WTO in 1998. As long as that is the case the US needs to follow the established rules. China also signed up to the WTO in 2001 and the improvement in their behavior in relation to intellectual copyright in recent years is largely because of the WTO processes.
Then the WTO should hold China accountable then. That would put them on our side in this case if they're intellectually honest. Correct?
I will concede your point. However, Europe was free to not trade with us or put tariffs on our goods as they saw fit when we didn't comply with their trade laws. We have the same right with regards to China.
That would have been true before WWII. However, the US signed up to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947 and the subsequent morph into the WTO in 1998. As long as that is the case the US needs to follow the established rules. China also signed up to the WTO in 2001 and the improvement in their behavior in relation to intellectual copyright in recent years is largely because of the WTO processes.
Then the WTO should hold China accountable then. That would put them on our side in this case if they're intellectually honest. Correct?
I agree, though I don't think the issue is as great as the US has portrayed it to be. The framework of laws and regulations required by the WTO on this area (as part of the agreement allowing China to join) is now in place, i.e. copyright protections in China are subject to essentially the same legal protection as given in Europe or the US. The issue is not therefore with the law itself but with enforcement and certain Chinese policies and procedures (in particular pressurizing international concerns to transfer copyrights to local Chinese firms).
I'm not suggesting these are not real concerns, but the progress made by China in this area over the last 10 years or so is considerable and I would have expected that to continue all other things being equal. The problem is that all other things are not currently equal. The view of trade by the Trump administration seems odd to me. That's not just in relation to China, but to international trade as a whole. The idea for instance that the NAFTA was specifically designed to do damage to the US just seems bizarre to me. However, it's time for my bed now, so if you want to continue the discussion @Balrog99 that will have to be done tomorrow .
I really wish we could do something to stop Chinese intellectual property theft, which has taken billions from our economy and benefited no one but the Chinese. I just don't know how we could achieve that.
China has specifically targeted alot of goods that are produced in red districts. Soy bean farmers for starters, pork farmers for another. Neither of which are likely big Democratic constituencies.
That's a disturbing prospect. It's bad enough that Putin has seen fit to bolster Trump; it would be even worse if the Chinese were trying to undermine Trump at the same time. China shouldn't have a say in our elections any more than Russia does.
Fair enough, but did anyone just expect the European Union or China to just sit back and let Trump smack them in the face without retaliation?? Certain segments of the American population may view him as a tough, strong leader. The rest of the world views him as an easy manipulated and outmaneuvered joke. Because they are keenly aware every decision he makes is for short-term benefit to the US 24-hour news cycle. He is interested only in battles and skirmishes, not the war.
It's not a surprise that the two major powers of the last 250-300 years, the US and Britain, are the ones who in recent elections voted for nationalist isolation in regards to Trump and Brexit. It's the arrogance that we can still dictate everything to the rest of the world. That's over.
Comments
It almost sounds like you guys are rooting for China, a totalitarian regime. Are you so certain we have no chance here, or are you just clouded by your views of Trump? Even a bad president can have a victory.
I do accept there has been a historic problem with intellectual property theft by China, but I don't really see how starting a tariff war is going to help with that ...
It just seems that it's less about who will win and more about who is willing to lose more.
What is winning? What does that even look like? Has anyone thought that through on Trumps side? I think not. Is China at the end going to say "gee I'm sorry you were right. Let us sign a one sided agreement where you guys take our money for nothing because we were wrong?" by antagonizing China it leaves them pissed how is that winning? We can have grievances sure, this isn't the way to "win". It is guaranteed that this leaves lasting hard feelings and damage between the China and the US. Over what? A pathological liars assertion that we're losing and need to be treated better. Great. You can feel that way, do something about it rather than complain. What we've seen so far is tariffs and complaining.
Four years to lay some conservative strategies to rest might be worthwhile in the grand scheme of things. I'm already starting to see things differently myself and I am conservative. The Bushes were too wimpy to push the envelope so I look at this as an opportunity to test the waters for the first time in 30 years.
See to Trump everything is a zero sum game. You are great or you are terrible. We win or they win. You are winning or losing. That's not the case. China and the US can trade and both profit.
As you suggest China has been moderating its behavior in recent years, but I doubt that a tariff war will help that process - I think it's more likely that they cut down on wider trade co-operation.
I'm sure there's plenty of other examples just one I'd stumbled on looking into them
I'm not suggesting these are not real concerns, but the progress made by China in this area over the last 10 years or so is considerable and I would have expected that to continue all other things being equal. The problem is that all other things are not currently equal. The view of trade by the Trump administration seems odd to me. That's not just in relation to China, but to international trade as a whole. The idea for instance that the NAFTA was specifically designed to do damage to the US just seems bizarre to me. However, it's time for my bed now, so if you want to continue the discussion @Balrog99 that will have to be done tomorrow
It's not a surprise that the two major powers of the last 250-300 years, the US and Britain, are the ones who in recent elections voted for nationalist isolation in regards to Trump and Brexit. It's the arrogance that we can still dictate everything to the rest of the world. That's over.