#trade war | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

mostlysignssomeportents · 1 year

Text

We should ban TikTok('s surveillance)

With the RESTRICT Act, Congress is proposing to continue Trump’s war on Tiktok, enacting a US ban on the Chinese-owned service. How will they do this? Congress isn’t clear. In practice, banning stuff on the internet is hard, especially if you don’t have a national firewall:

https://doctorow.medium.com/theyre-still-trying-to-ban-cryptography-33aa668dc602

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/30/tik-tok-tow/#good-politics-for-electoral-victories

My guess is that they’re thinking of ordering the mobile duopoly of Google and Apple to nuke the Tiktok app from their app stores. That’s how they do it in China, after all: when China wanted to ban VPNs and other privacy tools, they just ordered Apple to remove them from the App Store, and Apple rolled over:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/11/foreseeable-consequences/#airdropped

That’s the completely foreseeable consequence of arrogating the power to decide which software every mobile user on earth is entitled to use — as Google and Apple have done. Once you put that gun on the mantelpiece in Act I, you damn betcha that some strong-man backed by a powerful state is going to come along and shoot it by Act III.

The same goes for commercial surveillance: once you collect massive, nonconsensual dossiers on every technology user alive, you don’t get to act surprised when cops and spies show up and order your company to serve as deputies for a massive, off-the-books warrantless surveillance project.

Hell, a cynic might even say that commercial surveillance companies are betting on this. The surveillance public-private partnership is a vicious cycle: corporations let cops and spies plunder our data; then the cops and spies lobby against privacy laws that would prevent these corporations from spying on us:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/25/nationalize-moderna/#hun-sen

Which makes the RESTRICT Act an especially foolish project. If the Chinese state wants to procure data on Americans, it need not convince us to install Tiktok. It can simply plunk down a credit card with any of the many unregulated data-brokers who feed the American tech giants the dossiers that the NSA and local cops rely on.

Every American tech giant is at least as bad for privacy as Tiktok is — yes, even Apple. Sure, Apple lets its users block Facebook spying with a single tap — but even if you opt out of “tracking,” Apple still secretly gathers exactly the same kinds of data as Facebook, and uses it to power its own ad product:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar

There is no such thing as a privacy-respecting tech giant. Long before Apple plastered our cities with lying billboards proclaiming its reverence for privacy, Microsoft positioned itself as the non-spying alternative to Google, which would be great, except Microsoft spies on hundreds of millions of people and sells the data:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/11/25/the-peoples-amazon/#clippys-revenge

Tech’s surveillance addiction means that Tiktok’s own alternative to the RESTRICT Act is also unbelievably stupid. The company has proposed to put itself under Oracle’s supervision, letting Oracle host its data and audit its code. You know, Oracle, the company that built the Great Firewall of China 1.0:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/selling-china-surveillance

We should not trust Tiktok any more than we trust Apple, Facebook, Google or Microsoft. Tiktok lied about whether it was sending data to China before:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-tapes-us-user-data-china-bytedance-access

And even if it keeps its promise not to send user data to China, that promise is meaningless — it can still send the vectors and models it creates with that data to China — these being far more useful for things like disinformation campaigns and population-scale inferences than the mere logs from your Tiktok sessions.

There are so many potentially harmful ways to process commercial surveillance data that trying to enumerate all the things that a corporation is allowed to do with the data it extracts from us is a fool’s errand. Instead, we should ban companies from spying on us, whether they are Chinese or American.

Corporations are remorseless, paperclip-maximizing colony organisms that perceive us as inconvenient gut-flora, and they lack any executive function (as do their “executives”), and they cannot self-regulate. To keep corporations from harming us, we must make it illegal for them to enact harm, and punish them when they break the law:

https://doctorow.medium.com/small-government-fd5870a9462e

After all, the problem with Tiktok isn’t the delightful videos or the fact that it’s teaching a generation of children to be expert sound- and video-editors. The problem with Tiktok is that it spies on us. Just like the problem with Facebook isn’t that it lets us communicate with our friends, and the problem with Google isn’t that it operates a search engine.

Now, these companies will tell you that the two can’t be separated, that a bearded prophet came down off a mountain with two stone tablets, intoning, “Larry, Sergey, thou shalt stop rotating thine logfiles and, lo, thou wilt data-mine them for actionable market intelligence.” But it’s nonsense. Google ran for years without surveillance. Facebook billed itself as the privacy-forward alternative to Myspace and promised never to spy on us:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3247362

The inevitabilist narrative that says that corporations must violate our rights in order to make the products we love is unadulterated Mr Gotcha nonsense: “Yet you participate in society. Curious. I am very intelligent”:

https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/

Of course, corporations push this narrative all the time, which is why American Big Tech has been quietly supporting a ban on Tiktok, which (coincidentally) has managed to gain a foothold in the otherwise impregnable, decaying, enshittified oligarchy that US companies have created.

They have conspicuously failed to call for any kind of working solution, like a federal privacy law that would ban commercial surveillance, and extend a “private right of action,” so people could sue tech giants and data-brokers who violated the law, without having to convince a regulator, DA or Attorney General to bestir themselves:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/you-should-have-right-sue-companies-violate-your-privacy

Instead, the tech giants have the incredible gall to characterize themselves as the defenders of our privacy — at least, so long as the Chinese government is the adversary, and so long as its privacy violations come via an app, and not buy handing a credit card to the data-brokers that are the soil bacteria that keeps Big Tech’s ecosystem circulating. In the upside-down land of Big Tech lobbying, privacy is a benefit of monopoly — not something we have to smash monopolies to attain:

https://www.eff.org/wp/interoperability-and-privacy

Not everyone in Congress is onboard with the RESTRICT Act. AOC has come out for a federal privacy law that applies to all companies, rather than a ban on an app that tens of millions of young Americans love:

https://www.businessinsider.com/aoc-first-tiktok-congress-ban-without-being-clued-in-2023-3

You know who agrees with AOC? Rand Paul. Yes, that absolute piece of shit. Paul told his caucusmates in the GOP that banning an app that millions of young American voters love is bad electoral politics. This fact is so obvious that even Rand fucking Paul can understand it:

https://gizmodo.com/rand-paul-opposes-tiktok-ban-warns-republicans-1850278167

Paul is absolutely right to call a Tiktok ban a “national strategy to permanently lose elections for a generation.” The Democrats should listen to him, because the GOP won’t. As between the two parties, the GOP is far more in thrall to the Chamber of Commerce and the rest of the business lobby. They are never going to back a policy that’s as good for the people and as bad for big business as a federal privacy law.

The Democrats have the opportunity to position themselves as “the party that wants to keep Tiktok but force it to stop being creepy, along with all the other tech companies,” while the GOP positions itself as “the party of angry technophobes who want to make sure that any fun you have is closely monitored by Mark Zuckerberg, Sundar Pinchai and Tim Cook and their pale imitations of the things you love about Tiktok.”

