News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The China tea trade was a paradox of global capitalism. Parent comment

Re:The China tea trade was a paradox of global capitalism by boomboomsubban on Monday May 25, 2020 @05:47PM (#23305307)
>We can't take it as given, without proof that the British did manufacture a demand for it.

We know that the British increased poppy cultivation and manufactured a monopoly on opium for the purpose of export to China. Without it, I don't see how the Chinese demand would grow at the level it did. I have no idea what "proof" would be, an alternate world without British interference?

>How could the British have manufactured demand, if they could not even enter China outside of Hong Kong?

Guessing you meant Canton here, by smuggling/buying off locals.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The China tea trade was a paradox of global capitalism by solidsnack9000 on Monday May 25, 2020 @09:23PM (#23306554)
How do these things increase demand for opium?

Having a monopoly on opium doesn't make people want more of it. Smuggling doesn't make more of it, either. What you're describing are both forms of taking control of supply, and don't speak to demand.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The China tea trade was a paradox of global capitalism by boomboomsubban on Monday May 25, 2020 @10:42PM (#23306958)
By taking control of supply they were able to lower the sale cost, allowing more people to partake in the addictive substance. Making more people want opium isn't difficult.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The China tea trade was a paradox of global capitalism by solidsnack9000 on Monday May 25, 2020 @11:30PM (#23307138)
The arrow of causality runs in the other direction. Lower prices meet unmet demand.

When one supplier takes control of supply, that doesn't generally lead to lower prices; but expanding production -- which the British did -- certainly can.

[ Parent | on HN ]