| ▲ | noir_lord an hour ago |
| Good, if the middle power democracies don't align/work together they are going to get torn apart in the struggle between the US and China. |
|
| ▲ | nixass an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| Non-aligned movement 2: electric boogaloo |
| |
|
| ▲ | wewewedxfgdf 29 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Errrrr...... this has nothing to do with the struggle between USA and China. It is 100% about Trump. |
| |
| ▲ | noir_lord 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Trump is a symptom not the disease, when he's gone the people who supported him and voted for him still exist and another Trump-like figure is almost inevitable given they've basically ploughed and planted that field to grow the next one and who's to say NeoTrump isn't going to be smarter. The other democracies can no longer count on the US as a stable ally the way we have in the past (whether that trust was misplaced is a matter of perspective). Simply put, you did it twice, We can't rely on them not doing it again. | |
| ▲ | ChrisRR 5 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Trump is absolutely a malicious imbecile, but the US is a country that willingly voted him in twice. Removing Trump doesn't remove fundamental issues with the US |
|
|
| ▲ | krona an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| 70% of Canadian exports are to the US. 6% to the EU. Why would e.g. Poland want to enter a trade war with the US on Canada's behalf? |
| |
| ▲ | 9dev an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Because the US is going to throw Poland under the bus without even considering once if it yields a short-term benefit. | | |
| ▲ | walthamstow 43 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Under the bus again, I might add | | |
| ▲ | gustavus 33 minutes ago | parent [-] | | That's rich considering it was France and the UK that threw Poland under the bus despite having a signed defense pact. The US just came in to clean up the mess. | | |
| ▲ | awruko 3 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I am under impression that some other nation was involved in cleaning up. If you can even call it cleaning up. | |
| ▲ | UpsideDownRide 13 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If Stewie punched me, It doesn't mean Quagmire didnt. | |
| ▲ | post-it 31 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I don't think they're talking about WWII. | |
| ▲ | ajuc 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | WW2 ended with Yalta conference where Roosevelt agreed to Stalin's proposition of giving Poland to USSR's sphere of influence, making Poland (and rest of EE) their puppet state. Churchil wanted to pressure Stalin to leave Poland (and at least parts of EE) independent and even considered "Operation Unthinkable". At least that's what I think the guy above referenced. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | invaliduser 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If "70% of Canadian exports are to the US", that's probably why the US has so much leverage, and I can see why the Canadian government would like a change.
Hence the need for a rebalancing of trade partnerships. | | |
| ▲ | mcv 9 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I'd like to take a closer look at what exactly Canada is exporting to the US, and what exactly the EU is importing from elsewhere, to see if there's a match. I'd rather buy from Canada than from Russia. Or China. Or the US. | |
| ▲ | arethuza 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Wouldn't being strongly aligned with the EU give Canada a lot more leverage in trade discussions with the US? |
| |
| ▲ | gbalduzzi 42 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Deals right now are intended to increase the trades between Canada and reducing those with the US, in little improvement steps. If in 10 years the ratio moves from 70/6 to 50/26, the situation will be vastly different. The options are not black and white | |
| ▲ | consp an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Isn't the point that there already is one? | |
| ▲ | Komte an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | So the assumption is trading with Canada = trade war with US? Canada is abused pretty hard it seems... | |
| ▲ | Lio 42 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's not that they want to enter a trade war with Trump, it's that there's large room for growth in trade between Canada and Poland (your example). Since Trump is hostile to trade with both parties there's an opportunity to replace lost US trade that's probably not coming back. Trump has weakened himself and his allies where as mutual trade between Canada and the EU makes both stronger. | |
| ▲ | raverbashing 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Funny, to justify Brexit numbers like these were meaningless | |
| ▲ | pasc1878 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because Trump is trade warring everyone. The middle democracies will do better fighting together and not deal with US individually. | |
| ▲ | NuclearPM an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because the US is likely to ally with Russia over Poland. | |
| ▲ | ajuc 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Polish export to US is about 3% of its total export and import - about 5% of Poland's total import. Not much to lose, honestly. We trade more with Czech Republic. Polish export to EU is 74% of its total export and import is about 60% of its total import. Economically - whatever's good for EU is good for Poland and US barely matters. | | |
| ▲ | graemep 15 minutes ago | parent [-] | | What about the importance of that trade. The US exports a lot of critical things that cannot be supplied from elsewhere. Everyone is heavily reliant on American technology. | | |
| ▲ | krzyk 4 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Like what specifically? Only services come to mind. Any hardware is produced in Asia, in fabs that use equipment from Netherlands. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | dosisking an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There is no struggle, China has already won. |
| |
| ▲ | dguest 32 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | We should keep open to the option that they might both loose. | |
| ▲ | baxtr an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In what way has "China already won"? | | |
| ▲ | Escapado an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I am not OP and obviously "winning" reduces too many dimensions into one. But I will say that from my recent two visits to the country that I was pretty astonished by the speed at which they are building things. Cars, Buildings, Tech Hubs, Factories. You blink twice and a new tech company plops up somewhere making high end drones or humanoid robots or CNC machines or innovative 3d printers. It feels like there is an absolute abundance of electrical and mechanical engineers in that country and funding to match.
I am not making any comments on the politics of it all, but I have not seen this anywhere else in the world - perhaps it exists but I am not aware of it. | | |
| ▲ | vehemenz 5 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Agreed, but on other dimensions China is still 150 years behind the West. It’s important to keep this progress in perspective. | |
| ▲ | Arkhaine_kupo 27 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | For some of us, it mimics late 19th century europe where the rate of innovation perhaps was only matched by the lack of regard for cost, safety or need. I think we are closer to seeing the Chinese Hindenburg than Arpanet or Moon voyage or some other bewildering humanity joining initiative. Its inarguable that the industrial revolution brought tons of wealth quickly to the UK. But one, having past it all, has to wonder if the child work force, insanely cramped victorian houses, constant deaths due to smog, polluted water etc could not have been entirely avoided by reducing "innovation" speed. Is the existing suffering of the Chinese system worth the economic growth? For its own middle class, the answer is probably yes. But systemic conditions like limiting the universities places to top 30% students, means you have a permanent underclass that cannot join the white collar jobs. Is that required to have a cheap, hardworking manufacturing and construction industries? Maybe. But reinventing a class system that has a few steps removed from slavery as an "economic miracle" and "neck breaking speed innovation" feels a bit icky when they could take 5 years longer and treat people better. We are arguably close to post scarcity, and instead of building post-capitalism instruments (like libraries could be imagined as), we are just perfecting the economic conditions of capitalism which require an inordinate amount of cheap labour and state violence. Billionaires are building bunkers instead of museums, they can see the end game of this system they benefit from and its not a good one. Like I can't understand whats the point of winning "the economy" if we end up in a post nuclear hellscape of ecological collapse, but number must go up I have been told. | | |
| ▲ | graemep 17 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I do not think it was necessary for it to be that bad for the industrial revolution to happen. Possibly displacing agricultural workers through the agricultural revolution and enclosures accelerated it? It is certainly not necessary for economic development now. You probably cannot give people in less developed economies the same pay and working conditions, but you can provide the basics and relatively decent treatment. |
|
| |
| ▲ | weatherlite 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | China has the largest combined collective penis size. Around 500 million men (I'm discounting young kids and the elderly) times 4.5 inches (according to statistics).
