>>>Was it really bad for US until China started working on 5G and trying to become independent in semiconductor sector?

Yes, it's bad because "naval strategy is build strategy", and all of that industrial activity and technical know-how exported to China has facilitated the buildup of a massive, modern, increasingly-blue-water Navy and supporting Air Force that is postured specifically to challenge the US. The US Navy's global presence and open sealane patrolling is key to enforcement of the Petrodollar system, and therefore one of the lynchpins of American economic hegemony. Eventually China will challenge the US, and the US will either back down or lose. Either way, expect the global order to change, the Petrodollar to go away, and the US economy to collapse....and we'll have basically spent 30+ years making down-payments on our own destruction.

At least that's the theory.

A US economic collapse would be real hard on China, given how much of our national debt is owed to Chinese creditors.

Not necessarily. China doesn't really have many options, when it comes to parking USD. If USD collapses, 0 chance of that happening any time soon, then CNY would probably take over the spot... That would balance out Chinese losses.

People have been going on about China in the US since their ascension to the WTO. Plenty of federal politicians have been elected on platforms for pushing hawkwish trade policy with China.

Obama and Romney both ran with the policy of designating China a currency manipulator in 2008: https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/03/currency-manip...

Which is fascinating because the TPP that got bi-partisaned slamming in 2016 was an anti-China trade agreement for the APAC region.

When the TPP fell through, China moved in with it's own version lock down the region called RCEP.

I think that's a bit of a selective history though. In the 1990s there were plenty of politicians that fervently supported it, though the reasons they supported probably had something to do with this[1].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_fi...

The parent comment implied that the US has done a very sudden turnaround of belief; that's a selective reading of history.

The US has always had undertones of economic nationalism, particularly around jobs getting outsourced to China. It just took a while for the pot to boil over.

The complete destruction of domestic labor markets could be considered a "negative"

> Because until that time globalism was pretty profitable in terms of trade and relations for US.

It still is.

It's profitable for certain strata of economic classes and is destructive for most of the rest. But "in the aggregate the pie gets bigger", so Macroecon 101 is conserved. Yay.

You're being downvoted for being right. People without stock market share or who work as FTE for the hyper-successful tech companies are the only ones befitting under the guise of "lifting up underprivileged people around the world". It's disingenuous at best, nefarious at worst.