Tesla was one of the first US companies to operate with the level of autonomy they have in China. Perhaps there is some retribution from the CCP, but such is the consequence of doing business with a totalitarian state.
Our country is founded on a free market economy and competition. If a Chinese company outcompetes US companies... well that means our system is working.
If we decide that rounding up Muslims is a no good very bad idea it follows that we should probably try to do less business with those who do or at the very least do business on terms less favorable to them.
I think the scope and actions matter. Responding to tariffs with tariffs makes perfect sense, for instance. Punishing individuals makes less sense (eg. if china decided to send all expat americans in china to concentration camps, doing the same to chinese americans wouldn't make sense).
>If a Chinese company outcompetes US companies... well that means our system is working.
It's a good sign that a US company can outcompete a chinese company, even with a handicap, but it's a not a desirable situation.
Some say yes, specifically some in the current administration... But ignoring my glib & pointless attack at a few powerful racists: this tangent of the tangent has very little to do with that the previous posters were saying.
The comparison would only be valid if rounding up the Muslim population has some effect on commercial interests specifically the giving commercial interests in the country doing the rounding up an advantage over those in the other country.
We've been accusing China of "unfair tariffs" when in reality we actually benefit from exploiting their cheap labor and sell them back the same iPhone they assembled for something like 10x the markup. Trying to say this is a reactionary tariff is disingenuous, when the trade balance has been in this state for decades, and the only real reason we're starting to ban their tech exports is because it's getting dangerously competitive with our own. It's shaking our foundational beliefs that our system is destined to win, and now we're resorting to the tactics of our rivals in a moment of insecurity.
Giving up the moral high ground is not a move of a superpower, and aides in destabilising the geopolitical playing field.
At the core of it, the kind of protectionism China has engaged in is defecting in a prisoner's dilemma. If you play always cooperate against a defectbot, you're going to lose eventually, even if you start very far ahead.
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24079115 for more.
When you learn a bit more about geopolitics, you realize that there's more to these things than initially appears. Tiananmen Square was pretty bad. But when you look at the utter collapse of Russia after it tried to Westernize, and the poor shape of America because of her own economic policies, someone not living in the Anglo/American news bubble would really have to wonder.
To that end, companies that have an easier time skirting around the dirty politics – like Tesla, Ford, and GM – have been able to have successful and profitable operations in China. As the parent points out, there's a pandora's box that's being opened. And if you are led to believe that it's a normal comment, it's the same nationalistic stuff you've being trained to fall in line with.
Sure, but by that same argument, this executive order bans ByteDance/Tencent under American laws and directives (specifically, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act).
Obviously not the case - this is an out-right ban. There has been no evidence of TikTok violating any laws, and furthermore, no new laws have been issued to which TikTok could adhere to avoid a ban.
Companies operating in China can adhere to Chinese law to operate in the country, but the Trump administration hasn't even issued any laws.
This is unprecedented.
One of those laws is China's National Intelligence law which requires all companies to cooperate with and aid national intelligence.
https://fortune.com/2014/08/11/china-western-companies-monop... (China vs. Western companies: Best defense is a strong offense)
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/28/1-in-5-companies-say-china-s... (1 in 5 corporations say China has stolen their IP within the last year: CNBC CFO survey)
https://money.cnn.com/2018/04/05/news/economy/china-foreign-... (How China gets what it wants from American companies)
https://money.cnn.com/2018/03/23/technology/china-us-trump-t... (How much has the US lost from China’s IP theft?)
As far as I know, you trust media reports more than a random search on Chinese video sites.
https://weibo.com/tv/show/1034:4534875236007949
It's the Rockets vs Trail Blazers math on 4th Aug.
https://www.scmp.com/sport/basketball/article/3092980/nbas-c...
Even assuming they revoked the ban, I also don't see how it's particularly relevant to the point I was making; they still banned the entire franchise for months because he wrote a single message on Twitter. Censorship isn't somehow acceptable if it only lasts ~8 months. It's perhaps the definition of arbitrarily abused power.
China can force any company out of the country for any arbitrary reason whatsoever. As far as I know, they are still banning Houston Rockets games because Morey supported Hong Kong in a tweet.