News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Exile Economics: If Globalisation Fails. Parent comment

Re:Exile Economics: If Globalisation Fails by FuriouslyAdrift on Tuesday August 12, 2025 @05:21PM (#44881941)
The problem with China is that it is not a level playing field. Not even close. If they were an open market, then you would not see as big of a trade imbalance. They are predatory, manipulative and duplicitous.

The ideas behind globalism was to promote peace through trade and it worked for a while until China used it to try to become an empire.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Exile Economics: If Globalisation Fails by churchill on Tuesday August 12, 2025 @05:35PM (#44882066)
If the Chinese want to dilute the wealth of their people and use it to subsidize stuff for Western consumers, the smart thing to do would be to buy it!

Anti-trade activists always agitate about how they'll jerk up prices after capturing markets, but Uber hasn't managed to pull it off, despite >$50 billion burned. The moment a company's margins hike significantly, they attract competitors chasing those same dollars and they have to lower prices or lose market share.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Exile Economics: If Globalisation Fails by dilyevsky on Tuesday August 12, 2025 @05:44PM (#44882135)
Pretty obvious counter is it's not smart if in the process you've totally destroyed your domestic production
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Exile Economics: If Globalisation Fails by jncfhnb on Tuesday August 12, 2025 @05:45PM (#44882150)
Uber prices have been increasing for years now at a rate much faster than inflation
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Exile Economics: If Globalisation Fails by ghaff on Tuesday August 12, 2025 @06:12PM (#44882383)
So they had subsidized prices. Now a lot of people just go back to taking cabs or public transportation--or rent cars/drive.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Exile Economics: If Globalisation Fails by imtringued on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @06:22AM (#44886665)
Why would you expect anyone to play fair?

The Brettons Woods inevitable collapse was known when it was introduced, but it was implemented anyway because it unfairly advantaged the US. Meanwhile Keynes proposed balanced trade via his Bancor System. This would have addressed abuse by any specific nation, but the US didn't want it, because it would have limited their ability to be abusive as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]