That’s not just good electoral politics — it’s good policy. Young voters aren’t going to turn out to the polls for performative Cold War 2.0 nonsense, but they will be pissed as hell at whoever takes away their Tiktok.

And if you do care about Cold War 2.0, then you should be banning surveillance, not Tiktok; the Chinese government has plenty of US dollars at its disposal to spend in America’s freewheeling, unregulated data markets — as do criminals, petty and organized, and every other nation-state adversary of the USA.

The RESTRICT Act is a garbage law straight out of the Clinton era, a kind of King Canute decree that goes so far as to potentially prohibit the use of VPNs to circumvent its provisions. America doesn’t need a Great Firewall to keep itself safe from tech spying — it needs a privacy law.

Have you ever wanted to say thank you for these posts? Here’s how you can: I’m kickstarting the audiobook for my next novel, a post-cyberpunk anti-finance finance thriller about Silicon Valley scams called Red Team Blues. Amazon’s Audible refuses to carry my audiobooks because they’re DRM free, but crowdfunding makes them possible.

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[Image ID: A modified vintage editorial cartoon. Uncle Sam peeks out over a 'frowning battlement' whose cannon-slots are filled with telescopes from which peer the red glaring eyes of HAL 9000 from '2001: A Space Odyssey.' Topping the battlements in a row are Uncle Sam and three business-suited figures with dollar-sign-bags for heads. The three dollar-bag men have corporate logos on their breasts: Facebook, Google, Apple. Standing on the strand below the battlements, peering up, is a forlorn figure with a Tiktok logo for a head. The fortress wall bears the words 'RESTRICT Act.']

#rand paul is right actually ugh ugh ugh #politics #oracle #restrict act #privacy #privacy without monopoly #tiktok #commercial surveillance #trade war #bytedance #apple #google #facebook #meta #usausausa #generational warfare #electoral strategy #pluralistic #aoc

116 notes · View notes

auraeseer · 5 months

Text

It used to be a port stout . . .

#bend breing co.#trade war #export stout #bend #oregon

8 notes · View notes

chrisjake-cp · 1 year

Text

[CH-ENG translation] Interview: Find something to be wholeheartedly happy about. Jake Hsu: "Being an artist is influential work. I hope to continue to bring strength and warmth to other people."

Interview by Alec Zhan, Men’s Uno, 16 December 2022

"I want to make the world better through my works. I really believe this can happen. Being an artist is influential work. I hope to continue to bring strength and warmth to other people," Jake talked like this in the interview. After acting in several Q-series, Jake gradually grabbed the attention of the public. In 'Shards of Her', he displayed exquisite acting skills, and fully received recognition for it. In this interview, he not only shared his experiences along the way, he also brought up the reasons why he ardently loves acting, as well as his determination to become an actor. Let's walk together through these words to Jake's inner world.

A poem that let him walk to the heart of a character

Talking about the present situation, Jake indicated that he's in the middle of filming a series. In December, more details will be shared. "It's a 6-episode miniseries, and filming will soon be over. This role is very fun to play. Next to martial arts scenes that I filmed earlier, there is also much physical labor to be done for this role. [My character] is a driver of a tricycle. In the series he really has to ride a tricycle to transport goods, he's exposed to the sun a lot, he talks Taiwanese, etc. It's a character type I haven't come into contact with before."

In the recently popular ‘Shards of Her’, Jake, who plays Tiffany Hsu's younger brother, successfully attracted the attention of a lot of fans thanks to his superb acting. This included making the audience, along with Tiffany Hsu, cry with just one line.

About the how of playing the part of Lin Zhen Ye, who fell into a depression, he said: "I just want to find that burden, to the point that it I collapse under its weight myself. What is his (mental) state? How does he think? This results in him [Lin Zhen Ye] entering a state that normal people can't understand in the end, because he doesn't even talk and can't communicate with other people. But he also makes some moves that push forward the plot of this series. So this text was very important to me and helped me a lot. Whether it was lines or writings in the script, it was written for the actors to read."

Among the annotations, Jake remembered there was a poem by Lin Wanyu that kicked his heart into gear and guided him towards this role. "That poem is my favourite in the whole series. Even though it's written somewhere on set, the audience probably won't get to see it. This sort of thing is very important to me. The poem goes like this: The things I held on to are still in my pocket It's those little beliefs Supporting the entire workings of the galaxy Giving me light in the daytime And stars at night

Just like this character's affection for his sister has been in his heart all along. No matter which emotional difficulties he faces, this conviction make sure he can go all the way until now."

As for the popularity of the series [Shards of Her] at the moment, did it make Jake feel like more attention was on him [as an actor]? He explained laughing that because he cut his long hair, he wouldn't really be noticed by other people.

On the reason of him cutting his hair, he said: "I think I was a bit despressed while shooting this series. When I was in the middle of learning the character, I thought that nothing in life was happy. I lent my body to him to experience such feelings, and I in turn felt that depression [of his]. My own way of getting out of it was by cutting my hair."

Even though Jake cut his long hair short now, he indicated that if there was a series requiring him to let it grow out, he would be happy to accept.

Enjoying the compliments of others

Talking about his experiences since making his debut as an actor, Jake has gradually become famous after taking part in several Q-series. About the experiences and the training process of that time, he said that, thinking back on it, he was actually very happy, even though at that time he was short on money.

"I shared a rented room of 1 ping [3.3m2) and the rent of that room was only 5000TWD [about $162]. I spent almost two years living like this! This room, apart from our (bed)room had a communal space outside. I remember when it rained we had a pond. We had no windows, and mice would scurry in the ceilings and later die in the bathroom. It's funny thinking back on it now. That there are such houses in Taipei! But we can't complain about living in the city center for only 5000TWD [a month]."

Although many mysterious and odd things happened in that house, Jake still felt reluctant to leave when it was time to move out. "When life was really hard, I'd still have a feeling of reluctance to part with it. But that was because wanted to keep living there, so I didn't have to give up and return home."

Since childhood, Jake was fond of performing and it seems that as a child he already set the goal for himself to become an actor. "I remember that I liked performing, even when I was really young at three or four years old. At that time I was doing some silly magic tricks in front of friends and classmates. Because we were all children, they were happy to watch, no matter how silly the magic tricks were. I really enjoyed their feelings of amazement ('Wow') too.”

After this, Jake dabbled in magic tricks all the way until high school, and became the president of the magic club. He also decided to attend a university that taught performing arts. "I never thought about doing anything else than acting at all. Signing up for the drama department was my only choice ever, and I always said that if I didn't pass it [that department's entrance exam], I'd serve in the army."

Still, no matter how much Jake loves acting, he still can't shake the feeling of nervousness when facing the cameras. "The first time I was looking into a camera, I was really nervous to death! There were huge differences with the stage plays that I studied. These differences still exist until today...I'm still fumbling and endlessly exploring, but learning these things is really fun."

