China’s coming Austrian collapse (opens in new tab)

(tbwns.com)

38 pointsZweihander7y ago11 comments

11 comments

There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.

touristtam7y ago

I find the comparison between China and Napolean/Nazi Germany, as a system of looting weaker economies, to be weak. If anything it would have been more relevant to consider French/British/Spanish/Dutch/Portugese colonnial empires, or even going further back the Roman empire.

Fjolsvith7y ago

If you were arguing that China would continue to be a strong economy by continuing exploitative expansion, then yes, that comparison would be more relevant. However, the article was trying to argue that China's activities are not sustainable and will lead that country down the same path of failure for the given comparisons.

Recurecur7y ago

> There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.

What exactly about this article was "demeaning"?

The author does seem to feel that Trump is handling China well, which I'm sure brings cognitive dissonance to some...

pasabagi7y ago

I don't really understand how Trump could be viewed to be handling China well. One of China's big selling points as a negotiating partner is they're consistent. The US has traditionally also had this virtue. Trump isn't even consistent with his own state department. Why on earth would you rest anything on a country that might elect somebody like that? If you were Qatar, why would you agree to another US military base, knowing that the next president might say you're harbouring Al-Qaeda, because some Saudi royals told him so? If you were the Phillipines, why would you feel confident in US support?

I know some people like big tough guys in politics, and to some of those people, Trump appears big and tough. But I think even if you have this persuasion, Trump's no Kissinger, no Tito, not even a Putin.

MR4D7y ago

The Chinese came back to the negotiating table (after walking out in June) [0]. Anytime the other guys walks out and then comes back, you have the upper hand.

[0] - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/16/kudlow-confirms-trade-talks-...

For the record, negotiations look messy while they're ongoing. I think you'll find that the negotiations end up much better than most people think.

One of the key attributes of a good negotiator is to have a BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement). Without one, you're going to fail. The last few administrations have not had that when negotiating with China, and they failed (heck, they didn't really get started before they backed off).

Trump's style is certainly unorthodox, but he has several folks who actually know how to negotiate (Robert Lighthizer & Wilbur Ross among others). I wouldn't count them out just yet.

1 more reply

Fjolsvith7y ago

Do you always refuse to consider the points of an argument if you find fault with the author?

It seems to me that if you cannot refute the given argument, your character assassination will be just as inadequate.

mrpigeonpants7y ago

When an author is so confident in their assertions, it always raises red flags. Also, the latter part of the article seems to posit that "in order for the U.S. to win, China has to lose".

Fjolsvith7y ago

This wasn't what I got from the article. I believe it posits that if China is given a paddle on the butt, it will start to behave, which will be in everyone's best interests.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

11 comments

ahmedalsudani7y ago

There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.

touristtam7y ago

Fjolsvith7y ago

Recurecur7y ago

> There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.

What exactly about this article was "demeaning"?

The author does seem to feel that Trump is handling China well, which I'm sure brings cognitive dissonance to some...

pasabagi7y ago

MR4D7y ago

The Chinese came back to the negotiating table (after walking out in June) [0]. Anytime the other guys walks out and then comes back, you have the upper hand.

[0] - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/16/kudlow-confirms-trade-talks-...

For the record, negotiations look messy while they're ongoing. I think you'll find that the negotiations end up much better than most people think.

Trump's style is certainly unorthodox, but he has several folks who actually know how to negotiate (Robert Lighthizer & Wilbur Ross among others). I wouldn't count them out just yet.

1 more reply

Fjolsvith7y ago

Do you always refuse to consider the points of an argument if you find fault with the author?

It seems to me that if you cannot refute the given argument, your character assassination will be just as inadequate.

mrpigeonpants7y ago

When an author is so confident in their assertions, it always raises red flags. Also, the latter part of the article seems to posit that "in order for the U.S. to win, China has to lose".

Fjolsvith7y ago

This wasn't what I got from the article. I believe it posits that if China is given a paddle on the butt, it will start to behave, which will be in everyone's best interests.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse