politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This sounds great...
But that money would go a lot further if we were able to use Chinese panels.
Unfortunately a Korean company has been lobbying to put more tarifs on Chinese panels so their more expensive ones will be bought in America.
So now tax money is going to subsidize those Korean screens and they'll probably still be more expensive than the Chinese ones.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-plans-restore-tariffs-dominant-solar-technology-sources-say-2024-04-17/
I just can't wait till neoliberals are over with.
I hate seeing good news and knowing it takes 2 minutes of googling to find out out the shady financial side of it.
To add more clarity to your statement, the panels you're talking about are made in the state of Georgia, not outside of the USA.
Is criticizing the Biden Administration your full-time job? Is someone paying you to do this or are you volunteering these hours?
I think you know the answer to that in your heart
AFAIK we can. The only ones "banned" are the ones being made with Uyghar labor.
The only other issue I'm aware of is with Chinese companies playing a shell game where they sell them to a subsidiary company and then the subsidiary resell them into the US for the purpose of avoiding tariffs.
No. The Korean company is looking to end the exemption that the Chinese companies have been enjoying. This is explained in the article.
I'd rather that money go to American workers at a factory in America than have it going to Chinese workers at a factory located in China.
So you're in a hurry to ignore the Uyghar problem so that you can save a couple of bucks. You're trying to dine at the same table with American CEOs.
China does it cheaper not because they're awesome but because their environmental and labor safety rules are garbage and they are building the panels with either low cost or free (forced) labor. This is precisely where the Government is supposed to play referee; there is no possible way that a US Market and US Laborers can compete with what's going on in China.
Well with China facing sanctions for their oppression of Taiwan, could this be seen as a strategic divestment away from China?
Just asking, hopefully not offending anyone.
My read is that it’s less about divestment or sanctions, and more about preserving industry capacity.
The U.S. used to have a lot of textile factories until free trade moved those jobs to other countries. And the automotive industry used to be much more U.S.-based. (It’s a bit different, because while plants did close, the major job losses and industry shifts were in sub-assemblies that get shipped to plants.)
What happens is that China is heavily subsidizing its ______ industry (solar panels, in this case). That’s why they’re so much cheaper. In addition to heavy subsidies, the Chinese yen is artificially weakened against other currencies, meaning that those currencies can buy Chinese goods more cheaply than they can goods produced domestically.
The end result is that in free trade situations, and most lightly restricted trade situations, that the Chinese goods outcompete domestic goods. This creates trade imbalances, causes domestic economic issues, and perhaps most insidiously, destroys the domestic industry. Factories owned by ‘people’ tend to go under, or wind up sold off to multi-national corporations. Either way, factories are run with leaner margins until cuts to maintenance ensure that they must close because repairing, rebuilding, or replacing is economically infeasible. Equipment is sold off, scrapped, or just goes dormant. Poorly maintained, dormant equipment that is not stored properly will likely never be able to be used again.
Buildings either continue to degrade with no maintenance or no tenants, or they get sold and repurposed.
And at that point, China moves its subsidies to other industries. Countries must buy their goods because they no longer have enough domestic producers of the goods, or the surviving domestic producers have moved into premium products, so China has cornered the market on affordable products.
It costs huge amounts of capital to spin up a factory, and factories in developed countries really only really exist because they already exist. The cost of property and tooling is often way, way too much to start a new manufacturing business, let alone the cost of skilled labor. Once a domestic industry has died or failed to launch when new products are expected to carry a premium, there are exceptionally few ways to revive that industry, aside from throwing huge amounts of money at it.
So… In this case, it’s to prevent China from smothering the U.S. nascent domestic solar panel industry. I doubt it’ll really succeed. We’ll probably wind up with a political shift and whoever is blowing in the breeze will quietly open up free trade on solar panels, or somebody will sue about the tariffs, and the courts will do something silly like declare the federal government isn’t actually a government, but is actually a hamster.
...
I mean. If they were being sanctioned for something like their genocide of Muslims on all exports, yeah, I'd be all about it.
But if a country genocides Muslims, Biden tends to give them billions of dollars, not sanctions. You only get sanctions for genociding Christians, and thats only if the rest of the UN does it.
Besides the very very simple difference that if these were sanctions, they wouldn't be called tariffs, they'd be called sanctions.
You could try to read the article i linked if you want more info, or even try searching for another article.
Making random guess of how it could be a positive and throwing them out there hoping something sticks is what trumpets do...
Although these days it's legitimately hard to tell them apart from the few people actually excited about Biden.
Hell. A few years ago no Dem would unironically say they were "just asking questions". That's been the conservative move since Faux News came about.
But I guess if someone kept watching CNN after the Faux News guy bought it, that does explain the change. He said he wanted to turn CNN into Faux News, and it looks like it's working on people
Fact check: failed
"Treasury Sanctions Chinese Government Officials in Connection with Serious Human Rights Abuse in Xinjiang"
source
While you have a point, assume the guy was asking in good faith and then see how your response reads.
That account isn't asking in good faith.
Edit: Comment...adjusted...to comply with rules.
There as no editorializing on my part in my response. I didn't assign any motives or blame to their incorrect statement. I only posted that it was untrue (intentionally or not) and cited the source.
I'm sorry, I thought I was replying to @[email protected].
He's right in that we shouldn't just search for justifications, Trumpist style.