Perhaps because the opportunities for acting became more numerous, Jake has slowly explored his own ways to prepare, such as drinking water before going on stage/walking on set. This way he can disspel some of his anxiety. But he also shared that preparing for filming is still vastly different than preparing for a stage play. "The work format is slightly different. Stage plays could be rehearsed for 3 or 4 months at a time. The director and the actors continuously work until everything is perfect. That's not the case with filming [a series or movie]. When filming you receive a script and things you film today are broadcast together with things you shot on the first and the 80th day, so the moments when your performance isn't totally okay are easily noticed [litterally: 'easy for bitter scenes to appear'].

Finding things to be wholeheartedly happy with

Jake also has a very intriguing habit, which is that before he boards a plane, he will write a death note. We're also curious about what he writes in those. "The main sentiment is using elegant and sentimental language to bid farewell to my family. The intro to each death note approximately goes like this: 'Mom, dad, thank you for supporting my interest [in acting]. I may be dead now, but I don't have any regrets. Please rest assured that I lived a happy life, even if I didn't earn big money. Sorry for not leaving you any money, but in this acting business you really don't earn much' and such. I am someone who doesn't want to have any regrets left. Suppose I took a plane today and the plane was going down ten minutes in, I would go crazy if I didn't write such a death note, but it is what it is."

The funny thing is that you can probably find the death notes Jake has written before all over his home. "I have my death notes everywhere in my home now. I'm not sure that I unearthed the previous one each time I write a new one. When the time comes, I hope the lawyer will be be able to find out which one is the most recent note."

In private, Jake is a big movie lover. He likes to look at movies with an analytical perspective. "The first time watching a movie I'm more of an audience member, but if I like the movie, the second time I watch it I might think about the director's shots or admire why actors performed something a certain way. This way you can really learn a lot of things."

Another way to recharge his batteries is by playing badminton, which he started last year. "I discovered that playing badminton makes me extremely happy. Even though I don't play very well, I don't need to think about or care about anything while hitting [the shuttlecock]. I also discovered it's extremely important to find anything you can be wholeheartedly happy about."

Apart from his private interests, Jake reckons he's a multi-faceted person. "Because I was confronted by some issues in the past two years, and I examined myself a lot, I discovered that I am a completely different person when I am on my own, when I am hanging out with friends, or when I'm hanging out with fellow actors in a work situation. If anyone overlaps in two domains [i.c. if anyone is both a friend and a colleague], they'll be surprised about how different I am. This also opened up my understanding of a role; characters can have extremely different aspects, even though they're one person."

Like when he hangs out with friends, he said that he's often acting crazily [outspoken], but when he enters his workplace, people have asked him whether he's a bit autistic. And when he's alone, he often goes into a weirdly peaceful state, so much so that he can sit on the sofa for five hours straight without doing anything.

Continue to bring strength and warmth to other people

The theme of the December issue [of Men's Uno] is 'unique style'. We also want to know how Jake cultivates his own style? "I think style is not something that you have a method for, or that you create consciously. It just happens in every decision in life. For example, I decide which clothes I'm going to wear today, or which breakfast I'll eat, what music to listen to. Every little decision like this creates a person's life style." Just like when you create a movie, he thinks that directors with style won't think about what that style is. They'll just make every decision according to their own taste, and string their movie together like that.

[Being asked about] a future challenging role and goal, Jake, after consideration, replied that he would really wants to play a lawyer. Why is that? He believes he is someone with clear expressions and trains of thoughts. "During the process of observing myself, I found that the way my brain operates is very organized, like a machine. This can hinder me when I create certain characters, but help me with characters that require logic. For example, I recently played a guest role as a prosecutor. It was incomparably easy for me speak of what the evidence pointed at in an orderly manner."

But Jake also found out that emotionally outgoing roles are currently his weak point, "because my brain doesn't work like this, my rationality will be ahead of my emotions. So I'll be a little jammed. Intellectually I'll feel I don't need emotions to do things. Since I'm obviously able to solve things this way, why would I need to be outspoken? But currently I often accept roles with outspoken characters, so that's just as well for tempering my own [character].

At the end of the interview, we want to ask what Jake thinks is the happiest, most accomplished part of being an actor? "When someone gets strength from my work. I remember going to Taipei Film Fest one time. Getting out of Zhongshan Hall [an auditorium in Taipei] about to flag down a car, there was a boy running over to me clutching a slip of paper in his hand. Until now I still remember the contents of that piece of paper. It said 'thank you, Zishuo, [Jake's character in Close Your Eyes Before It's Dark] for allowing me to die, and at the same time be reborn.' After reading that note, I cried heavily in the square in front of Zhongshan Hall. I couldn't imagine that that was the strength I gave people, so that he felt he was reborn and was able to tell his story. That power, that continues to push me forward to be an actor, is that through my works I want to make this world a better place. I really believe this can happen. Being an artist is influential work. I hope to continue to bring strength and warmth to other people."

#jake hsu #interview #my translation #徐鈞浩 #她和她的她 #天黑請閉眼 #商魂 #shards of her #close your eyes before it's dark #trade war #history 3 trapped cast #photoshoot

13 notes · View notes

tomluongo · 6 hours

Text

It's the End of the Foreign Exchange Reserves as We Know It - Don't Feel Fine About it.

“Birthday party, cheesecake, jelly bean, Boom!”— R.E.M. The world we’ve known is over. The US Congress finally pushed the big red button. When the West froze around $300 billion of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves in March 2022 it was the first step in breaking down the system of foreign exchange reserves that makes up the global economy. Freezing assets of countries they are mad at isn’t new…

View On WordPress

#Corruption #Globalism #Politics #trade war #War

0 notes

tradermade · 7 days

Text

China outsmarts US chip ban! https://markets.tradermade.com/breaking/china-obtains-top-secret-nvidia-chips. Acquired Nvidia AI tech through resellers like Dell & Super Micro. Tech war heats up!

#china #tech #nvi #trade war

0 notes

psychreviews2 · 1 month

Text

Object Relations: Fear Of Success Pt. 7-4

For Lighthizer, there has to be trade negotiations that think of trade balance and mutual advantages so that there isn't a carte blanche situation. If results on the ground show unfair trade practices, like dumping, currency manipulation, or a lack of access, there has to be a reassessment of any trade deal. "All the great economies were built behind a wall of protection and often with government money. The British industrial revolution was aided by a wall of tariffs. Likewise, the late-nineteenth-century explosion of American industry was the product of protectionism and often subsidies. Can anyone imagine the great American railroads being built without the grant of free land per mile? Similarly, the manufacturing countries of Japan, Germany, and now China all benefited during their development from tariffs, other barriers, and subsidies of one kind or another. It is important to remember that no country became great by consuming. They became great by producing...Our trade deficit grew by a factor of fourteen, while our GDP grew by a factor of four. The win-win situation promised by advocates of free trade has never materialized...It is not my position that all trade deficits are harmful. Clearly, if a country runs a deficit one year and a surplus the next, no harm is done. The surplus will offset the deficit, and all is good. Likewise, for one country to run a bilateral trade deficit with a second country and a surplus with a third is fine. They offset each other. Indeed, all three countries could benefit by increasing efficiency and maximizing the allocation of resources among them. What concerns me is running huge trade deficits with the entire world year after year for decades...The second exception to the principle that bilateral deficits don’t matter is that running up gigantic trade deficits with one’s geopolitical adversary is particularly stupid. In our case, the United States ships hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of our wealth to China every year. This helps them build up their economy, build up their military, and have leverage over the political situation in the United States. It makes them more powerful in the eyes of all world leaders. I’m not sure there’s an example in world history in which two rivals—indeed, some would say enemies—have had such a lopsided economic relationship. It is fair to say China is challenging us because we gave them the money to do it. Clearly, during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, we never transferred such money. Had we done so, we might have lost to them...Tariffs don’t necessarily prompt trade wars, and removing tariffs often does little to prevent actual war."

There is also "...negative compounding. The people in the foreign country who buy our assets own those assets forever, with the obvious effect that they get the profit from those assets year after year. That profit compounds, and the effects of even one year’s trade deficit multiply over time as profits continue. Added to this is the fact that we have seen huge $500 billion to $1 trillion trade deficits year after year, so we have both an accumulation of trade deficits and a compounding negative multiplier on each trade deficit." Theory then assumed that it would still balance out because "...if a country that ran large trade deficits for a few years [they] would find less demand for their currency and their currency’s value would drop. This would then make it very difficult for that country to import and easy for it to export in terms of its domestic currency. Therefore, the weak currency would help correct the trade imbalance. Indeed, we see this occurring regularly around the world." Lighthizer then found that this didn't work for the U.S. because of the currency's demand in the world as a reserve currency, and the devaluation that other trade partners had done with their currencies. With a threat of a new BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) currency with developing countries dropping the dollar, there would then be a reduction of demand for the U.S. dollar, but this may be a long way off. According to Reuters "the [U.S.] dollar still dominates global trade. It is on one side of almost 90% of global forex transactions, according to Bank of International Settlements Data." The danger would be the mounting U.S. debt because you need people to buy your debt and if there's a sell off, there may not be enough buyers to avoid the U.S. government from having to print excess money to buy back the investments. The increased inflation would be damaging to U.S. dollar purchasing power, even if domestic manufacturing could restart from the high import cost environment.

Economist Sounds Alarm on US Dollar Losing Reserve Currency Status: https://news.bitcoin.com/economist-sounds-alarm-on-us-dollar-losing-reserve-currency-status/

The Path To Hyperinflation with EJ Antoni - TFTC: https://rumble.com/v3r7vlp-456-the-path-to-hyperinflation-with-ej-antoni.html

A lot of these unfair trade practices were also ignored for fear of stoking a trade war. "Trade liberalization came to be seen not just as a tool of economic policy but also as a path to perpetual peace." Lighthizer's book does come after COVID19, but the origin of the pandemic has yet to be investigated with enough thoroughness to prove that it was a lab accident only. Many people still feel intuitively that the release of COVID19 was intentional and a form of escalation in response to Trump's tariffs on China. It certainly doesn't help that China declared a People's War in 2019 before the pandemic. Chinese state media said that, "the Chinese side is fighting back to protect its legitimate interests. The trade war in the US is the creation of one person and one administration, but it affects that country’s entire population...In China, the entire country and all its people are being threatened. For us, this is a real 'people’s war.'" In the Strong Country blog one poster said "[The U.S. is] sucking the blood of the Chinese..." Another comment on the site said, "Why are Chinese people bullied? Because our hearts are too soft!" This would be an argument for peace advocates in the United States to allow mercantilism to continue in China, but Lighthizer would counter that not all wars are stopped by liberal trade policies. "Economic ties between the North and the South did not prevent the Civil War...It would be hard to argue that the rise of Germany as a major exporter in the late nineteenth century helped pacify that country in the first half of the twentieth. Japan’s dependence on raw materials from the United States motivated its attack on Pearl Harbor...China’s accession to the WTO in 2001—which was supposed to make the country a model global citizen—was followed by massive investments in its military capabilities and territorial expansion in the South China Sea. And certainly the great trade between Ukraine and Russia did not stop Putin’s invasion in 2022." Deep down, military situations are more accurately predicted based on the weakness of a target. The easier it is to attack a target, the more enticing it is to do so, like in the pattern of scapegoating described above. Attacking a strong target means that one has to assess casualties and ponder what a loss would look like to one's own sovereignty. A deterrence. Initial attacks are usually on weak targets or on military that are unprepared for the kind of attack planned. Even further, the new slave wage system became a draw down on wages for all world markets so sooner or later the same system would knock on every door and demand entry into all countries.

Chinese state media calls for ‘people’s war’ as US trade conflict escalates: https://nypost.com/2019/05/14/chinese-state-media-calls-for-peoples-war-as-us-trade-conflict-escalates/

China declares a ‘people’s war’ after Trump’s latest tariff hikes: https://thechinaproject.com/2019/05/15/china-declares-a-peoples-war-after-trumps-latest-tariff-hikes/

Chinese scientists discover EIGHT never-before-seen viruses... and now they plan to experiment with them: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12665249/Chinas-discovered-EIGHT-never-seen-viruses-plan-experiment-them.html

REP. ROSENDALE REACTS TO REPORTS THAT WUHAN LAB SHIPPED CORONAVIRUS TO FAUCI-RUN LAB IN HAMILTON PRIOR TO PANDEMIC: https://rosendale.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=691

Increasingly, there have been complaints from populist political commentators worldwide, and a shift between the typical left and right has created strange alliances where now it has become a political a divide between oligarchs and the workers who feel exploited by them. Ex-democrats like Donald Trump, Kari Lake, and Steven Bannon are now in the Republican camp. Big business leaders and big government Marxists have now allied on the side of China and want a continuing of the current mercantilist policies. Populists compare the China One Belt One Road initiative to that of being not a partner with China but a colony with a negative trade balance to match. Part of being a colony means importing the empire politics which then influences local politicians. The original expectation after the fall of the Soviet Union was the countries like China would reform into a representative government like in the west, but in the end it went in the opposite direction.

'Let Me Finish!' Johnny Rotten Makes His Views on Donald Trump Heard | Good Morning Britain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1uOwz_UrQ0

China Girl - David Bowie: https://youtu.be/imSPZt77sKo?si=GqTBSUfKxb5HlCIt

When the money goes from the exporters to the importers, it takes a foreign turn. Your home is where the money is and with globalism, the borders vanish, and as reported above, national values related to constitutions, and human rights are disregarded if the mercantilist country doesn't cherish them. It's just about naked money and power. The O'Keefe Media Group (OMG), for example, got an inside scoop on the giant investment group BlackRock and it became clear the view that people have when they have this much concentrated power.

"All of these financial institutions, they buy politicians."

"How do they run the world?"

"You acquire stuff. You diversify, you acquire, you keep acquiring. You spend whatever you make in acquiring more and at a certain point your risk level is super low...You own a little bit of everything and that little bit everything gives you so much money on a yearly basis, that you can take this big fuck-ton of money, and then you can start to buy people...We have a system in place. First there's the senators. These guys are fucking cheap. You got ten grand? You can buy a senator. It doesn't matter who wins. They're in my pocket at this point."

"Does everybody do that? Does BlackRock do that?"

"Everybody does that."

OMG Blackrock exposé: https://rumble.com/v2vg7ie-blackrock.html

More exposés from Steve Bannon showed the power of lobbyists in the same vein as the HR guy above described during the recent fight for a new GOP speaker. Typically in a representative government it matters who wins and different parties provide a check and balance to each other, but if there's an angle to win personally at the expense of a country then the balance begins to vanish. While watching politics for some time recently since the 2020 election, a certain narcissistic tactic was starting to appear again and again that I recognized by terms like "love bombing" which is a euphemism for the Trojan Horse. Like in the ancient Greek story, it's all about using niceties to bring down the defenses of an enemy and then you attack them at a weak spot. This is used everywhere and there's a long list in politics that never ends. In this context of corrupt politicians it works like this: The politician tells an electorate that wants reform whatever it wants to hear. Then when they are in power they look to lobbyists for directions in order to get more financial rewards. Typically, this leads to retribution at the polls when the politician is grilled on their bad voting record and primaried by another candidate from the same party. The problem is that they've found out how to win even when they lose. Lobbyists can provide job offers and lucrative media contracts so that if they have to leave being a politician they are forgotten about, regain their anonymity, and have increased their prospects. During the fight for a new speaker, because Kevin McCarthy didn't achieve any objectives he agreed to after the election with Rep. Matt Gaetz and other holdouts, Bannon talked about how you "never give the apparatus a second to collect themselves, because they are going to come up and they're going to be spreading money around and cutting deals and bring in more people to their cause. Right? That's where the K-Street lobbyists come in...but I have spies everywhere...The lobbyists were literally walking around cutting deals with people at the tables...to vote against [Jim] Jordan."

Jenny Beth Martin: "Honestly Steve, do you think they are worried if they lose their seat? They're going to have a job lined up with one of those firms. They're going to get some book deal. They'll get a gig on CNN or MSNBC or wherever else they can go to bash all of us, so they know either way they will at least get to keep power and keep access to money and that's what they care about." The divide in the GOP between globalism and populism became very clear with the boos and the criticism of Rep. Matt Gaetz for taking small donations from the general public. "When it comes to how those raise money, I take no lecture on asking patriotic Americans to weigh in and contribute in this fight from those who would grovel and bend for the lobbyists and special interests who own our leadership. Oh boo all you want! Who have hollowed out this town and borrowed against the future of our future generations. I'll be happy to fund my political operation through the work of hardworking Americans, $10 and $20 and $30 dollars at a time and you all keep showing up at the lobbyist fundraisers and see how that goes for you."

Martin Explains The Establishment's Radical Resolution To Install McHenry As The Speaker Permanently: https://rumble.com/v3q5f4v-martin-explains-the-establishments-radical-resolution-to-install-mchenry-as.html

Bannon: "This is the early morning hours of 2016 all over again": https://rumble.com/v3ms086-bannon-this-is-the-early-morning-hours-of-2016-all-over-again.html

The Faux-Right Infiltrating The Republican Party, Destroying Our Nation - Jack Posobiec: https://rumble.com/v3todsd-jack-posobiec-the-faux-right-infiltrating-the-republican-party-destroying-o.html

Many of these lobbyists are all a part of the importing lobby and closely connected with China. Another exposé, this time by Tucker Carlson, unearthed a video from a Chinese economics professor that openly talks about CCP influence in the U.S., what political commentators call Elite Capture, or Pay For Play, where the strategy is to corrupt those who have power and leverage so that even if the population is aware of what's going on, they don't have enough power to do anything about it. The professor explained to an amused audience about how China and the U.S. were able to resolve problems quickly before Trump, it was "because we have people at the top. At the top of America's core inner circle of power & influence."

Tucker Carlson: Our elites' collusion with China is real and widespread: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-elites-china-collusion-di-dongsheng

Of course lobbyists will use all kinds of arguments in their favor and the value of their businesses and what contributions they make to society but usually with important information about their personal interests left out because owners can't really feel the same feelings that workers feel, and they are not likely to drop their contracts and fortunes if they suddenly feel a pang of shame. If ineligible organizations can make social policy without the say so of voters, then the conversion to a one-party state is complete, even if it isn't expressed openly. This also means that the psychological impacts resulting from these policies will continue on because they can't be addressed without upsetting the power balance. Lighthizer connected the emotional component of self-esteem, a recurring theme, that is crucial in all understanding of economics beyond abstraction. "A big part of the elites’ misunderstanding of the situation is that they have no appreciation for the social component of work. Those obsessed with efficiency tend to see employment simply as a means of allocating resources and ensuring production. In so doing, they greatly undervalue the personal dignity that individuals derive from meaningful work. Commentators from Pope Leo XIII in the nineteenth century to Arthur Brooks and Oren Cass today have written eloquently about the central role of work in a well-ordered society. Doing honest work for a decent wage instills feelings of self-worth that come from being needed and contributing to society. Stable, remunerative employment reinforces good habits and discourages bad ones. That makes human beings into better spouses, parents, neighbors, and citizens. By contrast, the loss of personal dignity that comes from the absence of stable, well-paying employment is not something that can be compensated for either by increased consumption of low-cost imported goods or by welfare checks."

Counter arguments from the globalization side would put onus on workers to find retraining and enter more lucrative areas of the free market. "Those that claim that the benefits of interdependence or efficiency justify the costs free trade places on the American working class often argue this negative impact can be offset by retraining that helps workers move into new service sector or technology jobs. In theory, retraining may sound attractive, but this phenomenon has failed to materialize. Compared with those who lost their jobs in earlier periods of economic change, displaced workers in modern, developed economies typically have fewer and less attractive options. Historically speaking, this was not always the case. In the United Kingdom in the nineteenth century, for example, the repeal of the protectionist Corn Laws prompted agricultural workers to flee the countryside for industrializing urban areas where factory jobs were waiting. By contrast, the American factory workers who were displaced beginning in the 1990s either had nowhere to go or ended up working in low-skill, low-paying service jobs...The technology sector, for all its virtues, is not a source of high-paying jobs for working people. Over half of the United States’ roughly 250 million adults lack a college diploma. Historically, manufacturing jobs have been the best source of stable, well-paying employment for this cohort. Perhaps with massive new investments in education, former autoworkers could be taught to code. Even so, there probably wouldn’t be enough jobs to employ them all. Apple, Facebook, Google, and Netflix collectively employ just over 300,000 people—less than half the number that General Motors alone employed in the 1960s...Moreover, the service and technology jobs most accessible to working people, such as data entry and call center jobs, are themselves vulnerable to offshoring. Economists have estimated that nearly forty million service sector jobs in the United States could eventually be sent overseas. That’s more than three times the number of current manufacturing jobs in the country. People without college degrees face increasingly steep obstacles to obtaining stable, well-paying jobs. In sum, the United States has not taken adequate measures to put its own workers first...No great economy in the world has ever given up on manufacturing. To the contrary, they are all for the most part based on it. The vast majority of international trade is in manufactured goods and agriculture. The best jobs for high school graduates are in manufacturing. Most innovation in our economy is in this area. A prosperous, successful future needs a flourishing manufacturing sector...Losing manufacturing jobs, the United States also 'broke the chain of experience that is so important in technological evolution. As happened with batteries, abandoning today’s ‘commodity’ manufacturing can lock you out of tomorrow’s emerging industry.' In every economy, a great deal of innovation comes from manufacturing, and this innovation usually takes place very close to the place of manufacturing. The engineers on the ground are the ones who incorporate much of what we call productivity gains."

For Lighthizer, the response to mercantilist policies is to use tariff leverage to open up markets. "...We should just go to the countries keeping our competitive products out and demand more access. This was our approach in the Trump administration. Countries with enormous trade surpluses with the United States have a lot more to lose from our taking concessions away. We have leverage and should use it...We [also] need to create value to buy things from importers. Of course, some services are exportable, such as banking or professional services, but most are not (think food services or health care)."

The consequences of leaving those without advanced degrees behind is one of an inability to make ends meet, save money, and enter the ownership economy, which allows for more independent political views. If wages are made to be as low as possible then those workers will be unable to invest and the profits earned from lowering wages will just coalesce with a smaller group of owners. Victor Davis Hanson reminds the reader that "we need [the Middle Class] to be present, because without this present, you do not have these independent voices...Unfortunately in our generation it's eroding and we can see it erode in a variety of contexts. The first is, for ten years average wages of the middle class did not rise. Fifty-percent of the country dies with less than $10,000 in aggregate wealth. Over half of Americans die with credit card debt. Their buying options are limited and their choices on how they live are limited. Their chances of home ownership decline simply because they owe a lot of debt. Nowhere is this more dramatic than in student loans. When the student graduates, the average loan is somewhere between $30,000 and $40,000. We have an entire generation of students that are graduating, often with therapeutic degrees and are not able to find jobs that would allow them to pay off this enormous debt. If we came from Mars and looked at the situation, we would just simply say 'you have tens of thousands of serfs or indentured servants. If they are not beholden to their credit card, they are beholden to the federal government and the universities."

The Middle Class and Why Its Disappearing | Victor Davis Hanson: https://youtu.be/r8GeHGQK6fU?si=63QxelPH_gp0yfTt

The sensitive topic of illegal immigration also factors in big when it comes to whether people have a chance to enter the middle class. Labor, like anything in the market, falls under the forces of supply and demand. Wages are dear when employers have to compete for skilled labor that is scarce. Now that the U.S. southern border since 2021 has been opened to millions of illegal immigrants in the United States the pressure is always to renegotiate wages down, including those illegal immigrants who ironically have to compete with each other in the same bottleneck, keeping all of them out of a savings and ownership economy. The divide between the America First and George W. Bush influenced GOP became clear. Since retiring, Bush Jr. has been painting, including portraits of immigrants, and he provided his critique. "It's a beautiful country we have and yet it's not beautiful when we condemn and call people names and scare people about immigration. It's an easy issue to frighten some of the electorate, and I'm trying to have a different kind of voice. I would describe [the current Republican party] as isolationist, protectionist, and to a certain extent nativist." Nativist being a euphemism for racist. One can infer that there's a self-hatred going along with this line of reasoning, but it also ignores the parallel development in psychology to counter co-dependency, where it's common to hear healthcare workers admonished to take care of themselves better, say no, and have boundaries because you can't help others if you can't help yourself. One wonders when politicians around the world will catch on. Bush's view on immigration isn't a completely open border but it should be "pro-enforcement with a compassionate touch." He hinted a bit that he may also be out of touch in the Today interview when he conceded that "[the current Republican view] is not exactly my vision, but I'm just an old guy they put out to pasture, just a simple painter."

George W. Bush: Immigration System 'Needs To Be Reformed' | TODAY: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqJDPSPUZ44

Former President George W. Bush releases new book about America's immigrants: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y1L-ZGDTuk

The quiet comfortable interview unfortunately blurred details and was also dated since the new administration has allowed unprecedented numbers of illegal immigrants undocumented into the country, including in the years up to now. Bush's idea of having more courts and a new vetting system is just another thing that is imaginary but not actually a reality, like his ownership society, which ended up being a debtor society. Lower wages means slave wages, but all politicians would raise their hand if asked if they were against slavery. The topic of having people of different ethnic backgrounds working for cheap is hardly an image to advertise for immigrants who also want to be in the middle class. Bush's view goes back to the old story that certain jobs won't be filled because the wages are too low. "We need to change the work visas. There's a lot of jobs that are empty, and there's a lot of jobs that need to be filled, and there are people willing to work hard to do so." The plight of the middle class is ignored. Biden whispering "pay them more" is not going to magically raise the wages, especially when he opened the border wide open. The negative trade balance was also ignored in this interview. Illegal voting with easy-t0-get driver's licenses was not broached, including changes done in 2019 before the 2020 election. Illegal immigration, especially in the U.S. led to an increase in drug and human trafficking. There are also worries now after the war for Israel has begun that there maybe terrorists that have crossed the open border, which evaporated the entire purpose of Bush's Homeland Security initiatives. The Biden Administration even went further with a trial balloon to just merge the former NAFTA countries into an E.U. style regional government showing how settled their globalist view is.

Biden on Work Shortages, Tells Employers to Pay Workers More: https://youtu.be/h9wANPpPL98?si=5AvnKKKdCWzjRBf9

Governor Josh Shapiro announces switch to Automatic Voter Registration: https://twitter.com/GovernorShapiro/status/1704095982193877181

Lara Logan claims migrants are part of a globalist plot for a unified North American government: https://www.mediamatters.org/one-america-news-network/oan-lara-logan-claims-migrants-are-part-globalist-plan-unified-government

Trial Balloon Merger With Canada Mexico and the U.S - Tucker Carlson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jy1pIrWP44

Donald Trump upset this current establishment which responded with their fear of what reform meant for them and projected it onto the population, except for the fact the establishment didn't have, and still doesn't have, anything the general public would find exciting from them. Who wants debt slavery? Who wants stagflation? Who wants endless wars? In an emotional false-start resignation letter, General Milley made an assumption that Trump was "ruining the international order..." which he misinterpreted as being connected to the Greatest Generation in WWII, which I think would have a bone to pick with this current international order. I'm sure some did support the U.N., the Marshall Plan, etc., but I'm sure that many, if not most, were fighting for their country, and their children, not some nebulous and shifting international order with faceless bureaucrats that resist reforms. Regardless of political labels, this craven behavior should now be expected in any situation where there is a power differential and there's a threat of reform, meaning that people will lose their money and position with said reforms. Each side that reforms another side has a hatred of the people who are gumming up the works and wants them gone. Those who are to be fired feel castrated and mortified. The success or failure of any reform will have to rest with how many people it frees up and helps to thrive while at the same time removes obvious corruption, which always requires vigilance because for many people, corruption is a way of life and it seems unconscionable that enough money can be made with goods and services alone.

‘Your husband is the worst president. You owe us gas money’: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQv5cMSFkdE

Dick Cheney calls Trump a coward "He Lost. He Knows It": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6Nq9SpGzic

😂 Posobiec: I present to you, my dramatic reading of the General Milley resignation letter: https://rumble.com/v1fmezx--posobiec-i-present-to-you-my-dramatic-reading-of-the-general-milley-resign.html

Gen Mark Milley: I Had My Resignation Letter Ready for Trump: https://rumble.com/v3ih4ck-gen-mark-milley-i-had-my-resignation-letter-ready-for-trump.html

When you have a weak population that is like a colony, under taxation without representation, what would it look like? We already covered what it looks like now, which is very compromised, but what would it look like if all dissident reformers are put in jail? The world got a taste of that when the former President of the PRC Hu Jintao was escorted out in a way that looked disconcerting and humiliating to western audiences. Chinese media stated that "When [Hu] was not feeling well during the session, his staff, for his health, accompanied him to a room next to the meeting venue for a rest. Now, he is much better." Some commentators joked that his aids told him "death is a serious condition if you're not careful." Other commentators felt it was more of a middle ground. "What we just saw was the making of an All Xi's Men team, the breaking of decade-long rules, and the birth of an unlimited supreme leader...He is now a truly modern emperor." Hu Jintao did make another appearance later at Jiang Zemin's funeral with Xi Jinping in Dec 2022 showing that at least he wasn't dead. I talked to one Chinese woman who immigrated to Canada about it and she said "we [were] not allowed to talk about that." She found it surprising in Canada when looking at Twitter and all the aggressive back and forth between debaters of different political stripes and how it was possible to criticize top leaders with unlimited sarcasm and derision. This would be a hint that complete freedom of speech would have to end in order to consolidate power to one political aim. Dissent would have to be hidden and kept in closed door meetings and each prospective leader would have to be subservient and then make power grabs at all the right times before ascending to leadership, usually when the prior dictator has gotten too old. Any missteps could lead to expulsion, house arrest or execution.

For example, Zhao Ziyang, the leader who was more favorable to the students at the Tiananmen, lived under house arrest and was allowed some freedoms while being watched intently. His views on Communism grew more towards freedom as time passed. "We needed to establish multiple channels for dialogue—with various social factions, forces, and interests. Decisions on major issues should be made with ongoing consultation and dialogue with various social groups, not just within the Communist Party, and not only after merely consulting once with key figures of other political parties...We had to permit social groups to exist; otherwise, how could dialogue be conducted? Most important, we needed to change the situation in which all social groups—including workers’ unions, youth organizations, women’s organizations, chambers of commerce, and others—were all in monotonous unity with the Communist Party. They should not be treated like the Party’s royal instruments. They have to be able to truly represent the people they are meant to represent. Only dialogue conducted with groups of this kind would carry any real meaning. In other words, their function as intermediate organizations should be fully developed. The Communist Party should not take control of everything or interfere so much in their affairs, and should give them room for independent activities...We must establish laws that guarantee the protection of specific aspects, for example, freedom of association, assembly, demonstrations, petitions, and strikes. All these should be protected by specific laws." Of course these reforms never came to pass. His son Zhao Wujun said that "Zhao lived to see the consequences of rapid, unfettered economic growth in the absence of checks on government powers–rampant corruption, crony capitalism, one of the widest wealth gaps in the world and widespread social discontent...The things he wanted to do were abandoned…more than a decade of his sweat and blood was ruined in an instant...We have missed a huge historical opportunity to transform society. I don’t know if history will give us another chance."

Hu Jintao's Removal - CCP 20th National Congress: https://archive.ph/20221022153634/https://twitter.com/XHNews/status/1583829797297598465

Xi Jinping and Hu Jintao were on hand to bid farewell to Jiang Zemin: https://www.zaobao.com.sg/realtime/china/story20221205-1340592

Son of purged reformer Zhao Ziyang tells of China's 'shame', 25 years after Tiananmen: https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2014/05/son-purged-zhao-ziyang-tells-chinas-shame/

AI WEIWEI: NEVER SORRY - Official Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MYFOzP6Xns

Getting centralized control to give up power is one of the most difficult knots to untie for any reformers in any country, and this was not lost on presidential candidate Javier Milei who described leftist politics in his country as being seduced by Antonio Gramsci. Tucker in a couple of episodes also interviewed an Argentine economist and a business owner about what the economy is like in Argentina, before getting Javier's take on the situation. "We are 47 million people, out of which 11 million people have what you call a job. Slightly under 3.5 million people work for government, and 7 million people work in the private sector. So 10 to 11 million people out of 47, 25% of the people, [if you take out government workers], 1/7th of the population will have a private job...7 million people are working to support the other 40 million people. 60% of the children are poor...In Argentina the incentives now are so perversely inverted that many people decide that it's not worth working. They can make more money sitting home idle." To a restaurant owner this was due to high taxes and expensive union dues. The psychological impact of this kind of system was described by Javier like the typical Cycle of Abuse and The Battered Wife, where "politicians are kind of sociopaths. They want to believe that we are mentally disabled, disabled in every way, because we cannot live without them. In fact, they are the ones who cannot live without us." One of the ideas he warned Tucker about was "the idea that where there is a need there is a right. It's a problem because there can be infinite needs but someone always has to pay for those rights, and the resources for that are finite. That sparks a conflict between infinite needs and finite resources...Under my administration...they should have no reason to complain. There won't be any layoffs in the first round of reforms, and when the second round of reforms takes place, they will be able to leave behind their public sector jobs, because they will have an incentive to do so, and they will be paid better." Considering that Bolsonaro in Brazil and Donald Trump in the U.S. are currently under lawfare by their opponents, I think Javier will have to put on his seatbelt if he thinks the opposition will make it easy for him to just walk in and make changes.

