General > General Technical Chat

I have the feeling that the whole trade war starts from a pile of nonsense.

<< < (35/145) > >>

technix:

--- Quote from: bsfeechannel on May 26, 2019, 01:09:48 am ---Last time I checked, Adam Smith, the Father of Capitalism, was Scottish. I'm looking at his book, "The Wealth of Nations", right in front of me, while I write this.

--- End quote ---
Sorry even organized capitalism itself is invented in China back in the 12th century, 5 centuries before Adam Smith was even born. Dictatorship clocks in at no later than 8th century BCE.


--- Quote from: bsfeechannel on May 26, 2019, 01:09:48 am ---Have you stopped to think that we are talking in English, not Chinese?

--- End quote ---
我固然可以写中文,但是你能看得懂吗?I am posting this in English for YOUR benefit, so YOU can read it without having to learn a, to be honest fairly difficult language first. Should this be a private thread between me and @blueskull more likely than not we will be using Chinese.

By the way, how do you feel about uprooting your life and move to three cities over?


--- Quote from: windsmurf on May 26, 2019, 01:47:10 am ---So why do this?  It's designed to hopefully change the behavior of a trading partner (China).

--- End quote ---
Sadly the West blew its credibility in the eyes of China back in the late 19th to early 20th century. That is why I think it is unlikely that China will change its behavior even in face of this pressure.


--- Quote from: soldar on May 25, 2019, 11:15:36 pm ---The cheap stuff we import has a big environmental impact. We buy toys, clothes, electronics, etc. like they are disposable. We use clothes very few times. Clothes are fashion statements to be used and discarded but the manufacture of those clothes pollutes a lot. Same thing with toys, plastics electronics. So cheap we can replace them much more often than we really need. As an example I can say I have half a dozen mobile phones and an iPad and I have not bought a single one, they were all items being discarded by people getting newer devices.

--- End quote ---
Welcome to Green New Deal and the uphill battle of anti-consumerism.

technix:

--- Quote from: windsmurf on May 25, 2019, 10:31:54 pm ---That's currently being worked on, but its still more cost-efficient for the farmers to just hire illegals.  Particular crops are still challenging for machines to harvest without damage to the products without further robotics/AI development.   

--- End quote ---
How expensive are those equipment? Here in China usually it is usually the farmers union/local government renting the equipment and hiring the engineer for all union members/township/county.


--- Quote from: apis on May 25, 2019, 08:07:01 pm ---I imagine that creativity and rate of change might be higher in China, but farmers in the US has been adapting robotic farming methods for quite a while:

--- End quote ---
Why is it that the creativity and rate of change in US is falling back? What is holding t back? Is it a lack of educated people (which should be fixable by producing more of that kind of people through fixing the education system, and importing more through a more attractive immigration and work visa policy) or?

windsmurf:

--- Quote from: technix on May 26, 2019, 05:39:17 am ---
--- Quote from: windsmurf on May 25, 2019, 10:31:54 pm ---That's currently being worked on, but its still more cost-efficient for the farmers to just hire illegals.  Particular crops are still challenging for machines to harvest without damage to the products without further robotics/AI development.   

--- End quote ---
How expensive are those equipment? Here in China usually it is usually the farmers union/local government renting the equipment and hiring the engineer for all union members/township/county.

--- End quote ---

Some of the machines are too new and unproven, so farmers would rather have a fixed known cost (illegal labor) with smaller risk, than a large investment with unknown risk.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2019/02/17/feature/inside-the-race-to-replace-farmworkers-with-robots 


apis:

--- Quote from: technix on May 26, 2019, 05:39:17 am ---
--- Quote from: apis on May 25, 2019, 08:07:01 pm ---I imagine that creativity and rate of change might be higher in China, but farmers in the US has been adapting robotic farming methods for quite a while:

--- End quote ---
Why is it that the creativity and rate of change in US is falling back? What is holding t back? Is it a lack of educated people (which should be fixable by producing more of that kind of people through fixing the education system, and importing more through a more attractive immigration and work visa policy) or?

--- End quote ---
Better educated people will benefit all aspects of society I believe, it makes people smarter which means they make better choices on average.

I'm not sure it's the US falling back as much as China that has shifted up a gear or two. Creativity wise It's even worse here in Europe, if you are tinkering in your garage here, unless it's with an old car, people will look at you suspiciously. Lot of people doesn't like change. I don't really know what it's like in China, but China is huge and things are changing quickly. Maybe people there are more open new ideas, or maybe it's just the size (2.8 times as big population as EU), or maybe it's the rapid economic growth?

soldar:

--- Quote from: james_s on May 26, 2019, 12:10:36 am --- Well I'm not an economist and frankly most aspects of business and finances make my eyes glaze over so unlike Trump I'm not going to belligerently push to implement things I do not fully understand. It's just that on the surface they sound like a reasonable idea, a way to even out the playing field a bit given much of the reason China is able to be so competitive is that they are allowed to trash their environment and abuse the workers who do not enjoy nearly the standard of living or the protections those of us in many of the places buying these cheap goods have come to expect. Again though this is not my area of expertise so I'm not flat out saying I think they're a good idea, but I do feel the pinch of competing with people overseas who can live for a fraction of what it costs me and I'm frustrated by the race to the bottom with a lot of formerly good quality products being steadily cheapened to compete with low cost garbage.
--- End quote ---

On the surface anything can be made to sound like a reasonable idea, that is marketing and it is what politicians do: they tell people what they want to hear. Of course we are justified in invading countristan and taking their oil. You do not want the price of gas to go up at the pump do you? So we make up moral and political reasons why we should invade them and we do not talk about the real reasons.

We look at things our way, the way most convenient for our interests, and we ignore others' points of view. So what if they have to starve? Who cares?

Rich countries polluted their way to riches. Working conditions were terrible, pollution was terrible but people chose to do that rather than remain in misery. But now we get on our high horse and righteously proclaim those who pollute or have harsh working conditions are bad people and we should not buy from them. We do not give them the choice that we gave ourselves between pollution and starvation. No, better they starve than they pollute.

In the meanwhile, back in the great U.S. of A. the president is busy dismantling environmental protection regulations because they hamper American businesses.

So, where is the right balance? Does it have to be for everybody where America says it is?

And let us not forget that one reason poor countries pollute is because they are making stuff for rich countries. In other words, we are exporting to them our polluting industries and then we blame them for polluting.

We subsidize our agriculture and deny them the opportunity to make a living in the sector where they could most easily make a living.

China, as it gets richer, is already implementing pollution laws and will continue to do so as they get richer. Environmental laws are expensive and rich countries can afford them. But lecturing China on this is like lecturing the homeless beggar at the stoplight about showering every day. How is he supposed to do it?

It is ironic the America, the country that uses more gasoline per capita than any country in the world, would lecture countries that are using energy to make a living. Americans want to keep driving their SUVs but would deny China the option of using the same energy to develop.  It all rings very false and very hollow.  It sounds like very bad excuses to support xenophobic policies.

America is no moral position to preach or impose their values. America, like any other country, has some very good things, a lot of meh things and some very bad things. The way to make the world a better place is by cooperation among nations and not by giving the world the middle finger and telling them to phuckoff.  America has become a rogue country and is in no position to preach.

I believe American supremacy is waning fast and America is not adapting well to the new world order. America wants to remain "sole superpower" and can only do so militarily so there is danger of America disrupting things and using force. And all will be supported by very good ostensible reasons. Those with the wealth and the power have always found good support in the Bible or any other source of morality. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod