American businesses have the power to change China’s behavior

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/03/american-businesses-have-power-change-chinas-behavior-time-step-up/

by jger15 • 6 years ago

86 83 6 years ago

blackrock• 6 years ago

LOL. What a load of lies.

American businesses had the power to change American behavior in the 1800s and 1900s. Did they do it? No.

American businesses could have helped outlawed slavery in America. They could have forced the issue onto their politicians. Did they do it? No.

Then in the 1900s, American businesses could have outlawed racism. They could have forced civil rights onto their politicians. Did they do it? No.

And today. American businesses can force the end of police violence against minorities onto their politicians. Are they doing it? No.

American businesses can ensure fair distribution of wages, and financial equality, and social equality to help their minority citizens. Are they doing it? No.

Hence, give me some evidence that American businesses can actually do something useful at home first, before making them a pawn in this stupid game of geopolitics that the Washington elites are playing against a nation on the other side of the world, and forcing the rest of us to choose sides on. When, they themselves do nothing for us.

My point is, the problems we have in America, has nothing to do with China. This is all home grown. We have within ourselves, the ability to make life better, fairer, and more equitable to all Americans. Instead, what does the politicians do? Nothing. Instead, they do everything to support the rich, and the elite. While the rest of us gets fleeced, are lied to, and gets hoodwinked.

The biggest lie that they sold to us, is that Trickle Down Economics will work for everyone. That tax cuts for the wealthy will help drive business growth. Trickle Down Economics should instead be renamed to Trickle Up Economics.

The problem is not China. The problem is our corrupt political and financial system.

arcticbull2• 6 years ago

I guess the question this article asks is what, if anything has changed since the examples you cite.

perl4ever• 6 years ago

There are places where a "corrupt political and financial system" intersect with China.

I was kind of startled to find out that Chinese companies listed in the US are not held to the same standards as those from the US and other countries,[1] because the Chinese government will not allow auditing in the same way. It seems this is a genuine issue and not about xenophobia, even if it gets muddled with it by people who just don't like China. And it is corruption.

Threatening to move listings out of the US, while of course it is an option, does not seem (or should not be) relevant to the US changing policies which have been corrupted due to Chinese demands based on "national security". It's about the US fixing its problems, not China per se.

It's easy for a casual observer to see the Trump administration saying something and dismiss it, especially as their credibility is so low many news articles are automatically slanted. However, the SEC and PCAOB have some credibility to me.

[1]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-china-exchan...

thoughtstheseus• 6 years ago

Also concerning is the amount of resource allocation / decisions being made by companies rather than individual people. It has changed dramatically since the 1800s.

rayiner• 6 years ago

American businesses could have helped outlawed slavery in America. They could have forced the issue onto their politicians. Did they do it?

They were instrumental in ending slavery! In the first half of the 19th century, politics was dominated by conflict over the status of slavery in the new territories that were being added to the US. The Missouri Compromise in 1820 held off the civil war for a bit, outlawing slavery in states above the 36th parallel. Over the next 40 years, after the federalists disappeared, business interests in the north mostly belonged to the Whig party. (They had little to no power in the south, which was an agrarian economy where political power rested with landowners, not people whose wealth was built on commerce, finance, or industry.) Whig Presidents compromised with Democrats to maintain the status quo. During that time, Northern industrialists resented the political power of the slave states. On policy issues like tariffs, federal investment in railroads, central banking, etc., northern commercial interests were fundamentally at odds with southern plantation interests.

In 1854, Democrats, under President Franklin Pierce, pushed through the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which repealed the Missouri Compromise by leaving it to states to decide whether to have slavery. This led to the anti-Nebraska anti-slavery movement, and violence between pro-slavery and anti-slavery interests in Kansas. The Republican Party was created out of the anti-Nebraska movement. The Republican Party was built on two principles: anti-slavery, and economic modernization.

In 1856, Republicans lost the election against James Buchanan. They ran Abraham Lincoln in 1860, on a platform of opposing the expansion of slavery, building a pacific railroad, tariffs, and improving the channels of commerce (harbors, rivers). See: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-p.... While Lincoln said he wasn’t going to ban slavery in the southern states—the south feared he would. (Rightfully so, given that the platform called the slave trade “a crime against humanity and a burning shame to our country and age.”) Lincoln’s election precipitated the southern states to secede.

Then, of course, there was the civil war. During the civil war, Republicans worked closely with business and financial interests to modernize the economy: https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/the-economics-of.... That paid for the massive military superiority that crushed the south.

skybrian• 6 years ago

The article doesn't really support the headline. It concedes that we can't know if it will help and makes more of a yolo argument instead:

It’s possible, of course, that the Chinese might decide to give up U.S. markets rather than liberalize, as they gave up Hong Kong’s usefulness as a financial hub. But if we can make a difference, we should find out.

DaiPlusPlus• 6 years ago

as they gave up Hong Kong’s usefulness as a financial hub

Did they though? Many banks are still based there - but relative to the rest of the PRC, HK became less important because the rest of the country developed at lightning pace.

arcticbull2• 6 years ago

Up until a week ago, HK hadn't been abandoned as a financial hub. Things are moving fast, so let's keep a look out.

dan-robertson• 6 years ago

It’s unclear. The usefulness of Hong Kong is supposed to stem from it being a bridge between China and the global financial system (allowing Chinese firms to raise foreign capital and Chinese citizens to get their money out of China), and secondarily as a place with stable legal institutions which are useful to businesses. It seems like the former advantage is being reduced through HK’s special treatment being reduced, and the latter may or may not go away for businesses but I think that remains to be seen.

gruez• 6 years ago

There's this: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-27/pompeo-fi... from a month ago.

creato• 6 years ago

Despite Collison’s example, most CEOs probably won’t take that risk on their own; they will be too afraid of being undercut by less scrupulous competitors who retain their access to China’s markets and manufacturing prowess. So on this Fourth of July, it falls to the American public...

This is the weakness of American individualism. Some form of organization is necessary to achieve anything meaningful here. This is a job for regulation/trade policy. Attempting to shame individual companies or "the public" is at best pointless, and at worst a distraction from a real solution.

There's a pretty funny example here from the tech world: web search, google, and microsoft. What has been achieved by google abandoning the Chinese search market? It sure as hell isn't respect for that decision. Far more vitriol (even at the level of US congress) has been directed at google over this than microsoft, who operate bing in China!

Don't get me wrong, google deserved the criticism over dragonfly. But where is the outrage over microsoft operating bing under China's censorship policies? This is why organization/regulation is required: people are really bad at maintaining a coherent position even in the absence of market pressures, which are massive in the case of trade with China.

anon5774787557• 6 years ago

“Out of our regard to them we gave them Bing, two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect.” — William Trent, William Trent's Journal at Fort Pitt

systemvoltage2• 6 years ago

2017 - I remember when Trump had initiated the trade war, it was such a taboo to support it. I am not a fan of trump but the progressives in the Silicon Valley would abandon me in a mob mentality god forbid if I said something I like about Trump. I had pretty unpleasant pushbacks during lunch breaks and then I stopped discussing things all together.

Living here in the valley, I wonder what’s the difference between aggressively progressive places and aggressively conservative places like a small town in Arkansas? To me, they are both intolerant of opposing views, don't think for themselves and subscribe to extremely strong stances.

Being a centrist, I feel like I am exiled in this country by all sides. The stronger one's view, the more burden is on them to prove their view with data, successive chain of logic and reasoning. I am constantly wary of my own views because either circumstances change, my understanding improves or new data is available. This is the HN way.

crunchyfrog• 6 years ago

Trump's trade war was an attempt to pressure China to reduce the trade deficit and help him in the 2020 election. It had absolutely nothing to do with human rights. If anything, Trump admires dictators who violate the human rights of their citizens.

There absolutely nothing logical about supporting a policy that superficially looks like a policy you support but has entirely different goals.

refurb• 6 years ago

Indeed. The tactics and intolerance for different opinions is pretty similar on both ends of the political spectrum.

I think the US would make a huge leap forward if different political opinions we're viewed with "I disagree with you" versus "your beliefs mean youre a bad person".

11thEarlOfMar6• 6 years ago

It was inconceivable to me even one year ago that American citizens could be beaten in public for supporting the president.

This is not rational in any explanation.

rdlecler13• 6 years ago

As a centrist saying. Irving particularly offensive your post was downvoted. I feel my days on HN are numbered. One used to be able to have an intellectually honest discussion. Now step out of line and it’s downvotes. This kind of monoculture isn’t healthy.

addicted2• 6 years ago

Nothing Trump has done has come close to the massive gift Trump gave China by killing the TPP.

This idea that Trump is somehow harder on China is laughable.

Trump has been screaming China loudly, but his actions amount to barely a whimper, and the cost has been paid overwhelmingly by Americans.

TPP on the other hand would have actually been effective by giving American companies 4-5 alternative countries they could relocate their operations too, with the added incentive that the TPP requirements would have protected their IP from being stolen like it is in China. And it would have cost the US nothing, because the relocated businesses were not in the US anyways, but were in China.

In fact, the added diversity of countries to manufacture would have probably made it even more of a win for the US.

The idea that Trump has been anything but a massive gift for China is ridiculous. There’s a reason China has ramped up its aggressiveness worldwide towards the end of the Trump admin (although they are probably clearly overreaching, but they realize this might be their last chance to make hay without the US doing anything).

mr_toad• 6 years ago

Sanctions will hurt factory workers and their families. And they’ll hurt US consumers. But Xi will still be grinning.

If you really want to give the finger to China, dispense with the one China policy.

rdlecler13• 6 years ago

Collision could have looked at it very mathematically. It’s unlikely they would ultimately succeed in China, but if they take a stand, I’m willing to bet they win over more customers and employers. Call this a cynical view but if the majority of their revenue was from China I don’t think we would have seen that comment.

lefstathiou• 6 years ago

Said differently, it doesn’t take courage to take a stand on a position that costs you (your employees and their families) nothing.

saltedonion4• 6 years ago

This article is incredibly ignorant, and is more of the same realities detached day dreaming that the left likes to partake.

Why should American businesses voluntarily abandon an sizable overseas market and supply chain when China keeps getting access to our home market? In effect, placing a punitive tariff over our own heads and puts our American firms at a competitive disadvantage over our European and Chinese counterparts? Why should such a tax be born by the American corporation, workers and taxpayers?

If America has decided to decouple from China, then the solution should be legislative as it creates a level playing field for all firms involved, such that no one in particular is punished by a voluntary withdraw.

The saving grace is I believe world leaders are aware of this “you withdraw you loose” dilemma and are starting to cooperate to form a unified front against China. Donald Trump did well in waking the world up against the Chinese threat, but I’m afraid we now need a diplomat to finish the war.

tanilama3• 6 years ago

Abandon money for virtue signaling?

This is a capitalistic world, money will go where it can multiply itself.

US can leave China as they want, will EU follow? How about Japan? My bet will be that they will be happy to take up the vacuum US left and make a huge fortune out of it.

Corporate America, if they can act coordinately, they can fix so many things domestically in this country. Yet, they didn't and probably won't. It make zero sense that they can achieve that in China.

bigpumpkin• 6 years ago

So rather than competing with the duopoly of AliPay and WeChat, Stripe decided to not enter the Chinese market because it will change China's behavior- Somehow letting the profits flow to two Chinese giants will help its society become more free.

saltedonion4• 6 years ago

That’s not the real problem. The real problem is By leaving America is doing charity work. Another player from another country is just going to fill in the void. The idea of voluntary exit is as good as we should all be model citizens.

Indeed an idea as good as communism. It’s beautiful on paper.

boznz• 6 years ago

American Consumers have even more power, look at the human rights records of the countries you are buying products from rather than just looking at the lowest sticker price.

Tiktaalik3• 6 years ago

Can you even buy a smartphone that's not assembled in China?

axaxs2• 6 years ago

Sure. Nokia apparently is making some in India. Samsung does some in S Korea and some in Vietnam, unless that's changed recently.

dathinab6• 6 years ago

Fairphone 3 is pretty open about where parts come from, where it's assembled and which (moral) standards are applied for there selection of suppliers.

It's also supper repairable (iFixit score 10 of 10).

Problems:

- It has not so good spec, for people which need a high-end (or higher middle-end) smartphone not a option.

- For the spec it has it's expensive.

- It's somewhat clunky. (But hey even a non tech person can repair it.)

- The speakers are at a strange position.