No other power on earth has that penis size. | |
| ▲ | dosisking an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > In what way has "China already won"? The US has depleted their missile stockpile and can no longer defend anybody. Countries in the Middle East are moving away from the US and forming their own alliances. Taiwan knows that the US cannot do anything to help them. South Korea also knows. The US has weaponized the US Dollar, forcing countries out of the SWIFT system if they don't do what they are told. As a result, the CHIPS system has become the alternative. China understands better how the economy works, with the Belt and Road Initiative. The US government doesn't understand how the economy works, and is run by a bunch of complete m orons. | | |
| ▲ | cbg0 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | You've said a bunch of things that don't really equate to "China already won". | | |
| ▲ | dosisking 31 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > You've said a bunch of things that don't really equate to "China already won". There is no path for victory for the US, where it remains the world's reserve currency. China will become the world's reserve currency by 2032. You are simply in denial. Everything that I wrote points to China winning. | | |
| ▲ | roncesvalles 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Reserve currency status entirely depends on whether the issuing authority has the ability to drop a munition (literally or figuratively) on the head of anyone who dares to counterfeit the currency. China's military and soft influence are improving but until they get that good, USD will remain the reserve. Because, imagine the scenario where the US simply counterfeits the renminbi. What is China's recourse? Spicy statements by Wang Yi in toothless international forums? | |
| ▲ | haldujai 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > China will become the world's reserve currency by 2032. China doesn’t want this for the same reason that some Americans currently in power don’t want the USD to be the world’s reserve currency - it comes with an export and trade cost. There are also many structural and political reasons why the Yuan can’t play this role not least of which are transparency, the peg and monetary supply independence. | |
| ▲ | charlieyu1 13 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This has to be the funniest thing I’ve read for a while. China still has two exchange rates. | |
| ▲ | kakacik 11 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Folks can keep their heads in the sand for pretty long, as long as they look just at progressively smaller circle around them and ignore rest of reality. The momentum China already gained, and gaining more every day is well beyond anything in the west. Plus if you consider the position they are rising from, its properly meteoric. Nobody knows future, but its rather easy to continue projection with current, or even a bit slower pace and within 1 or 2 decades, situation will be pretty clear from any objective perspective. Above is purely technological/process progress. Add US making enemy of whole world in one brilliant move, something that is practically irreversible in upcoming decades, and situation is clear. Military (without ammo) alone won't give you much negotiating power. LLMs can be replicated elsewhere with rather little cost, and soon some small bleeding edge advantage will be largely meaningless for most practical tasks. It doesn't even matter what near future brings, this is settled and no amount of denial from US or self-patting is changing that. |
| |
| ▲ | layer8 23 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It’s meant in the sense similar to “omae wa mou shindeiru” (“you’re already dead”), i.e. that defeat has already become unavoidable. | |
| ▲ | spacedcowboy 34 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | I’m not sure I agree with “already won”, that’s an extreme position, but there are consequences to all the things s/he says. It may be a death of 1000 cuts, or it may hit a tipping point, but the us is certainly walking blindly down the “let China win” road. As a joint us/uk citizen, even I would prefer to deal with China than the USA these days. Predictability is really useful in business, and narcissistic man child presidents aren’t predictable. |
| |
| ▲ | roncesvalles 16 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Every single point you've made is either straight up untrue or comes with caveats. I hate to quote Trump but, in light of Brandolini's law: "Wrong." | |
| ▲ | weatherlite 7 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | > China understands better how the economy works, Many people avoid Chinese stocks like the plague because the system is still half communist and as a foreign investor you get some paper in a company on Cayman Island instead of real direct ownership. That keeps me from buying their stocks and I'm not the only one. |
| |
| ▲ | prmoustache an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Look around and visit any country, you'll see chinese made and sold goods inundating everymarket, build infrastructures. It used to be chinese made goods sold by local or western companies. Nowadays bar a few exceptions these are chinese goods sold directly by chinese brands/companies. | | |
| ▲ | fidotron 26 minutes ago | parent [-] | | And many of those products are not only good they're becoming good in ways nowhere else can do. |
| |
| ▲ | arethuza an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because, unlike the other superpower, they don't seem to be losing? | | |
| ▲ | 9dev an hour ago | parent [-] | | The USA is repeatedly punching itself in the face over and over though, so it's not a fair fight. |
| |
| ▲ | philipallstar an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Their culture prioritises economic outputs not entitlements. |
| |
| ▲ | wewewedxfgdf 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Go do some research on China - it's economy is in the toilet and its leadership has destroyed much of it's success, foreign capital and companies have fled to India, Vietnam, Mexico, Indonesia. Your lament of "Oh no China is the best in the world and only getting better!!!" is long long out of date. | | |
| ▲ | lnsru 4 minutes ago | parent [-] | | With 2 billion people you’re absolute power. Internal market with middle class size of whole United States. No need for wallstreet and American style financial engineering. Producer of 80% goods for Europe. I mean buying something mainstream not made in China is barely possible. Technically there are some challenges like plane engines or lithography. But they’ll nail it. Trust me. |
| |
| ▲ | fidotron 28 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is being heavily downvoted, but it's dangerously close to true. In ten years the downvoters will not only agree with this, but have moved on to "and that's a good thing". |
|
|
| ▲ | 0xpgm an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| One thing that is common about middle democracies is that prioritize a bureaucratic elite structure over an entrepreneurship culture, while both the US and China embrace entreprenuership wholeheartedly. If they changed that they'd perhaps become world powers themselves. |
| |
| ▲ | pyrale an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > One thing that is common about middle democracies is that prioritize a bureaucratic elite structure over an entrepreneurship culture No, that's just the 2010s propaganda fed to you by people who assert that not letting them do whatever they want is "bureaucratic". These very same people are completely fine lobbying legislature for more moat when they benefit from it. The difference between "middle democracies" or whatever that means and the US is just that politics aren't corrupted enough yet that they can buy whatever they want. | | |
| ▲ | mmrezaie 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I did some admin work for the startup around 5 years ago and I have to say EU countries specially mine Sweden is far more clear. In USA you are basically hopeless without a lawyer. but I did a search and for clarity of rule I searched and this came up using AI: World Bank’s broad “Regulatory Quality” measure supports that direction: Sweden scored 95.28/100 and the US 90.57/100 in its latest comparable 2023 data. I couldn't find EU wide score. I wanted to help someone to get work visa and I thought it is like Sweden and you just fill a small form, oh boy! We hired a lawyer for just filling the US side application. | |
| ▲ | petesergeant 8 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Heavily country-dependent, in practice. The UK lets you set up a company online cheaply, quickly, and filing is easy. Insurance is plentiful and sensible, as are business bank accounts. The law is mostly straight-forward. Setting up a German limited-liability company OTOH involves putting down some ghastly large sum as a guarantee. But yes, Americans are told they have the freest speech and the freest markets, and don't seem to question either. |
| |
| ▲ | InsideOutSanta an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's interesting to me that people generally see Europe's regulations as interfering with entrepreneurship, while they see American decisions that give more power to multinational corporations at the expense of smaller companies as a normal part of a free market. | | |
| ▲ | roncesvalles 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Don't you see that the same bureaucracy that adds friction to entrepreneurship also serves the purpose of protecting the incumbents? It is odious to start a company in the EU. There are many accounts of this on HN itself. | |
| ▲ | hilbert42 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "…as a normal part of a free market." That's unfettered capitalism at work—"free" implies no bounds. Multinational corporations have never been more powerful now than at anytime in history. | | |
| ▲ | mcv 6 minutes ago | parent [-] | | And that hurts the free market. A free market should be transparent, have low barriers to entry, and not be dominated by monopolies or cartels. There's nothing free about American capitalism. |
| |
| ▲ | anhner 27 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | well you see, maybe one day they'll be the CEO of that multi-trillion dollar company, so it's better to err on the side of capitalism. /s |
| |
| ▲ | hilbert42 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "If they changed that they'd perhaps become world powers themselves." If they were to change some within the citizenry would stand to gain at the expense of others. Inequality would increase. Seems—for now—middle democracies aren't prepared to pay the high price of social upheaval such a policy would create. | |
| ▲ | 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | 42 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | _heimdall an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The CCP retains too much power over businesses and business leaders for me to consider them to "embrace entrepreneurship wholeheartedly." | | | |
| ▲ | ohyoutravel an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Didn’t China force Meta to unwind Manus? In no way is China embracing entrepreneurs wholeheartedly. | | | |
| ▲ | petesergeant an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The US _also_ embraces rent-seeking, regulatory capture, and the externalization of social and environmental costs as entrepreneurship. | |
| ▲ | NuclearPM an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is just wrong. The US prioritizes billionaires over entrepreneurs. |
|