this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
58 points (100.0% liked)

News

1751 readers
1 users here now

Breaking news and current events worldwide.

founded 2 years ago
 

Now that the relationship with China has soured and the People’s Republic of China has become the greatest adversarial threat to the U.S. and Western security, policymakers should revisit thi…

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (7 children)

The USA is trillions of dollars in debt to China too.

[–] toxic 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly. It’s a mutual beneficial arrangement that’s made. If the US didn’t want this to happen, we shouldn’t have continued to utilize Chinese manufacturing after literally building them up.

We helped make China who they are today because of capitalism.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"We" didn't do anything. The shift to China for manufacturing was performed by private companies, not the state, and for economic reasons, not political ones.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep, and the corporatists made Nixon go to China to open it up. Cheap labor and no competition.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Are you trying to say China is better off pre-Nixon than they are now? I'm just trying to figure out the point of this comment...

[–] toxic 2 points 1 year ago

Private companies moved to China because of capitalism. That’s exactly what I said. Cheaper means of production and whatnot. This could have been avoided with some forward thinking in the 70s, 80s, and 90s about the future of America. Investing and subsidizing industries so that they stay in the states, encouragement to move away from the unlimited growth mindset, etc.

We don’t like to think that far in the future though because we like to have quarterly returns so instead of building up our infrastructure and industries state-side, we built them up in China because of the lax regulation and cheap labor.

load more comments (5 replies)