- The microphone is so-so. For usage in normal handy mode it's ok, but audio quality in speaker/video conference mode is bad (but then hey, for that you probably should use a headset anyway).

Good thinks include repairability, close to stock android, large battery, dual sim, micro sd card (yes 2 sims + 1 sd card can be used), NFC, known to get updates for as long as they can afford it, I think it's unlocked.

So if don't use your phone for things it bad at and you are not tight on money it's a totally reasonable option.

pmoriarty• 6 years ago

Unfortunately, people who can't afford to pay for any but the cheapest goods far outnumber those who can.

dathinab6• 6 years ago

human rights records of the countries you are buying products from

Good, idea.

I tried. I ended up with a Fairphone3. I like it, it's ok for me but unsuitable for probably many use cases.

It's hard to do so and still get performant tech. It's hard to even know where the parts came from. Not just for tech but anything you buy.

This is even worse in countries which have weak consumer protection laws and consumers can be duped into beliving it's e.g. from the US when only the last assembly step is done in the US but 90% of the work is done in e.g. China.

Lastly wouldn't that also mean that US products can't be bought. I mean the US not only never signed the human right charter they also never recognized the rights in it independent of the charter. Partially because they where committing human right violations all the times back then.

Tiktaalik3• 6 years ago

In the 1980s the West used boycotts and divestment to criticize apartheid South Africa. It's time the West does the same to China to criticize its treatment of the Uyghurs.

The problem though as an individual consumer is that electronics products made in China are so ubiquitous that it's difficult to impossible navigate a boycott.

Please HNers at big corps, if you are in any sort of position to influence where your hardware products are made, please push to have your products made elsewhere.

wonnage3• 6 years ago

This is a curious comment in that the West set up apartheid in the first place. Millions of Africans suffered under it and thousands died in the struggle to overthrow it. The role that external condemnation from western countries played, if any, pales in comparison to what actual Africans sacrificed and accomplished.

Western sanctions generally produce misery and discontent as their main outcomes. North Korea has been sanctioned for decades and shows no signs of responding positively. Iraq was sanctioned for decades until the US invaded and further ruined the lives of everyone there.

novok• 6 years ago

The reason why north korea is still around is because China enables it's existence, and as a result, that little hell, which wasn't that much different from china 35 years ago, still persists.

Tiktaalik3• 6 years ago

I'm not calling for sanctions I'm calling for boycotts.

Sanctions means that a country can't buy the raw materials it needs for its citizens.

Boycotts mean that foreign consumers don't buy the products the country produces.

Massive difference.

dathinab6• 6 years ago

Honestly it's unlikely. At most they will delay China, maybe make it pretend for a bit it changed.

China is clearly pursing US Tech independence since a long time. They are not there yet, but they constantly get closer. If Tech companies in US/EU would have been more careful with cooperation and IT-espionage maybe then it would be true. But by now it's pretty much to late. They already have a solid enough foundation to become US Tech independent. The question is just how long it will take. And how it currently looks not too long.

echelon2• 6 years ago

Do you want to live in a world where the CCP is the dominant superpower? They have a perfect Orwellian state, destroy ethnic minorities, purge ideas that don't fit the narrative, steal land and resources, harvest organs from prisoners, ...

I think we should do anything under our power to prevent that fate. Bolster every other nation in the region, give Japan a powerful navy, replace their one belt with our own. Build out Vietnam's and India's industrial capability, and get started on Africa. Unite with all other Democratic nations in a trade agreement that shuns the China/Russia sphere.

Maybe we can make their system rupture from the inside.

throwaway554344• 6 years ago

When the US finally became a superpower, there were still Jim Crow laws and minorities were second class citizens that could be killed for looking at someone the wrong way.

It took decades for the US to change and for Civil Rights to truly take hold.

It’s entirely possible the China we know today will be completely different once it’s a superpower.

dathinab6• 6 years ago

Do you want to live in a world where the CCP is the dominant superpower?

No!

But if we belive that US companies can effectively change China and try to use that we are already on the losing end.

wonnage3• 6 years ago

Makes me think of a current superpower which committed multiple genocides against a native population, enslaved and represses to this day ethnic minorities, is in perpetual undeclared war with oil-producing countries, purposefully infected its own free citizens with syphillis and observed them over the course of 40 years....

alfiedotwtf2• 6 years ago

They have a perfect Orwellian state

Snowden

destroy ethnic minorities

Native Americans

purge ideas that don't fit the narrative

“Fake news”

steal land and resources

Native Americans

harvest organs from prisoners

Nothing yet, but who knows under Trump

remarkEon2• 6 years ago

They already have a solid enough foundation to become US Tech independent.

Highly skeptical of this. All of the manufacturing infrastructure that actually makes the chips in these fabs everyone is so excited about is still made ... in the United States and Germany. China can't do this today, but they may be able to do it in the future. The opportunity for the West to cut them off is closing very fast, however. Cut them off now, before it's too late.

justicezyx5• 6 years ago

I see no reason a country with 1.4 billion people won't catch up another one with significantly smaller population.

Edit: record reference to racial difference

justicezyx5• 6 years ago

Note that China had been under embargo since 1989 from high technology products. There simply was no option other than independence.

Gorge Kennan, the author of the X article incept the containment strategy, often contended: there needs to be options for USSR (often in criticizing US foreign policy that is highly ideology charged and leave minimal policy maneuver for USSR).

Of course, it was totally reasonable to enforce embargo after 1989. That was an attempt to force spontaneous changes in the Chinese society, after an obviously unacceptable behavior from the government.

However, no one studied the Chinese people. They are more willing to correct the wrongs made to them in the past, than bend to external pressure. The pressure, which has been on this ancient nation since 1840, never managed to break the nation. And this time the result won't be different either.

pupdogg• 6 years ago

As much as I want to believe your reasoning, I just can’t fathom how Chinese copycats could actually yield next generation tech...have you had a chance to search “Chinese structure collapses” on YouTube? I believe there are over a hundred videos showcasing their ingenuity.

justicezyx5• 6 years ago

Yes copycat cannot innovate. But Eric Schmidt believe China are no longer copying:

""" "I have carried the prejudices about China in my years working with them," he said.

"That they're very good at copying things, that they're very good at organising things, that they throw large numbers of people at it. But they're not going to do anything new. They're very, very good at stealing, if you will, our stuff. Those prejudices need to be thrown out.

"The Chinese are just as good, and maybe better, in key areas of research and innovation as the West.

"They're putting more money into it. They are putting it in a different way, it is state-directed in a way that is different from the West. We need to get our act together to compete." """

Aperocky• 6 years ago

So if you do believe that out of a billion people and all they can do is copy, I don't know if that is prejudice or racism.

Also, have you had a chance to search 'Chinese structure built' on youtube? You won't find anything because it's not newsworthy. Every now and then something gets stolen and people are upset. When Chinese companies actually invents something you'd never hear about it - or you're quick to jump on the sanction bandwagon, e.g. tiktok, huawei.

tanilama3• 6 years ago

The Chinese can't innovate or create is really just a relic of 90's racism+orientalism. Seriously, only if you believe somehow the Chinese people have different brain structure, there is absolutely no reason why they can't do what West can do.

Yes Chinese wasn't doing super innovative stuff back like 10 years ago.

Reason? Because they don't have to. There is easier money to make at a lower segment of the market that fits them better. The China back then is under developed, spending in R&D isn't something that would benefit them than simply importing last-gen Western technology.

Now they have educated themselves and clambbed up the value chain, that is when the innovations become profitable to them.

The West still enjoys some advantage, in certain key areas, but it is diminishing, and diminishing fast.

fomine3• 6 years ago

Anyway, Look real companies like DJI

jasonlingx• 6 years ago

Let’s take a step back and look at the quote in the article’s opening paragraph: “As a US business (and tech) community I think we should be significantly clearer about our horror at, and opposition to, the atrocities being committed by the Chinese government against its own people.”

Now let’s swap the words “US” and “Chinese” around. Maybe it’s not so absurd after all.

philliphaydon• 6 years ago

Doesn’t seem to work.

arkis22• 6 years ago

The entire point of China pushing HK is that China thinks they don't need HK anymore.

dathinab6• 6 years ago

And that China sees HK to some degree as a symbol of shame.

Else they might just have keep it for some more years because it doesn't hurt them I thing, well more like guess.

tengbretson• 6 years ago

American businesses are Chinese businesses.

American businesses have the power to change China’s behavior

Related Stories