Argentina's economy - Tucker Carlson: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1702079713622299100

Javier Milei. Who is he? - Tucker Carlson: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1702442099814342725

Bolsonaro Again Ruled Ineligible to Hold Public Office by Brazil Electoral Court: https://news.yahoo.com/bolsonaro-again-ruled-ineligible-hold-232806102.html

Trump’s presidential ballot eligibility on trial in Colorado and Minnesota: https://www.axios.com/2023/10/31/trump-14th-amendment-trials-colorado-minnesota

Prosecutor files case against Argentina’s frontrunner Javier Milei days before presidential election: https://apnews.com/article/milei-picardi-peso-fernandez-argentina-02db52be25b493ca0f1d10fec9d6f017

It's best not to forget that when you trade with people, or if you are involved with people in friendships or intimate relationships, you are receiving strong signals from people who need repeated confirmations that they are respected. Many others need confirmations that they are special and superior. China expert Jack Posobiec worked in China and remembered how focused the Chinese were in wanting to turn the tables on the U.S. "I'll never forget this one. These are people I worked with by the way, and they weren't saying this in a hateful way or an angry way. They were just saying it matter of fact. They said 'we want to see a world where Chinese parents are one day adopting American babies.'" It's safe to assume that when you deal with people there are always hidden concerns in the background about power, self-esteem, envy, jealousy, and resentment.

China is going to eat our lunch - Jack Posobiec: https://rumble.com/v2r7ocg-jack-posobiec-chinas-going-to-eat-our-lunch..html

Even if reforms seem clear that there should be more work and production, with a reducing of some government spending, along with a reduction of interest rates, and how that will resurrect an economy, some of these economic principles are going to be challenged by the incoming developments of Artificial Intelligence (A.I). If the technology develops as quickly as developers contend it will, you'll have a situation of overproduction when the newly unemployed can't buy any products produced by the A.I. that replaced them. If there's a minimum income introduced, and if taxes are implemented to replace all the wages lost, what will life be like? Will a universal basic income allow the same human freedoms as before? What would psychology look like if one just pursued hobbies and didn't have to go to work? Would the lack of power when there are no wages or labor to negotiate with lead to another form of slavery?

#robert lighthizer #trade war #trade deficit #rust belt #economics #trade balance #donald trump #object relations #fear of success

0 notes

nuadox · 3 months

Text

China’s chip industry is gaining momentum – it could alter the global economic and security landscape

- By Robyn Klingler-Vidra , Steven Hai, King's College London , The Conversation -

China’s national champions for computer chip – or semiconductor – design and manufacturing, HiSilicon and Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC), are making waves in Washington.

SMIC was long considered a laggard. Despite being the recipient of billions of dollars from the Chinese government since its founding in 2000, it remained far from the technological frontier. But that perception — and the self-assurance it gave the US — is changing.

In August 2023, Huawei launched its high-end Huawei Mate 60 smartphone. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (an American think tank based in Washington DC), the launch “surprised the US” as the chip powering it showed that Chinese self-sufficiency in HiSilicon’s semiconductor design and SMIC’s manufacturing capabilities were catching up at an alarming pace.

More recent news that Huawei and SMIC are scheming to mass-produce so-called 5-nanometre processor chips in new Shanghai production facilities has only stoked further fears about leaps in their next-generation prowess. These chips remain a generation behind the current cutting-edge ones, but they show that China’s move to create more advanced chips is well on track, despite US export controls.

The US has long managed to maintain its clear position as the frontrunner in chip design, and has ensured it was close allies who were supplying the manufacturing of cutting-edge chips. But now it faces formidable competition from China, who’s technological advance carries profound economic, geopolitical and security implications.

Semiconductors are a big business

For decades, chipmakers have sought to make ever more compact products. Smaller transistors result in lower energy consumption and faster processing speeds, so massively improve the performance of a microchip.

Moore’s Law — the expectation that the number of transistors on a microchip doubles every two years — has remained valid in chips designed in the Netherlands and the US, and manufactured in Korea and Taiwan. Chinese technology has therefore remained years behind. While the world’s frontier has moved to 3-nanometre chips, Huawei’s homemade chip is at 7 nanometres.

Maintaining this distance has been important for economic and security reasons. Semiconductors are the backbone of the modern economy. They are critical to telecommunications, defence and artificial intelligence.

The US push for “made in the USA” semiconductors has to do with this systemic importance. Chip shortages wreak havoc on global production since they power so many of the products that define contemporary life.

Today’s military prowess even directly relies on chips. In fact, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “all major US defence systems and platforms rely on semiconductors.”

The prospect of relying on Chinese-made chips — and the backdoors, Trojan horses and control over supply that would pose — are unacceptable to Washington and its allies.

Stifling China’s chip industry

Since the 1980s, the US has helped establish and maintain a distribution of chip manufacturing that is dominated by South Korea and Taiwan. But the US has recently sought to safeguard its technological supremacy and independence by bolstering its own manufacturing ability.

Through large-scale industrial policy, billions of dollars are being poured into US chip manufacturing facilities, including a multi-billion dollar plant in Arizona.

The second major tack is exclusion. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States has subjected numerous investment and acquisition deals to review, ultimately even blocking some in the name of US national security. This includes the high-profile case of Broadcom’s attempt to buy Qualcomm in 2018 due to its China links.

In 2023, the US government issued an executive order inhibiting the export of advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment and technologies to China. By imposing stringent export controls, the US aims to impede China’s access to critical components.

The hypothesis has been that HiSilicon and SMIC would continue to stumble as they attempt self-sufficiency at the frontier. The US government has called on its friends to adopt a unified stance around excluding chip exports to China. Notably, ASML, a leading Dutch designer, has halted shipments of its hi-tech chips to China on account of US policy.

Washington has also limited talent flows to the Chinese semiconductor industry. The regulations to limit the movements of talent are motivated by the observation that even “godfathers” of semiconductor manufacturing in Japan, Korea and Taiwan went on to work for Chinese chipmakers — taking their know-how and connections with them.

This, and the recurring headlines about the need for more semiconductor talent in the US, has fuelled the clampdown on the outflow of American talent.

Finally, the US government has explicitly targeted China’s national champion firms: Huawei and SMIC. It banned the sale and import of equipment from Huawei in 2019 and has imposed sanctions on SMIC since 2020.

What’s at stake?

The “chip war” is about economic and security dominance. Beijing’s ascent to the technological frontier would mean an economic boom for China and bust for the US. And it would have profound security implications.

Economically, China’s emergence as a major semiconductor player could disrupt existing supply chains, reshape the division of labour and distribution of human capital in the global electronics industry. From a security perspective, China’s rise poses a heightened risk of vulnerabilities in Chinese-made chips being exploited to compromise critical infrastructure or conduct cyber espionage.

Chinese self-sufficiency in semiconductor design and manufacturing would also undermine Taiwan’s “silicon shield”. Taiwan’s status as the leading manufacturer of semiconductors has so far deterred China from using force to attack the island.

China is advancing its semiconductor capabilities. The economic, geopolitical and security implications will be profound and far-reaching. Given the stakes that both superpowers face, what we can be sure about is that Washington will not easily acquiesce, nor will Beijing give up.

Robyn Klingler-Vidra, Associate Dean, Global Engagement | Associate Professor in Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, King's College London and Steven Hai, Affiliate Fellow, King’s Institute for Artificial Intelligence, King’s College London, King's College London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.