This may be hard to swallow for those #TrumpForever sycophants on this board.
https://reason.com/archives/2018/04/05/trump-the-anti-business-president
https://reason.com/archives/2018/04/05/trump-the-anti-business-president
Criticism of the Businessman, DJT, and His Treatment Of The Business Community
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
The Chinese are rip off artists and lying rat bastards when it comes to intellectual property. Whatever you think of Trump (which appears to be not much) he is shifting the paradigm and doesn't seem to be worried what "the experts" think. I don't have any issues, personally, with him hammering US businesses some of them deserve it. Does that make me a Trump sycophant?
BTW when an article starts out with the following title......
Trump, the Anti-Business President
Donald Trump is a perpetual danger to every company in America.
Well, I have to call BS on the whole premise and the hysterics associated with the title and article. Somewhere someone is saying "We're Doomed!"
BTW when an article starts out with the following title......
Trump, the Anti-Business President
Donald Trump is a perpetual danger to every company in America.
Well, I have to call BS on the whole premise and the hysterics associated with the title and article. Somewhere someone is saying "We're Doomed!"
There is only one mention of China in the entire article, in the second paragraph, saying Trymp’s tariff have led China to respond in kind, so I’m not real clear why you began your response with a tirade against China.
The point the author is making is Trump appears to think he should be an unquestioned ruler of all business decisions. And because he has the full force of the federal government to enforce his prejudices he has the potential to be a danger to our economic freedom.
No government authority, whether it be a local dog catcher or President, should have the power to decide what products you buy or from whom you buy them. If you are unhappy with products offered by foreign entities, no matter what the reason for your unhappiness, by all means do not buy those products. But you should not assume because you don’t like it that should give you the power to restrict my freedom to buy them if I so choose. Please engage me in a discussion of why you think I should not buy any of those products. I’m a reasonable person, I will listen to your explanation. But you are mistaken to think your moral displeasure should give you the right to employ the police power of the state to interfere with my economic choices. Donald Trump obviously thinks he should have such power. Ergo that makes him a menace to liberty for all of us.
Ponca I get all that about Trump....a saint he ain’t, cut throat business guy definitely. The article indeed mentions the Chinese once, but much of the whole tariff deal is aimed at China and virtually no one else.
I made a personal decision awhile back to not buy things from China or Mexico, if you do I’ve got no issue with that. I also won’t spend my hard earned money vacationing in Mexico or liberally run blue state shitholes.
As a wider argument I think governments/entities that steal intellectual property and or practice unfair business practices (don’t have time to go into it here but the Chinese government just shut down one our sister companies plants, in China. Stole the design, built their own plant producing the exact same product and coerced the workers to leave one plant and work for the Chinese run gig) should be regulated and or shut out of the US market. Guess I’m curious as to why you think those types of groups should get the same seat at the table as those who don’t steal intellectual property?
Just don’t see him as a threat to liberty (not like he has weaponized the IRS and Justice dept). Guess that’s not much of an argument, but (and I’m not saying you do) don’t see this as the “sky is falling” type deal. Time will tell though. I’m not a sycophant though and while he has done some things I applaud, he has also done some incredibly short sighted things that make me cringe.
I made a personal decision awhile back to not buy things from China or Mexico, if you do I’ve got no issue with that. I also won’t spend my hard earned money vacationing in Mexico or liberally run blue state shitholes.
As a wider argument I think governments/entities that steal intellectual property and or practice unfair business practices (don’t have time to go into it here but the Chinese government just shut down one our sister companies plants, in China. Stole the design, built their own plant producing the exact same product and coerced the workers to leave one plant and work for the Chinese run gig) should be regulated and or shut out of the US market. Guess I’m curious as to why you think those types of groups should get the same seat at the table as those who don’t steal intellectual property?
Just don’t see him as a threat to liberty (not like he has weaponized the IRS and Justice dept). Guess that’s not much of an argument, but (and I’m not saying you do) don’t see this as the “sky is falling” type deal. Time will tell though. I’m not a sycophant though and while he has done some things I applaud, he has also done some incredibly short sighted things that make me cringe.
As I re-read the article it appears these guys seem to be beating trump up while throwing soft balls at the ex rodent in chief. At least trump doesn’t really use acolytes to push his message.
The administration's effort to block travel from several predominantly Muslim countries brought a lawsuit from some 160 tech firms warning it would impose "substantial harm on U.S. companies, their employees, and the entire economy." His crackdown on undocumented immigrants disrupts agriculture because, as the American Farm Bureau Federation notes, "50-70 percent of farm laborers in the country today are unauthorized."
That para alone is total crap! Tech firms want to hire cheap labor from foreign countries with H1B1 visas, they don’t give a crap about America workers. Did the travel ban (or would it) cause “substantial harm on US companies, their employees and the entire economy.” Sound pretty dire almost alarmist (the eunuch R’s did the same thing for instance with obysmalcare) and I seriously doubt true. Who were these 160 tech firms?
Are we suppose to not crack down on ILEGAL BORDER JUMPING CRIMINALS (undocumented immigrants usage here tells me there is already an agenda) because of their agricultural contributions? I don’t mind paying more for fruits and veggies knowing that my money is not being sent via western union, to support a corrupt Mexican or Central American government.
You can make all your arguments w/o the article by the way. The people writing the article are pushing an agenda, advocating continued acceptance of law breaking and soft balling the ex-rodent in chiefs same schemes, via different means.
The administration's effort to block travel from several predominantly Muslim countries brought a lawsuit from some 160 tech firms warning it would impose "substantial harm on U.S. companies, their employees, and the entire economy." His crackdown on undocumented immigrants disrupts agriculture because, as the American Farm Bureau Federation notes, "50-70 percent of farm laborers in the country today are unauthorized."
That para alone is total crap! Tech firms want to hire cheap labor from foreign countries with H1B1 visas, they don’t give a crap about America workers. Did the travel ban (or would it) cause “substantial harm on US companies, their employees and the entire economy.” Sound pretty dire almost alarmist (the eunuch R’s did the same thing for instance with obysmalcare) and I seriously doubt true. Who were these 160 tech firms?
Are we suppose to not crack down on ILEGAL BORDER JUMPING CRIMINALS (undocumented immigrants usage here tells me there is already an agenda) because of their agricultural contributions? I don’t mind paying more for fruits and veggies knowing that my money is not being sent via western union, to support a corrupt Mexican or Central American government.
You can make all your arguments w/o the article by the way. The people writing the article are pushing an agenda, advocating continued acceptance of law breaking and soft balling the ex-rodent in chiefs same schemes, via different means.
No one is suggesting the sky is falling. The suggestion is to stay alert. Our individual liberty is the thing that sets us apart from others. Our liberty is a very precious, very fragile commodity, something easily taken away if we allow it.
The article in question barely mentioned China in passing, preferring to point out instead the multiple times our dear leader has bullied the business community. He truly seems to think he should have the final say in all business decisions that are made. It is the personality of a potential tyrant, and if we ignore it it may very well lead us into disaster. Vigilance is the suggestion.
As regards China’s nefarious fascist business practices, I know very little. It is my understanding that the Chinese government tells American businesses if they want access to their market the American businesses must build factories in China and turn over all data regarding their manufacturing techniques. It strikes me as a stupid, stupid thing for American businesses to agree with. But their “greed” for access has been so great they have been willing to do it. And it has bit them in the ass. That’s my understanding, which, I admit, may be 180 degrees off target. As I said I know almost nothing about it. I’m sorry your company got screwed.
Oy, where to begin! The article has very harsh words for Obama and his tactics. Read it again! He’s saying Trump is showing potential to be even worse, which has caught the business community completely off guard. They thought he would be more “capitalist” than he has shown so far.
Tech firms do NOT want to hire cheap labor from foreign countries, that’s an urban myth. They want to hire the brightest minds available so they can stay ahead of the competitive curve. The best educated, brightest minds come from all over the globe, and so they recruit all over the globe. Would you rather Chinese tech companies hire them?
The illegal border-jumping immigrants are responsible for a sizable chunk of our food supply. Chasing them back to where they came will have a huge impact on that industry, causing untold chaos in getting the food we eat to market. That’s the point of the article. We have relied on those illegals to cultivate and harvest our food for decades. It may be more of a case of the food not being available for you to pay more. Much of it may be left to rot in the fields.
Your last paragraph is a supreme disappointment. You are reading the article with the intention of refuting what he says rather than objectively paying attention to his argument. He is not soft balling Obama, he rips him. He is not making an argument on behalf of illegal immigration, he’s pointing out how dearly the agricultural industry relies on it. He is pointing out that industries have spent years - decades! - developing international supply chains, and Trump is sadistically threatening them.
Take a deep breath, read the article a third time with the intention of listening to what he’s actually saying, not what you think he’s saying.
I was headed to bed when it struck me where you are making your mistake with this article. You are assuming if someone criticizes Trump thst means he defends Obama. You are seeing only two sides, and if a person take a stand against the antics of one side that means he’s a player for the other team. You are not understanding the libertarian position. Libertarians are not on either team, in fact most of us despise both teams. Libertarians have only one political policy agenda: defend individual liberty against all comers. Regrettably both “teams” represent a direct threat to liberty. This author has not chosen one of the statist sides. He criticizes them both. Knowing that maybe you can read the article without the emotional attachment of a team player. (I apologize if I sound condescending. That is not my intention.)
Heck no you don’t sound condescending Ponca! I really do enjoy your input....I don’t like either team either, as others say here opposite sides of the same coin. I’ll re-re-read tomorrow and see what I’m missing. I suspect though we are closer together than not.
My attachment to Trump is twofold. One he isn’t Hillary and second he’s not the preferred candidate of either established party. I love flies in the ointment or as JB says, turds in the punch bowl. He still has a plethora of time to screw up or not screw up though, I’m just not seeing his actions currently, in the same light as the authors of the article.
My attachment to Trump is twofold. One he isn’t Hillary and second he’s not the preferred candidate of either established party. I love flies in the ointment or as JB says, turds in the punch bowl. He still has a plethora of time to screw up or not screw up though, I’m just not seeing his actions currently, in the same light as the authors of the article.
This is a common refrain. For a long time now.
I'm asking this not to be adversarial, but I'm having a tough time getting my head around Biff's actions with China. They're thugs, they steal, have no respect for intellectual property, I get all that and it's offensive to me and I'll accept that it's worthy of retaliation. BUT.
We're supposed to protect American businesses that know that dynamic exists and still wade in, knowing the risk, so they can save labor costs? I mean, nobody makes these american businesses hand over their trade secrets and technology over to a known thief. So start a trade war to protect the bottom line of american businesses that get in bed with an authoritarian regime to save American labor costs? What am I missing here?
I think you’ve pretty well nailed it, except I would quibble slightly with one point. I do not think the primary reason American companies attach themselves to the Chinese government is for lower labor costs (although that us a fine secondary reason). The prime reason, as I see, it is they want access to over a billion prospective new customers. Other than that I agree with you.
I’m with you on your happiness that Hillary lost. I don’t vote, refuse to participate in choosing my overlord, but I admit I danced a little jig of happiness when I saw she lost.
Equal criticism of both sides;
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2018/...ot-play-favorites-trump-republican-economics/
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2018/...ot-play-favorites-trump-republican-economics/
This takes a somewhat circuitous route to bolster my point, but it discusses various reasons why manufacturers make the decisions they make. It explains the miscalculation that American companies have made in dealing with the Chinese government.
http://cafehayek.com/2018/04/quotation-of-the-day-2399.html
Are you at liberty to go into more detail about the incident with your sister company? What kind of products do they offer, etc...?
Let's play out a trade war hypothetically to the nth degree.
Let's assume that China places a 1,000% tariff on anything coming from the US into China. And let's assume that we place an equal 1,000% tariff on anything that comes from China into the US.
The US economy would rock along fine without China goods, albeit with some inflation. The Chinese economy would literally implode into anarchy and deep depression without the US consumers buying their cheap shit. That hypothetical is a no-brainer and very true
Let's assume that China places a 1,000% tariff on anything coming from the US into China. And let's assume that we place an equal 1,000% tariff on anything that comes from China into the US.
The US economy would rock along fine without China goods, albeit with some inflation. The Chinese economy would literally implode into anarchy and deep depression without the US consumers buying their cheap shit. That hypothetical is a no-brainer and very true
The Chinese would starve pretty quickly creating civil unrest. I’m pretty sure Trump views this as a side-benefit anyway. Sure the Media is going to scream and howl about big bad meanie DJT and wreckless this or that but at some point you have to ask yourself, whose side are they really on?
This comment belies an almost complete misunderstanding of international trade. In the scenario you describe the world’s economy would be devastated. Maybe the US economy would not be hurt as badly as China’s (a debatable proposition), but to assume the US economy would “rock along fine” is a preposterous assumption. International supply chains would take decades to recover. Your scenario would far more likely be the cause of a world wide depression.
Well, if they were screaming and hollering against a trade war they would be on your side, the side of the American consumer. I am shocked you don’t seem to understand that.
As a full time practicing and degreed economist, I simply disagree. China has abused us and you know it. North America and Europe have the capital resources and liquidity (and resourcefulness) to do without chinese goods. the economic growth in N. America and Europe to replace the lost goods (alone) would overshadow any loss of production from exports, by a factor of 10.
Most people forget that we exchanged a production based economy for an intellectual property based one, and the only thing that changed in that period of transformation was we gave up low value production to China and kept high value IP.
On an $800.00 iPhone, how much of the value in that supply chain do you think China is capturing? Less than $12.00. It would be a pain in the ass to reproduce that $12.00 and it might have to double to $24.00, But the $800.00 doesn't go to $1,000, but merely to, maybe, $815.00. Get granular in every one of these scenarios and you'll not panic in a doomsday scenario,
As an economist you surely understand that the US does not trade with China. US companies trade with Chinese companies. Government intervention in private trade negotiations produce nothing more than uncertainty and confusion. The scenario you provide would create utter chaos. To think otherwise is myopic.
Let’s make an example. Let’s say the US company, XYZ Corporation, has discovered a new way to produce widgets, an invention that will increase its market share exponentially and take widgets into new markets previously unreachable. XYZ has done detailed research into the various components required to produce their new widgets, and have learned a company in Portugal manufactures the perfect component that will assure the widget is the finest widget that can be made. They negotiate with the Portuguese company and come to a mutually satisfactory contract. The Portuguese company will now have to expand its operation just to make the incredible increase in the demand for their product. But the equipment they need for this expansion is made n Australia. Negotiation ensue between the Portuguese company and the one from Australia. The Australian company relies on a product from Brasíl, and the Brazilian company needs imports from Ireland. The Irish company relies on raw materials that are found in Sweden. The equipment the Swedish company uses to mine the ore is comprised of components that come from Canada. And on and on and on. When government throws a wrench in the gears of this supply chain chaos follows. Companies from around the globe are placed in a situation of uncertainty. Do they expand in hopes it will all work out, or do they sit tight? To suggest otherwise is really short sighted.
I am shocked that literally every opinion you have is based on is good X, Y, or Z cheaper or more expensive with the American consumer if a policy is enacted, rescinded, or continued. Maybe not shocked as you are true to your libertarian beliefs and I respect that. However, do you not see that in the real world (not a philospical world), just because an IPhone, TV, or other consumer electronic is cheaper, that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s good for the greater society as a whole or national interest?
Our Gov has created exactly what it wanted through cheaper goods: people do not have to save very much to buy incredible pieces of indoctrinating technology and therefore become sheep.
For the record, John, my contention has never had anything to do with a product being cheaper for the American consumer, although that is a happy consequence of countries like China taxing their citizens in order to subsidize some of their companies so they can sell their products cheaper to us. My “libertarian” argument has always been that the American consumer should be able to buy the product he most desires without interference from governments.
You and I can agree that artificial manipulation of trade is very bad. And that is EXACTLY what China has been doing for a very long time. Your assumption that we are starting at a level playing field is what is extremely short sighted.
In your world, where we are today on a static basis is the proper baseline by which to make comparisons. All of the companies....in all of the countries....that you mention in your hypothetical......have ALL been manipulated by China.
If China would allow the global free market to decide such basic things as their own currency fluctuation rates, then I would be in full agreement. But they don't play fair. They never have. And it isn't such a bad thing to make some moves to force their hand into doing so.
And to use your words, to suggest otherwise is really short sighted
As an economist, is your stance on offshore shell accounts and profit hiding equal to that of China?
CB, can go into some detail but not it’s entirety. They produce a specialty coating, primarily for the O&G industry. Sister company had a “partner” who was going to be the rep in China. Factory gets built, employees are all trained and they are ready for production. Then (and for whatever reason) the Chinese govt shutters the plant. The next thing you know there is a plant built down the road and almost identical to the original plant. As soon as the original plant is officially closed, everyone moves to the “new plant” and they begin production of the material. I have not heard what has happened since and for obvious reasons this has been kept quiet. I have heard since there was not real legal recourse, they walked.
It is the third instance I’ve seen in about 9 years where Chinese groups have blantantly stolen intellectual property. I experienced two with my previous company on projects in Australia. Although there they got hammered in court because the Chinese groups unjustly fired unionized Australian workers and when that happened they headed to court.
I know lots of groups that simply won’t do business in China. My old company absolutely would not work in China except offshore. Offshore we could keep an eye on our equipment and access to the equipment. My last field tech position (previous company) was in the Republic of Georgia, and while we didn't necessarily consider them a risk the odd Russian coming through was considered such. When we packed up I spent the full time from our work camp, in Bakuriani, to Tbilisi, with the equipment and didn't leave myself until I verified the containers were locked, hadn't been tampered with and were in the sterile area of customs.
Last edited:
Your argument is a logical fallacy. You agree that “artificial manipulation of trade is very bad.” You assert that China artificially manipulates trade. And your proposed recourse is for America to join in the artificial manipulation. By God, if the Chinese government is going to abuse its own people we’ll show them! We’ll abuse our own people! That’s the ticket! But, of course, that is nonsense, a totally inappropriate response. As Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Friedman, Boudreaux, Higgs, Perry and countless other free market economists point out repeatedly the proper response is for our government to stay the “free market” course. It has been said about socialism that it works until it stops working. That is true for any government interference. China is sowing the seeds of its own economic demise with its manipulation of its currency and its subsidizing of some of its industries. Cracks are already beginning to appear. It is illogical for the US to “fight fire with fire.” It makes no sense for our government to punish us because China is punishing its own people.
Cracks on China’s economic horizon:
https://thinkmarkets.wordpress.com/...nny-mcmahon-houghton-mifflin-harcourt-288-pp/
https://thinkmarkets.wordpress.com/...nny-mcmahon-houghton-mifflin-harcourt-288-pp/
The Chinese will be bring repercussions on themselves eventually. As an economist you should already know that.
Look, when the Chinese government manipulates its currency so that Chinese products become cheaper for foreign consumers, the other side of that coin (no pun intended) is foreign products become more expensive for Chinese consumers. Who got abused, the American consumer or the Chinese consumer? Who has to work longer hours to pay for products? Who did the Chinese government hurt by its actions?
When the Chinese government charges its citizens extra taxes so it can give the money to its crony industries, and then the crony industries take the subsidy and sell their products to foreign consumers for less than they could have charged otherwise, who got abused? The American consumer, who got the product cheaper than the market would dictate? Or the Chinese consumer who had to pony up taxes to "subsidize" the American consumer?
When the American government retaliates against that horrible Chinese abuse of its own citizens, and imposes tariffs on Chinese imports, thus driving up the cost of those products for the American consumer, who has the American government abused?
So, yes, I would say doing nothing is the appropriate response. Government interference works until it doesn't work. The Chinese will learn a very harsh lesson, much like the Japanese did a few decades ago. Take the Taoist approach: exhibit patience.
Those of you that scream "do something!" will lead us to more harm than good.
I got granular in your tongue and cheek post on Texas/Oklahoma/California/China post.
Please tell me those EXISTING imbalances that are MATERIAL are ok with you. If they are, then there's really nothing else I can say.
In your world, China's complete disregard for free trade is ok, but our desire to force them into free trade is not. Ok
There is an 18% disparity between combined tax/tariff rates on US/China trade. Correcting that imbalance IS NOT retaliating by levying tariffs.
Answer it this way to use an extreme example: If that imbalance were 50% in tax/tariffs, would you consider correcting that imbalance a new tariff?
Please tell me those EXISTING imbalances that are MATERIAL are ok with you. If they are, then there's really nothing else I can say.
In your world, China's complete disregard for free trade is ok, but our desire to force them into free trade is not. Ok
There is an 18% disparity between combined tax/tariff rates on US/China trade. Correcting that imbalance IS NOT retaliating by levying tariffs.
Answer it this way to use an extreme example: If that imbalance were 50% in tax/tariffs, would you consider correcting that imbalance a new tariff?
I got granular in your tongue and cheek post on Texas/Oklahoma/California/China post.
Please tell me those EXISTING imbalances that are MATERIAL are ok with you. If they are, then there's really nothing else I can say.
In your world, China's complete disregard for free trade is ok, but our desire to force them into free trade is not. Ok
There is an 18% disparity between combined tax/tariff rates on US/China trade. Correcting that imbalance IS NOT retaliating by levying tariffs.
Answer it this way to use an extreme example: If that imbalance were 50% in tax/tariffs, would you consider correcting that imbalance a new tariff?
In "my world" China's complete disregard for free trade is immaterial. Free trade works. Every time. Whether the other side practices it or not. Government manipulation does not work. Ever. China is playing with a ticking time bomb. If they want to ruin their economy, all we can do is explain the error of their way, then sit back and watch the explosion. It would be an error on our part to follow their path in an attempt to "force" them to change. The market will do that soon enough. It doesn't need our help. So for that reason I wouldn't care if China imposed a 1000% tariff on American products (as per your original hypothetical), I would not advocate for the American government to respond in kind.
Yes, you've made that your position very consistently. We will have to agree to disagree.
If country A sells one kind of product (let's say tee shirts and underwear) and country B doesn't make that product at all. In fact country B liquidated all of its tee shirt and underwear factories.
And country B sells a totally different kind of product (let's say software required to even have basic livable functions). Country A does not have the ability to produce this software, which is absolutely required to even function.
So Country A charges a 50% tax to Country B for the purchase of tee shirts and underwear and Country B charges no fees, taxes or tariffs on the purchase of the software. Then worse, Country A steals the software code and literally pays nothing for the privilege.
In your world, that is ok and there SHOULD NEVER be any repercussions to Country A, because somehow magically Country A will end up punishing itself. Ludicrous and where you and I will never agree. Country A will not be harmed at all.....ever.....by its own trade practices.
In my world an astute businessman would make haste to Country A and start up a software company. I think (and I stress I think, because, as I have said before, I don't know), if you are referring to China "stealing" software code, you are being pretty liberal with your words. I am of the understanding China insists companies voluntarily hand over the software code before it will allow the company to pursue business in its country. You are a professional economist, what would your advice be to the CEOs of those companies? Would you not see a giant red flag? Would you not feel a little sheepish running to Uncle Sam to bail you out after you made such a colossally stupid mistake? Why should American taxpayers and consumers pay the price for your stupidity? I run a small business, a TINY business. Should you be required to bail me out every time I do something stupid? That would be a very sweet deal for me, because I do stupid things every day of the week!
Your understanding is incorrect, and I know first hand. I have been in the venture capital and private equity business for 35 years. China does NOT wait for companies to voluntarily hand over IP in JV discussions. They systematically, consistently and regularly pilfer, steal and commandeer intellectual property, assets and value. They do it before and during negotiations and, even worse, after definitive agreements are in place. I am not being liberal with my words. That is just fact. It is not just software, but hardware, branding, and all else that goes into the building of value. Your voraciousness in defending them is getting very interesting to me.
You are hearing what you want to hear. There is no defense on my part when it comes to situations as you describe. But I will repeat that it makes no sense to me why any company would enter into negotiations with the Chinese government knowing the treachery they will probably encounter. (You should not interperate that as defending the Chinese). What you describe is indefensible. I am surprised there are no international tribunals that have jurisdiction over actions such as that. If the rest of the business and political world know what you know about the systematic pilfering and stealing of property by the Chinese government, it surprises me they haven’t been shut out of all discourse. They should be shunned by all. That doesn’t alter my opinion as regards China’s currency manipulation or subsidization of some of its industries. A country that practices free markets has nothing to fear, the market will correct China in time.
