Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What would be the concession from the Chinese?

Or do they up the ante and impose more tariffs on incoming U.S. goods?

Is this something that the Hacker News community actually supports Trump on? More curious than anything - you just don't see a lot of support for any of his initiatives here.

? Why all the downvotes?



I support this, and I'm a rabid leftist. Things should cost what they cost. The only time government should interfere with pricing is to force companies to price in externalities.


"I'm a rabid leftist". I appreciate your candor, but if you think "things should cost what they cost", then you're not nearly as rabid as many of the rabid leftists that I've encountered.


I think what is left and right have been evolving since the 60s. Leftism is being fought over now between anarcho-capitalists vs labor while the right is being fought over between big business vs nationalists.


What is left and right has been misunderstood in evolving ways since the 60's anti-intellectualism set in.


"Left" and "right" have been pretty arbitrary ever since the French Estates General set up their seating plan with monarchists on the right and republicans on the left. That fight, like all fights before and since, was really divided along multiple axes with overlapping but not identical motivations.

I don't think there's a single thing to be misunderstood, so much as a rough analogy between many different kinds of political battles. Anti-intellectualism does seem to present a kind of newish element to that fight, though I suspect it's always been present in various guises. (I will say that I'm particularly unhappy with the version of it that has dominated for the past 30 years or so.)


Left and right is not really useful. The issue is that there are multiple degrees of state control. But state control comes in more than one flavor. States want either to control what everyone thinks, or to own the economic output of all individuals, or some combination of these two. The state control axis is the most relevant, and its endpoints can't be labeled left or right.


Right, among leftists, some want an absolute state authority controlling all aspects of the economy, and some want absolutely no government at all. The common denominator is the socialization of the means of production (for whatever that means to different people).

Left/right is kind of a stupid spectrum because it's essentially compressing a great deal of dimensionality into a single dimension. And not even that, but "left" in the US means "higher taxes" where to the rest of the world it means "abolish private property and money."

> The state control axis is the most relevant

That's like saying "I think color is the most important aspect of art." I think different things are more important to different people, subjectively. That said, given where I land on this political compass (https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=-9.0&soc=-6.62) I'd say I do share your views on state control being important.


Oh, no. Don't get me wrong: I'm a communist. But in the current system, I would rather costs not be subsidized. In fact, I think costs should incorporate much more than the pricing system currently allows (pollution, recyclability, etc).


From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. The aliexpress sellers need the cheaper shipping rates to be able to compete, wouldn't you say?


Shipping rates? As in exchanging money for shipping? There's no money in communism.


That does not sound like a rabid leftist?

- You don't want rent control?

- I guess whatever non-Pigouvian portion of tax/subsidy is also out of bounds?


Handing people money to pay for rent would be an equally leftist alternative to setting prices, you can be a leftist without being authoritarian.


> You don't want rent control?

I don't want rent, period. Housing and means of production are a basic need and should be provided outside of markets.

> I guess whatever non-Pigouvian portion of tax/subsidy is also out of bounds?

Following my system, there would be no money, no taxes, and government would be limited to coordinating between regions for large projects.


Not every person fits into a political bucket. Please do not bait politics here.


There's no baiting here. The guy says he's very leftie, but says something that sounds the opposite. I was curious.


Don't confuse "leftism" for "authoritarian" or "welfare capitalism." I advocate neither.


I think it's the word "rabid" that carries a certain cartoonish meaning. But I don't think I mentioned authoritarianism.


> I think it's the word "rabid" that carries a certain cartoonish meaning

It does, I agree =]


There's a difference between agreeing on the idea, the execution, and supporting a person who says that idea. (and the story they try to sell with that idea)

A lot of people likely agree the imbalance was hurting us businesses. But fewer agree with how it was done, or want to support Trump.


The resolution should be restoration of reciprocity, like having China Post insist on commercial shippers having customs clearance arranged.

Other trade war elements like getting out of TPP and bellicosity in general have cost vastly more than the value of stopping drop-shipping Chinese eBay sellers, which is negligible in US China trade.


The US withdrawing from TPP directly resulted in a vastly-improved treaty. The problem is that the US didn't sign up to the new version.


That's not what I have seen in any description of TPP. It appears that withdrawing from it is pure vandalism of US interests that we now see in the trade war with China, happening outside the framework of TPP.


TPP instantly lost the bulk of the intellectual property chapter and a good amount of ISDS-related commitments when the US withdrew. Is there anything in the CPTPP signed version that's worse than the version the US wanted?


> What would be the concession from the Chinese?

What concession? It's a clear market distortion that shipping rates across such distances are so ridiculously low. I'm not sure why anybody is supporting them. This isn't about Trump or not Trump, and always putting these issues in these terms is incredibly distracting from what's actually important. (And I say this as somebody who absolutely despises Trump.)


>What concession? It's a clear market distortion that shipping rates across such distances are so ridiculously low. I'm not sure why anybody is supporting them.

Come on, everyone supports ridiculously low costs on anything.


You can't just mandate low costs by fiat. That's why it causes market distortion.

You could also say mandate that say breakfast at a hotel should cost no more than $1. You'd get that, but you'd also pay for it via rising hotel prices that would need to subsidize that benefit some enjoy with a higher room fee that everyone would pay for.

In this case lower shipping rates for some are subsidized with higher shipping rates for others, or in some other countries with the same problem corresponding state subsidies for the postal service paid for out of the general state budget.


We don't know that they're below cost. Maybe the market distortion is that internal mail is so expensive.

EDIT: whoops, untrue as below. Disregard this.


We absolutely do know this, the UPU (universal postal union) has a mandate to subsidize mail rates from nations that are termed developing under its rules, like China.


99% of what Trump does is very stupid. This is the 1% of his actions that is not stupid.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: