"Could" upset the global trade order? Chinese multinationals have been doing one-sided tech transfer deals in exchange for access to the (massive) Chinese market for decades. You're a little late there, NYT.
8
We have already lost because our government has not stood up to unfair trade with china for the past two decades.
As a result, jobs that went to the chinese were not replaced domestically by "higher technology, higher paying" jobs that were promised to us when our government gave in to corporations' outsourcing. The outsourcing simply hiked the companies' profits and resulted in executives almost choking on their sky-high compensation.
Nobody has answered the question, "Why did our government let this happen?" because there is nobody to put this question to. And for that reason there is nobody motivated to make any changes. The USA is losing its middle class and is slowly rotting like a piece of old fruit.
11
Why did this article take three authors to write? It's a synthesis of old business articles about the development of Chinese advanced manufacturing with no added analysis. At least provide some data about the current state of advanced manufacturing in the US (and other major economies) vs. that of China in order to inform an estimation of how trade balance has shifted and might shift.
The article does nothing but to echo the well-spoken narrative of faltering US competitiveness, eliciting banal political sentiments and possibly personal financial insecurity. Not worth the read.
3
If Wilbur Ross and his cronies paid their fair share of taxes, the United States could afford a better school system, including research and development at the post-graduate level. American leadership in science and technology could be regained.
But no, the love of free stuff keeps them dependent, and so long as they have the termite’s view of house construction, they’re not the people to advise us on architecture.
7
'“There are a few U.S. companies that have been leaning too far about sharing technology with countries that are potential enemies of ours,” said Wilbur L. Ross Jr., the United States secretary of commerce, in September remarks regarding information technology that were widely seen as referring to China.' Mr Ross - and others of his ilk - might wish to consider that attitudes like that he expresses above contribute to making enemies of countries that could be partners, were the United States less bellicose. The United States has benefited immensely, not least in the post WW II period, from technologies developed by foreigners, either working in the United States or elsewhere : that some people in that country are attempting to limit Chinese access to such technology and seem terrified by the prospect of Chinese technological development hardly is indicative of the self confidence that these forces otherwise attempt to project....
A United States that cooperates with China will be a far greater and far richer United States than one that devotes itself to hindering Chinese progress....
Henri
7
Let the Chinese have artificial intelligence, robotics and electric cars; We can all be coal miners!
11
Coal is the future, for the US. Alot of coal currently being mined gets exported to India and China to fuel their growing economies and growing middle class. Trump forgot to mention that the US and China are gonna switch places!
8
So US Corporations are selling themselves out to China in order to get access to Chinese market? Short term profits vs long term implications of that decision. Could this be the beginning of a new catch phrase - corporate prostitution? If corporations are people, then.....China will be laughing all the way as the Chinese know the weakness to exploit - it’s greed. The only company who made a smart decision was the one who did the licensing deal. Licensees don’t own any of the assets, but only have permission to use them and pay hefty fees to do so. No sympathy here, as its a dog eat dog world, US corporations, you had best get used to it...
3
Gee, this is terrible news.
It sounds like China is planning worldwide domination by economically dominating the R.O.W. (Rest of world).
That’s unfair.
They are supposed to fight us “mano a mano”.
1
Is the United States the remnant of the British Empire's power? Being looked up to and feared cannot be underestimated as the basis of the world (pecking) order. The debate about this is one view of history. The lack of debate about it is another.
5
If I were an American I'd only start worrying about losing the technological edge if the international ranking of the top 10 universities in the field of science and technology was dominated by universities based in China.
2
What if the graduating classes a those top 10 universities were dominated by Chinese and Indian students? Would you worry then?
11
U.S corporations have been using taxpayer funded research, legal system, banking system, infrastructure & military to protect their products & market them throughout the world for decades, all the while paying little to no taxes to the U.S. to support those systems. U.S. corporations now control our local, state & national legislators & write laws to favor their businesses while cutting wages, investment in infrastructure, education & science. I could care less what happens to U.S. corporations or their products.
9
For anyone in the high tech world, it's common knowledge that China openly disregards IPR, so why do we even need to debate this? Letting the Chinese in on trade secrets and sensitive IP is leaving the cookie jar unattended and wide open.
The West has always had the key to tame China, if not the will... Producers must accept a higher CoGS, conumers a higher retail price for quality, high tech kit made in the West. As long as we continue to facilitate China's rise in exchange for market access, the Chinese will continue to ride roughshod over the West...
5
This reality of the international trade with China remains still a win for the USA and the other western countries. Otherwise, we should assume to be governed by not so clever politicians.
The substantial point is that China has a long term tech plan. Where are the tech plans of the Western countries, which should ensure the tech lead on the developing China?
6
I hate China! No...wait, I hate Russia! No...wait, I hate Mexico! No...wait, I hate North Korea! No...wait, I hate Syria! No...wait, I hate Iran! But I'm not allowed to hate guns. I'm not allowed to hate opioids. I'm not allowed to hate pesticides. I'm not allowed to hate climate change. I'm not allowed to hate oil. I'm not allowed to hate sugar. I'm not allowed to hate billionaires. If my government didn't do all my thinking for me, I would be nothing. Thank you government!
11
You seem to have stated --
It's OK to hate people
but not any source of fast cash.
1
China will keep pushing until they are the preeminent global super power, a position they believe is rightfully theirs.
They force western companies to provide massive tech transfers as a cost of doing business in China.
They send millions of students abroad each year to train at the best global schools.
They set plans with goals multiple years ahead, versus thinking solely about the next quarterly report or the next election cycle.
If they can reign in the corruption, teach their young how to be creative, and ensure the areas outside of the Tier 1 cities (Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen) become desirable places to live, they will be in good shape.
I live here, and am investing heavily in Chinese tech companies. They are undervalued vs. their USA counterparts.
The USA is becoming fat, lazy, and violent. We follow an unbridled sense of capitalism that allows the plutocrats to destroy the rest of us.
24
China pursues high technology.
Trump works to make coal great again.
12
The U.S. is becoming old feudal Europe. All of the wealth that is worth anything is in the hands of a few dozen families. They use it to beat on each other and all of the little serfs (the rest of the country) gets trampled in the crossfire during their "wars".
The lunacy that happens in Washington is just for show. The real action is elsewhere.
16
Fund, embrace, advocate education. There are kids born every day in America that are brilliant, but the lack of will and resources will short change their future and the future of America.
There could be an Einstein born everyday here in poor neighborhoods that goes undiscovered.
Fund the NIH fund NASA fund Science to keep us prosperous. Intellectually lazy societies will wither and die.
12
But, but, but all the American myths say that competition is good, right?
Fair competition is good. Competition with a government backed company that can afford to sell items below cost or steals tech avoiding R&D or licensing expenses is not good.
6
In other words competition is only welcome if it's on favorable terms for the US?
The previous comment stated that China is not competing fairly by backing its companies. In similar token a company from Vietnam may argue that it's hard to compete against US companies that have access to capital via US stock markets and banks or the educated work force provided by US universities. A company from Iraq may complain that it's hard to compete against US businesses that roll in after the US military invasion and are financed by the US aid money.
China is not doing anything terrible by setting up rules on sharing technology as a condition for access to their market or outright buying it. Calling it "stealing" is not accurate.
12
This is China's space race. To the moon in 10 years. Or in China's case, technological supremacy in ten years.
We better be their Russia or they will zoom past us in this race.
1
It says you are writing from Tel Aviv... Two of Israel's top universities have (and are building) campuses in China now. Seems Israel has made the sensible decision not to view China as an enemy.
3
For years I’ve said that we should have a national chain of Costco sized stores called Made In America. Everything in the store would be made with 100% American materials and labor. It would be interesting to see the inventory, and then the prices. I would make it a point to buy something there at least on a monthly basis. I might pay more but I would be helping a fellow citizen out there somewhere. I’m not saying I’m against foreign made goods, but this store would be a physical focal point of how globalization, cheap foreign labor, and technology have affected the US job market, especially for lower income blue collar workers. China would love to “out Apple Apple”, same with Tesla, and many other American icons. What happens when they do? They’re producing way more university graduates and PhD’s than we are. When they have modernized and advanced to equality with our tech prowess, while maintaining lower labor costs, what then? A 2016 Oxford Univ. study says that over the next 25 years 47% of jobs in developed nations will be lost due to computerization and mechanization, including upper income white collar jobs. Our children are entering a world far different than my relatively simple post WWII childhood. I hope it will work out well for them.
4
Nothing truly innovative and commercially viable will ever come out of these efforts. They have too much money being handed out by the Government and thus no skin in the game to make it commercially viable to earn a return on capital. Good example of this was the first PC funded by Xerox with a generous R&D budget that resulted in the Alto which sold for $70,000 in 1973 and was never commercially successful. Five years later a high school graduate by the name of Steve Wozniak, with virtually no R&D budget at all, designed another PC called the Apple II. It retailed starting at $1298 in 1977 and was quite successful. Big money does not equate to innovation. The Startup industry model has proven this over an over.
4
American businesses are more than happy to facilitate technology transfers and help kill US research and manufacturing capacity in search of short-term profits. It's a model which worked for the Japanese 50 years ago and China's leaders and planners are very effectively moving to ensure their future dominance of the world economy (with the attendant political dominance). Khruschev was almost right in his prediction, he just didn't realize the Soviet Union was not going to be the beneficiary of capitalist cupidity.
The obligatory phrase all US politicians must currently append to any statement involving the US ("the greatest most powerful nation in the world"), is not going to be valid in 25 years. Coupled with the political and economic disasters which will be caused by global warming, Americans are going to have a rude awakening at some point when it will be too late to do anything to counter that decline.
5
Let's espouse free trade, have no border tax, and let China come in and undermine all our industries. Then let's let China have developing country status so they can put major tariffs on all our goods.
Now watch China develop all the new technologies since now industry is all located in China. Now look at income disparity grow in this country as the middle class manufacturing jobs get eliminated and the rich get richer from lower labor costs and Chinese subsidies.
See everyone complain about global warming as all heavy industry was moved to a country that puts out at least twice the carbon emissions as the US per unit of GDP. And those goods are sent over on ships which are the worlds biggest polluters.
And finally, the issue spurs Trump to the Presidency.
Brilliant.
12
China is potentially the best friend the USA could ever have.
Our resources and skillsets are complimentary.
Under the covers, USA and PRC are lovers.
4
Now.
Will you still love us tomorrow? China loves the US as Dracula loved Mina Harker.
4
Trade is what you do between likeminded nations that have a common goal or purpose. The purpose of China was always to dominate the world and attain a mythical status that until now only existed in its imagination but never in reality. Through the steady exploitation of the weaknesses of the Western Capitalist system China has now put itself in the position where it is in a position to dominate the west and its neighbors. To China wealth is merely a path to power - everyone kowtow! Its always amazed me that more people have not read and discussed the article "Squanderville vs Thriftville" that Warren Buffet wrote in Fortune magazine in October 2003. That has indeed come to pass and we (Squanderville) are now powerless and deeply in debt.
5
I hope China eats us for lunch. Preferably with chopsticks and not a fork, that would hurt too much.
5
Meanwhile our President is focused on brining back coal mining jobs. You should all follow Ivanka Trump's lead an teach your children Chinese.
4
Yep.
China is looking and moving forward and we are looking and moving backward. One country has a leader that is looking to advance clean energy tech and the other has a leader looking to restore coal mining.
6
The completely asymmetrical relationship between the US and China has to end if the Westetn world order and culture is to survive. Chinese have access to the following in the US and Canada, while the reverse is not true:
1) Student visas. STEM is over saturated with Chinese students who then go to work for the US companies that routinely discriminate against American (especially older) workers in favor of Chinese nationals on H-1B and OPT visas. These are not the geniuses necessary for the betterment of the US economy. They are mostly average. Chinese managers hire Chinese nationals.
2) Real estate. Whole communities are transformed as Chinese stash their money into Western real estate. Vancouver, for example, is unrecognizable.
3) Birthright citizenship. Chinese on OPT and H-1B visas take advantage of birthright citizenship on a massive scale. The amendment needs to be repealed.
They are playing the long game, and are happily aided by the US companies that are only too happy to kneel before the communists if it will make them a dollar.
19
"China is directing billions of dollars to invest in research at home as well as to acquire innovative technology from abroad"
China is buying American technology with American dollars by selling cheap goods to Walmart. To paraphrase Marx: a Capitalist will sell the rope on which it will hang :(
7
NYT “If Made in China 2025 achieves its goals,” he said, “the U.S. and other countries would likely become just commodity exporters to China — selling oil, gas, beef, and soybeans.”
The article is too gloomy about Chinese prowess on advanced IT technologies.
Just to refresh our memory. The first Trump's meeting at the White House with representatives of American corporations was with top IT CEOs.
The first question asked by Trump was: How can I help you guys?
Of course, there are two ways to interpret Trump's words. For the bullish, President Trump recognizes the vital role played by the IT industry in the American and global economies.
The doomsayers, however, recall President Reagan's joke about the US government. The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
1
Memo to Wilbur Ross: Russia is our nation's enemy, which is what makes Donald Trump's personal financial dependence on Russia so dangerous. They own Trump due to all his loans and the terms of those loans.
5
And the US still is pushing coal. Won’t be long before the United States is the number 3 in global power.
3
And then China also steals what it wants when it wants.
4
Not sure why Americans are whining about China embracing capitalism.
Isn't that what you wanted?
And is it any wonder that China is thriving?
You buy their consumer products, they buy your debt.
Your roads and bridges are crumbling, China is building high-speed rails and trains. ...
China is already outpacing U.S. efforts on High Voltage Transmission, Advanced Coal Technologies, Nuclear Power, Alternative Energy Vehicles, Renewable Energy, Supercomputing, Revolutionary Electric Vehicle Batteries, and Converting Sunlight Into Usable Fuel (from the US Dept.of Energy).
A.I. is another area where China might already be ahead.
In education, China consistently beats American students in reading, math, and science skills, ensuring a well-educated and growing labor force.
China is surging ahead in the race to beat cancer with CRISPR.
...
The writing is on the wall and nobody should be surprised by this.
The Chinese have a plan for the future and they are moving ahead, aided by their authoritarian system of governance.
America has no plan and its dysfunctional political system has emerged as the biggest threat to its economic competitiveness.
China is forging new alliances, e.g. Russia and India. The construction of the Silk Route rail link which has huge implications for developing Sino-Asian trade is a good example.
And China's reluctance to invade, or bomb, impose sanctions or undermine legitimate governments stands in stark contrast to the US government's foreign policy.
中国 加油!
14
China is run by a bunch of engineers. The US is run by Donald Trump. Guess who is going to win? Not US.
4
'China does not need to match the United States militarily. Instead China can take advantage of the global economy and the internet to take down its main rival.'
that's what I've been saying for a while - China has maybe a million people working on computers to steal secrets and work out how to hack US security systems and the internet in general, so my expectation is not if but when push comes to shove – and China turns off the internet, and with it your water and electricity (no fuel pumps, no food deliveries - two days without food, rioting in the streets) – then who you gonna call ... ?
3
When any of the 50 million refugees wandering around the world move to China, I will believe that China is a great country.
I see no evidence that any refugee wants to move to China.
Moreover, I see no evidence that any part of the world that the Chinese have colonized (e.g., Hong Kong, Africa, Latin America, Southeast Asia) have any liking for them.
Almost everyone in the world sees the Chinese as ruthless imperialists, just as the Japanese were the early years of the 20th century.
7
ever wonder who made them refugees?
u.s. and its nato gang invaded and destroyed Iraq, bombed and destroyed Libya, destroyed Syria. Europe reaped the unintended benefits of refugees from these war torn countries.
Europeans see the handwritings on the wall. we don't.
4
Does the phrase "giving away the store" ring a bell? (an alarm bell)
5
"The goal is not simply to beat the United States. China is preparing for a day when cheap manufacturing no longer keeps its economy humming. It wants to embrace industries offering skilled jobs that do not blacken its skies and cloud its rivers."
Gee golly, how could this be? I have been assured by the Trump administration the only path to prosperity is to dig for coal and make boiler stoves.
7
The usual comments about China cheating and copying are blind repetitions of herd mentality. Consider, say for example, a medical conference where the latest surgical technology are presented and discussed. Attendees learn and adopt useful practices. All is ok but when the Chinese attendees do it, is it copying?
Then some would counter-argue that the Chinese government is involved and setting the rules to their advantage. But, really, is it only the Chinese government that does this? Be honest. Doesn't every responsible government in the world. whether "authoritarian" or democratic, does the same? Has these commenters suddenly forgot conveniently that even Trump is doing it with his"make America great again"? Is Trump also not setting rules to benefit his own country? Whether his efforts are effective or good is a separate issue.
This is a problem when commenters simply regurgitate stuff from herd mentality without using their brains.
5
Why do Americans think that American global dominance is the natural order of things? Why would any informed person think that countries like India and China will never develop economically and have their chance as ascendancy? Why would any sane person think the world will remain as it was in 1989?
The only constant in the world is that it will change. A country that adapts will survive and prosper. A country that rages against change and tries to crawl backwards will be left in the dust. The problem in the US now is that we have too many people, including the people in the White House, refusing to think of ways to adapt. They want to live the fantasy of being able to turn back the clock.
14
I think China is going to win this battle. Trump wants to go backwards, China is moving forward. China wants renewable energy, the Trump wants coal. China has the advantage because they have a steady leadership with a long term vision they can stick to to get it done, wheres the US not only changes leadership and "vision" every four years, the government is stagnant, it is so split within the parties, let alone either of the parties working together - it gets nothing done. Trump has done nothing to create, he has only destroyed. The US is going backwards and Trump is seen as divisive, isolationist, self serving, untrustworthy and all over the place, no-one knows what they want now. While the rest of the world makes deals together, Trump crushes deals then wants the same benefits as those in the deals it crushes. I believe we're seeing the transfer of power, the US is going to not come out ahead.
3
I have a different view. Manufacturing will become more local. Automation, AI, cheap energy, abundant land and raw materials and vicinity to market will bring many manufacturing back. There will be no economic advantage of making many products overseas. We are gradually seeing it. We can buy socks made in USA at Costco. And Kirkland adsorbent pads are the best and it is made in the USA.
US should focus more on offering unique products, services and experiences to foreigners. US higher education is the world's best. US healthcare is the world's best. US has Wild West, Grand Old South, Rocky mountain, prairie and farm country. I just don't buy the pessimistic view of alarmists.
3
the system in China now is a combination of Meritocracy and authoritarian which focusing on science, high tech and globalization, unfortunately the US is heading the other way. really interesting to see how the two great countries will look like in 2025.
4
Based on what we have seen so far with Xi’s ideologies, plans to invigorate China’s economic influence as well as an established Chinese upper-middle class who strives for more and more, there’s no doubt that all stakeholders will pool in whatever resources available to elevate China’s status as a world leader comparable to that of the United States. Given it’s political cohesiveness within a one-party system, the willingness for entrepreneurial companies to continuously test and innovate, and the dependency from developed countries to invest for a high ROI, its going to be extremely difficult to stifle China’s growth as an emerging leader in global trade.
I️ have lived in Hong Kong for most of my childhood life before moving the the US when I️ was a pre-teen. If you had asked me whether China then would have become the economic behemoth it is today, I️ would have scoffed at that thought and said there’s no way a country as restrictive as it was with a lower HKD currency exchange rate would ever be measurably successful.
Ask me now - and I’ll say as scared as I️ am to admit it, I️ believe it.
4
Made in China 2025 will be as much a fantasy as economic nationalism from everywhere else. Already, Chinese companies are eyeing Africa as source of future cheap labor, and Chinese consumers already show interest in foreign goods, particularly luxury brands. The upper middle class in China do not covet domestic cars, they want to drive Audis and BMWs. The Chinese government may have plans and nationalistic slogans, but capitalism is a force unto itself. Chinese businesses are like businesses everywhere else: they are in it for the money.
2
"There are a few US companies that have been leaning too far" said Wilbur Ross: is it because they are leaning towards China, that it is unacceptable? It seems when US companies are leaning towards Putin 'cronies', as Mr. Ross-owned Navigator Holdings, the leaning and partnering suddenly becomes eminently acceptable.
5
China is concentrating on the development of electric cars, and the U.S. is eliminating the subsidy for electric cars to reduce the demand, and thus their development, in the U.S. This is in line with China's encouragement of alternative energy production, dominating both the solar panel and wind turbine industries. We would rather encourage coal production. Doesn't anyone see a problem here?
20
Well let’s see instead of investing in healthcare, education and research the US has decided to reward itself with a tax cut that will add trillions to the national debt. Part of this reward will be paid for by cuts to domestic spending in key areas.
China on the other hand is .....well they are doing the opposite of what the GOP is planning.
Place your bets ladies and gentlemen...
21
China took a page from the American play book of 30 years ago. Fund basic research, attract researchers. It worked for US. It will work for them.
Today US federal research budgets (military and University) have shrunk. We have a President that wants to back coal technology, not solar power and electric cars; which are China's focus.
Some Americans cling to a idea which is no longer valid. That Tech is created in America, and gets sold to the rest of the world...or "stolen". This is no longer true. The rest of the world is catching up to, and will over take the US in Technology innovation.
The reality is that we have a global community of scientists and engineers. A raw idea that originates in China may be realized as a product in Europe or the US. We have an international system of intellectual property ownership that just does not work in the modern world.
This is a dispute over ownership, and monetization; which is separate from the creation of ideas. US legal Tech spends millions if not billions on patent disputes with other US companies. It's a distraction from the job.
In the end the first company that comes to market with a marketable product wins. Microsoft "stole" from everyone, but they made something that worked. Silicon Valley shrugged, and went off to invent something better.
24
An incomplete story. The US destroyed its 'invention factories' with the new model of corporate focus on quarterly profits and stock price. Some of it was destroyed by deliberate antitrust action- Bell Laboratories as a case in point. It was a great source of patents and Nobel prizes, but not allowed to turn them into marketable products- they had to be licensed to all comers. AT&T essentially invented cell phones but was not allowed to launch the service for more than 13 years.
RCA, Westinghouse, GE, and many other major companies supported research labs. All are gone, in the name of quarterly returns. Essentially the same kinds of people work at google etc, but they do not labor under nearly the same burden of regulation and antitrust that yesterday's industrial behemoths did. Their profits are unlimited, their intellectual property is theirs alone.
Essentially the only long-term risky research is now funded by the DoD, and to a lesser extent by civilian agencies. Sane Americans know that most STEM jobs lead nowhere- not to tenure if you are an academic, not to increasing salaries in private companies. If you are lucky enough to last that long you train your H1B replacement.
4
With our young children being faced with the remainder of the 21st Century, what are American adults doing now to protect their future?
The prospects that this article implies are frightening, especially because China is a one party dictatorship with a long history of human rights violations. What kind of world will they promote globally?
It seems U.S. policy was to look the other way in hopes a capitalist middle class would evolve and demand freedoms and a more responsive government. So far that long term strategy doesn't seem to be working nor does it seem that it will because of the fundamental differences between our cultures regarding freedom of the individual vs. collective responsibility.
Plus they have a unique advantage of being ethnically homogeneous and not burdened with the extra social challenges we have to build a diverse society.
I have heard about farms in the mid-west where farmers once used to get rich selling rice and other farm commodities to the Chinese, especially since Nixon opened they markets. But, presently, the Chinese have come in and bought up all the farms. The farmers now work for the Chinese landlords, as hired hands, and don't earn the same money. The Chinese just ship their rice back at a lower cost than when they had to purchase it. This makes those mid-western farming communities poorer for it.
We'll be lucky if we can even sell them commodities at this rate.
12
The Republican Party stoutly resists the idea of national industrial policy. Instead, they seek tax and trade policies that give them unlimited access to the U.S. from any place with subsidies, lax labor policies and little or no regulation.
To achieve short-term earnings and high stock prices, most American corporations will sell their future for immediate gains.
China, Japan and South Korea, among many other nations, know all this and are perfectly happy to reward a few Americans at the expense of the many. And that few can be purchased -- often for surprisingly little.
14
We're at a distinct disadvantage in this competition with China because we're living in the past. We were doing great back when there was no real competition and "if it's good for business, it's good for the country" was actually true. There are too many people who believe it still is true but in reality corporate business always was self-serving. Now that there is a huge new market in China they're prepared to do anything to get a piece of it, regardless of whether it's in the interest of the country. China has the advantage of (a) a plan and (b) government control. Meanwhile we fight among ourselves and Congress fiddles while the US burns (or would if they could agree on how to play the violin).
25
"When President Trump arrives in Beijing on Wednesday, he will most likely complain about traditional areas of dispute like steel and cars."
why complain? there is no reason why the US should specifically export steel or combustion-engine automobiles. don't make steel and automobiles again when there are more profitable and innovative sectors in the economy.
in addition, china could use more electric vehicles given its dirty air, which is a daily health hazard in many cities:
"[china] wants to embrace industries offering skilled jobs that do not blacken its skies and cloud its rivers."
the US should too--for example, it should want less coal production and consumption and more of other forms of energy.
...
"...[too much] sharing technology with countries that are potential enemies of ours,” said Wilbur Ross...
that is the assumption underlying most of this article. trade and sharing might not be mutually beneficial with an enemy. so, how much is the "potential" in this case? some people say that mr. trump goes to china, like a previous republican president in the early 1970s went, when steel and combustion-engine automobiles were a larger fraction of domestic production.
1
When I look at China over the last 35 years, I don't underestimate any of their goals. China has been the most incredible experiment in nation building in all recorded history. Playing by the rules does not always get you where you want to be and does not always make friends from those you are pushing out of the way.
13
Been to California lately? How about Stanford or cal tec? Not only do the Chinese have virtually carte Blanche to our intellectual property and technology, we are also educating most of their next generation leaders and those who in 2025 will be directly putting US out of business. Yes they are studying here at our top universities. They pay well I am told. I am sure that by the next presidential election they will already be the number one super power. Our petty squabbling amongst ourselves guaranteeing that we may already be irrelevant not irreplaceable.
37
OK, so I was at Stanford to study networking technology. We all got the same classes. Some of us went to work for Cisco in San Jose, CA. Some went back to China to work for Huawei.
Huawei absolutely nailed the right technology for fiber optic broadband edge networks. Cisco fumbled. They "let the market decide".
The world market chose Huawei. The Chinese did not steal our lunch, they out-executed us.
8
Huawei succeed in spite of Obama insinuated there might be built in back door, etc to sabotage the Huawei brand. it sure didn't help Cisco.
I wish cable news would take 1% of the time they spend on the drip-drip-drip Russia investigation and talk about Made in China 2025 and what this means for various industries, US - China relations, relations with the rest of the developing world, world trade and economic competition and its impact on security, the overall growth of the Chinese economy and its political implications, technological progress, etc. The insularity of our culture is just amazing.
24
A distinct American global trade order vision?
As a voracious reader please let me know where to learn about this distinct vision. I have yet to come across it. Bush Obama Trump and Krugman. One distinct vision. Who knew? And that is just four people out of near about 325,000,000.
Nor have I come across a distinct Chinese vision which I assume means Han, with Taiwan the highest Percent Han in the world and of course honorable mention to Singapore, and the People's Republic Chinese communist party exercising hegemony according to the whims of the current gangsters in charge. I am eager to learn more about the distinct Han vision of global trade. I trust there will be no long fingernails involved as was once the case of those who lived off the rents of the Han people for millenia, but plenty of imperial past pride exemplified by the feudal class royalty that Mao worked so hard to obliterate forever. Fat chance. Middle Kingdom baby.
Yeah yeah. Just sayng stuff about distinct visions. I know. Times trolling.
IN actuality - it was Sigapore and Taiwan know how and investment that helped China rise the most. You stated the reason... They are majority ethnic Han and speak Chinese. Western money and know how was later an less significant. Foxconn - who makes Apples I Phones in China - is headquartered in Taiwan.
It's amazing how little the media here seems to know and understand.
1
If the US government wanted to, it could stop spending so much on the military and spend more on subsidizing technology, basic research, or higher education. Every government and every people has to make choices. I happen to believe that when governments try to choose which technologies to subsidize, they usually don't choose effectively. It is relatively easier to choose when you are catching up to more technologically advanced countries, but much harder at the forefront of technology. I do think that funding for more basic research and higher education would be appropriate though.
6
What the US government did brilliantly in the Cold War was fund basic research through long weapons development contracts.They got heavily criticized for cost overruns, so now it's buy stuff "off the shelf" and shift R&D expense to US companies [though the companies get a fed tax credit, which is why they do it at all].
Yes, eventually the government picked "winners" for long term contracts, but they also payed for all the losers in research. The losers went on to build incredible things the US Military funded, but wasn't interested in, immediately.
Under Reagan, Clinton, the DOD adopted a "keep 'em alive" strategy. They spread the contracts around to keep companies alive. Defense contractors were failing/merging left and right, and there was a realization that this would drive up procurement costs in the future.
Under Bush (W), the DHS, not the DOD, was appointed to distribute R&D money and they did it almost exclusively for political purposes, not technical reasons.
In my case my organization had a working device for detection of over 300 biological and chemical weapons already working in field trials, and the DHS awarded the contract to a GOP crony company with "a letter of intent". No product, no employees, no research. We had secured about 100 patents on the basic technology, so their solution was never delivered.
6
I happen to believe Silicon Valley and the internets are outgrowths of US subsidies at every level going back to Stanford and railroad grants and Chinese immigrant labor for a transcontinental railroad.
Famously so.
But who cares about historical facts. “I believe” rules.
1
As long as Americans let themselves be constantly dragged into the culture wars, many facilitated by Russian trolls and pernicious politicians, we will fall way behind economically , politically, educationally and culturally. While Russia delights in our unfolding and weakening, china quietly and meticulously forges ahead with their goal to be the world's new superpower. We desperately need leaders who will impliment fair tax reform across the board and use the revenue to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, ensure healthcare for all citizens and move us forward into an economy based on clean energy. Without these critical changes, we will indeed cede our global position and all that that entails, to china. Bet on it.
15
It's definitely Russia's fault again, "distracting America with its trolls" while China is taking over the world.
2
China has 1.5 billion people who given the chance, study math and science, and as Buddhists, value expertise and thought. The US has 400 million people: 32 million smoke pot; 40 million use other drugs or alcohol; and students avoid STEM classes by and large. So, do the math.
23
this is why new bi-lateral agreements are better for us as Trump is proposing
????
1
Wonder if you can buy a Chinese company and move it to the USA or Europe with all of its technology secrets - as they have done with Volvo, Kuba & others. Bet the Chines government would put up a big stink - I can recall when a several US manufacturers 1st moved production to Formosa - the Republic of China & a few years later a design and the development and the management. Today's circuit board manufacting is nearly 100% automated and the manufactured parts: higher pricing isn't labor costs but taxes (federal, state, &local property) if not China - another country would of gotten the manufacturing plant - Possibly Brazil, Dominican Republic, or another low tax state. (*)Wonder how many today - think - President Nixon opening it up -China mainland that was a great idea !! GE & citibank allowed / encouraged and provided assistance for US workers to move overseas - I was one of them - You will not see that today - workers get 2 months & an opportunity to train their replacement.
2
The United States has made poor bets on encouraging domestic corporate monopolies like Google and Monsanto to name just a few. These companies do not share our national interests. The United States thought it could wield superior corn genetics over China- so what did China do? It bought Monsanto's Swiss competitor Syngenta. China openly steals or buys the technology it needs. The US is moving more towards the sad feudal system that once dominated where I am writing this from. Those Kings and Queens never really had a long term vision.
The United States is a ship without a rudder.
11
"China openly steals or buys the technology it needs"... So basically not much different than any other nation that has risen before. Thankfully they haven't done as others and started wars to plunder.
4
No. we did not plunder. we liberated the Iraqis and Libyans from tyranny.
the wounded, maimed, orphaned, widowed, and the dead are most certainly grateful for their freedom.
Three Kingdoms: Capturing Arrows with Boats of Straw.
Brilliant.
From China's perspective, that is.
1
A country where the people who vote (and whose president) value their right to own an assault rifle over their children's right to quality public, vocational, and college educations, and think their interests are better served by closing the doors to immigrants and elevating the Bible as science and history, is primed to be knocked off its perch by a striver like China.
22
"The United States long believed bringing China into the World Trade Organization, which oversees global trade disputes, would ensure it would follow the rules."
Ha! I knew that was bogus 20 years ago! But investors and top executives were looking for a good excuse to cash out. And now they're catching on? Nope. Just cashing in as long as they can, till the US no longer controls any technology.
6
It is interesting to think of a rival; China in this case. The US has access to almost 25% of the Earth's resources with about 5% of the World's population. Added to this is a constant influx of high achieving immigrants, including Chinese, who just about earn median wages. How is the US going to be dethroned?
1
Well we could put a spoiled child in charge and his policies could drive away all of those high achieving immigrants by promoting hate for all non-whites or anyone that can be deemed the other. We can allow millions of guns to be spread around the populace inviting violent incidents to take place on a regular basis. We could decide that all that really matters is a hyper wealthy group of a million out of the three hundred and gradually push all but that small percentage into subsistence wages. We could promote dogma over scientific fact. We could devote our attention to industries of the past instead of those of the future. We could borrow to fight wars around the world and bear the burden as the world's policeman while the rest of the world free rides under our safety net. We could cut funding for education and basic research.
13
Yes, internally!
1
To best serve the public interest:
Stop importing Chinese engineers, scientists, “investors,”
and university students.
Stop issuing the visas.
4
How comedic. Those (some) schools need Chinese students to keep them afloat. If you remove all Chinese engineers from the Bay Area what will happen to the tech ecosystem?? Then you do that - that will leave the Indians. Do you think they will want to be "little tech brother to the US forever?". Nope! They will compete like the Japanese - then Koreans - now Chinese. Then you will to ban the Indians. It will all be too late anyway. Ask those in the tech and science sectors... It is already beginning to tilt toward Asia. Protectionism won't work for long.
4
Wait wait wait, those mentioned are Americans of Chinese/Indian heritage. They are Americans. Are you saying we should do the same to German Americans since Germany outcompetes our auto industries ?
1
We in the U.S. could perhaps better embrace China's growth and America's decline if the former was not governed by a totalitarian regime. I worry less about China's economic supremacy than its ability to use those resources to take away freedoms from the rest of us.
The current political situation in America is actually hastening China's ascendancy and amounting to a tremendous waste of human capital here at home. With different leadership, we could easily match or exceed China's progress and the entire world would be much better off.
18
We're done. Keep voting Republican! Enjoy buying your Chinese solar panels from Wallmart, moving to and fro in driverless Chinese cars, talking on Chinese made phones and watching Sinovision on your Chinese made flat screen tv. And above all: Keep Voting for the Republicans who hate you, and enjoy that GOP paradise
20
So are you seriously saying China wasn't in the ascendancy during Clinton and Obama as well??? You actually did state the problem in the US.. Partisanship (and arrogance)...
2
Ha! As if it's a bi-partisan issue. It's a capitalist/trade issue. If you think the Dems are some pure America first party, you aren't paying attention. It's about money, not politics.
3
This article is defeatist breast beating. Just today this same newspaper has stories which speak to three areas in which America excels:
1. Our corporations are number one at not paying taxes.
2. We are number one in weapons sales. Our Great President is ensuring that we maintain this leadership by asking the Japanese to buy more. Here is an article with pertinent facts from 2015:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/26/us/politics/united-states-global-weap...
3. We are number one in gun deaths, both in absolute numbers and on a per person basis.
4. This is not in today's paper, but is still pertinent. Sadly, we are number 2 in worldwide incarceration rates:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate
Seychelles is number one.
So everybody in America should sleep easy. The Chinese are not overtaking us anytime soon.
37
Most of the Chinese technology is stolen from western countries, mainly US.
And US companies like Advanced Micro have proved what communists used to say " capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them"
21
They paid AMD - so it's not stealing. Besides if you notice - they were shut out of supercomputers and space technology. You might want to check who is putting out the most advanced stuff in both. In case you didn't know - there were millions of very intelligent Chinese around the world. Many working in advances sciences and engineering. As conditions in the country improved - many went back. It's laziness and arrogance to claim "it's all stolen". No wonder the scales are changing in balance.
2
Lenin: “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” It didn't work for the USSR. Will it for China?
3
For most of the past 2200 years China has been the scientific and technological world superpower. Foolishly ceding exploration and exploitation of science and technology to European barbarians for the last half a millennia cost China dearly in terms of socioeconomics and politics and military power. But it was Japan using Western technology that left 30 million Chinese dead during World War II.
10
To your first sentence that is true (though you can carry it back further)... But most people have no clue in our country because we are taught the Greeks invented everything and the Anglo Saxons sailed the world benevolently making it better for everyone else (hello Cecil Rhodes)... I was in a college class that didn't know where Algebra was invented - let alone what the Chinese invented throughout human history. How can most be expected to understand epochs of time? Most have zero clue about non European contribution to human history and advancement.
4
There is no "natural" order to the world that says the Chinese have to be a world superpower, just as there is none for the United States.
1
@Blackmamba
Geometry was developed by Greek and algebra was developed Hindus, Muslims and Persians. Rene Descartes synthesized these two concepts into what at present called analytic geometry. Thirty years later, Sir Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz independently developed a powerful mathematical tool called calculus based on analytic geometry.
.
China has very effective leadership.
We caved in Russia by having a rate of military spending they could not keep up with, it bankrupted them and broke up the Soviet Union.
The Chinese are bankrupting us, by offering superb, cheap consumer goods that we can't resist buying, witness the Apple computer I am typing this comment on, actually a Chinese product. And whatever you are reading this on, doubtless made in China, too.
Our deficit with them keeps growing, they keep buying our debt as we are in the midst also of a crisis of democracy and a breakdown of discipline at every level. We spend money to get politicians re-elected, they spend money playing the long game of national dominance.
Net net: They are winning the poker game. We are losing.
28
I'm all for improving business. Not so much for beating out the other guy. If China has its way, they will dominate commerce just like we do now. The best answer is to invest in R & D and intellectual talents from around the world. But you know where we're going with that. Keep them out.
If you invest in R & D, you need to protect it.
3
Reporting in outlets like the NYT always have a implicit notion of equivalence in competition in technology sectors when referring to the US vis-a-vis China.
This is fundamentally wrong, and frustrating, since there is zero equivalence between the two countries when it comes to tech.
For starters, many US tech companies (e.g., Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Amazon, etc; the list is enormous) are not allowed to compete or are often stymied from competing in China, while Chinese companies routinely compete in the US, and routinely raise money from US investors. Second, pretty much everything that passes off for "tech" from China is a knock-off of US ideas, US intellectual property, and US designs (I dare your readers or reporters to name ONE major tech innovation from China that has been globally adopted, leave alone be knocked off by a US firm). Clearly, they have improved or made cheaper some of those US innovations (since after all, they did not have to spend on R&D), but to suggest that Chinese tech is even remotely in the same league as, say, Silicon Valley is not simply incorrect, but insulting.
9
It’s fine if China wants to have a modern, competitive economy - just what everybody else wants. What’s not fine at all is to do it through theft or breaking the rules. In this respect at least the Chinese communists prove themselves true followers of Marx and Lenin, who from the get go declared that lies, theft and “any means necessary” are just fine.
If the Americans could spare some time and attention from fighting their all-absorbing ideological wars, maybe something could be done to force China to play by he rules.
4
Trump backed us into a corner on this one.
Instead of having the leverage of a unified multinational front provided by the TPP, we instead will let China have its way.
Personally, I think it's pretty fair considering China's history and our role in bringing down the dynastic system and bringing on 100 years of misery.
But it is certainly not in America's interest. I'll eat my maozi if Trump "wins" anything in Asian trade deals. He doesn't have a clue what the issues and stakes are.
3
Hey one thing you have to give China credit is they are trying to get ahead and they are building up nations not destroying them with bombs and guns like the US is doing.
24
The United States government has interwoven military intervention, technology development, support for higher education, weapons sales, influence over global banking and financial policy, and dollar denominated international trade to derive the spoils that have characterized American exceptionalism since World War II. We now have an administration that is destroying or neglecting most of those institutions with policy uncertainty and ineptitude, yet assumes the spoils are a given. At the same time, a powerful rival has been striving for parity and recognizes it is being handed an opportunity for dominance.
I can only imagine the chuckling of Chinese strategists when Trump told his Japanese hosts that they could ensure their security by buying American weapons. Given the instability and untrustworthiness Trump imposes upon every aspect of arms development and trade, as well as international security agreements, China has never been in a better position to achieve cooperation and influence with its historic enemy and rival. Why buy American when America is no longer trustworthy and Chinese manufacturing is less expensive?
6
China reached 'peak-population' a few years ago, and has begun a long-term process of workforce contraction and demographic aging. With limited in-migration, the population is expected to shrink and age significantly in coming decades - inverting its population pyramid.
The economic burden of dependency of an aging population, requiring pensions and health and social welfare services, will grow dramatically. A retiring workforce will reduce domestic demand.
The manufacturing sector needs to quickly embrace high-end technologies to offset the coming contraction and avoid a hard crash.
However, this automation strategy will eliminate large numbers of low- and mid-level manufacturing jobs, leaving the future workforce stratified between few high-end technicians and many low-end service workers.
Given these trends, its not clear whether China has the human capital to develop into an economic superpower with globalized multinationals versus a more narrowly focused technology hardware exporter.
3
Germany and China have comprehensive national industrial policies.
The U.S.? No.
The idea that libertarianism / anarchy / pure capitalism is good for broad prosperity is a fairy tale, with no real world successful examples.
Historically, US economic might was built in an environment which included pro-active national industrial policy. Deifying some vaguely defined "globalism" - while our economic rivals embrace and benefit from economic nationalism - is foolish unilateral capitulation. Workers feel betrayed by our *national* leadership and news media, who demonize anyone proposing that our *nations* leaders should pursue any *nationalist* policies, such as infrastructure spending, full employment policies, or ending decades of trade deficits.
Without a comprehensive national strategy for economic success, we end up with a patchwork of policies as proposed by whichever donors supply the most cash.
Shipping jobs to foreign nations - just for cheaper wages, even though companies are profitable - inevitably transfers technology abroad, with US know-how lost forever. Along with the lost manufacturing capability, is the synergy, where creative ideas and IP are often created in activities related to actual production of goods.
Finally, supply is not the problem - demand is. Tax cuts to companies already sitting on cash will not increase wages, nor increase investment, when there is already a supply glut.
34
In the mid-80's the US banned export of encryption technology in software. It was done under ITAR, which controls military munitions and equipment export.
The irony is that the encryption they were banning for export was developed by two Belgian cryptographers and was already in use throughout the world.
The US needs a strategy and policy for Technology success, but we need to acknowledge, before we do that, the fallacy that we develop technology and give/sell it to the world.
OSS Architect:
Of course other nations develop technology.
But having been involved in development of IP, I have to be very emphatic that if we want more IP to be developed in the US, it is very foolish indeed to allow massive transfer of our manufacturing to foreign nations. As requirements for existing products change (safety, environmental, cost, performance, etc), it is the existing producers of those products who have creative people already immersed in the existing technology, and who have a very good chance to be the ones to create and own the IP which will inevitably be created.
The idea that the US can ship all our factories to other nations, and somehow have our "creative geniuses" sit alone in a loft downtown somewhere, expecting them to come up with designs for the next generation of products, and the associated IP, is ludicrous.
Simply insisting on balanced trade, insisting on some kind of competitive framework that doesn't allow our jobs to endlessly flow to nations with cheaper labor, would be a great start. Throw in some infrastructure, affordable nationwide high speed internet, and high demand policies.
Some government contracts to purchase goods with up and coming technology (electric cars, etc) would be a great way to boost demand. Massive amounts of demand has tremendous effect on fostering innovation, and increased productivity. Lack of demand is death to capitalism.
3
Welcome to anarchic feudalism.
1
The article talks about "China" in terms of its government policies like "Made in China 2025" rather than it's people.
Perhaps the role of government should be to create an environment where the people it serves can thrive through their own efforts to pusue their own goals. Not one where people are their as cogs in the machine of government, working to support the government's central goals.
I am grateful I am in a country where goals are mostly bottom up, Where price and production decisions are distributed across the people that only as a whole contain the distributed information needed to tune the economy.
I believe in an environment where good economic plans decisions automatically result in localized growth and bad one's cause businesses to perish with their resources including people being reused by the growing businesses.
In short, I prefer our economy which outside of health care and the safety net is based largely on free market principals. A free market regulated for fraud, monopolies, and pollution where we serve the interests of others largely be seeking to serve our own.
One where we buy the products and services that give us the best value, and where we can work for the employer who sees the greatest value in hiring us.
Nice thoughts and yes, I favor a market economy, but if you are competing against a government monopoly of over 1 billion people, you need strong government (and in fact, multi-government) support or you will be crushed. Frankly, the US government has always helped US companies compete overseas. The issue today with China, Inc. is the tactics will have to be adjusted in a major way or we will lose in the long-term. We have anti-trust laws because monopolies distort free markets. In this case, we are competing against a government monopoly and the rules, strategies and tactics need to be adjusted accordingly.
9
China is keen to sense the economic power vacuum. The country is rising to the occasion to the next level of economy. The last sentence summarizes the piece. Rest of the countries, especially US, will be relegated to commodity exporters to China for beef, vegetables, soybeans, oil, gas, etc. In contrast Donald policy, more precisely dictum, is to a 1950's economy.
9
While I don't think it is what you really mean, but a 1950's US economy basically would entail the rest of the developed world being in rubble while the USA dominates in virtual every economic sector.
1
The old "Europe was rubble" myth. While I don't agree with everything Paul Krugman says, he does have some arguments against the "Europe was rubble" theory.
In fact, according to trade theory, we should actually benefit more as a nation from having prosperous and efficient trading partners.
In contrast to the "Europe is rubble" myth, which seems to imply that we would be better off with completely isolationist policies: If Europe was rubble, what would they have to offer in the way of raising the US standard of living?
The trade related problems the US faces now, really are caused by policies made to benefit donors to US politicians, rather than the common good. The fact that we have had *decades* of large trade deficits, is the result of feckless and corrupt trade policy, and think tanks dedicated to redistributing money upwards. And now that they have squeezed the bottom 90% dry, the 1% is going after the 90-99%, with their latest tax plan. Every other nation is looking after their own national economic interests, while the richest nation per capita watches major bridges fall into the Mississippi River due to neglect. Shameful. FDR's New Deal gets dismantled, and the 99% get the shaft. I guess our pols figure they can be puppets for the Chinese oligarchs and donors, just as easily as they can for American oligarchs and donors, once that becomes expedient.
1
One key question remains: Can a society that up until now has tried to stress the dignity of the individual, personal liberty and free markets (and, unfortunately, focused on tomorrow morning) compete with one which emphasizes the collective and command and control and thinks in terms of decades, if not centuries?
8
In light of this article, it's clear that Trump's withdrawal from the TPP will only hasten American decline on world markets. No doubt, China sees opportunity in the very technologies Trump seeks to keep down in favor of entrenched fossil fuel interests: renewable energy, electric cars, advanced nuclear power, etc. History will not look favorably upon these choices.
But does this mean that China will DOMINATE the world mid-century? As successful as it's been for the past 30 years, China faces plenty of headwinds.. Most importantly, China's labor force is peaking, and will decline for the rest of the century. The era of endless Chinese cheap labor, city building and debt-financed expansion is about over, to be replaced by efforts maintain standards of living with fewer people working and ever-increasing wages. And there is no guarantee that the Chinese system of government will be able to support a prosperous, innovative tech-driven society.
If America gets its act together and invests in education, science, engineering, R&D and low-carbon technologies that the world wants to buy --- then I would not write off the USA. But we have to actually GET our act together --- rather than treating each other like the enemy, promoting guns, arguing about who gets to use which bathroom, investing heavily in gasoline-powered SUVs that only sell well in America, protecting coal and pharmaceutical interests, shutting down science funding, etc.
48
Only sensible choice seems to be making plans under the assumption that PRC will achieve enough under the initiative discussed here. Playing with 'ifs' concerning the democratic economies' ability to move quickly under strain will be a serious delusion.
1
China has been uncannily successful for the past 3,000 years. Not just the past 30.
Trump is in way over his hair plugs.
1
Amen and well said. We can do it, if we just stop hating each other.
So are massive amounts of Saudi money or Chinese money going to change the tech industry? Does it matter? Whoever has the most money will influence for awhile and then another monied entity nation or individual will come in with more money. Is it really trade between nations or just the wealthy elite moving their money to the next advantageous industry wherever that may be?
Trump is on an Asian trip which is supposed to benefit US interests. He is traveling with over 20 CEOs.
With the release of the Paradise Papers it is becoming increasing clear that the monied elite of the world move about their funds shaping national policies and alliances with little regard for borders, national integrity or previous trade deals.
Their alliance has more to do with their wealth and investments than any foreign policy. True globalization for the 1%.
17
There's no IP protection in China. Laws of economics don't work.
I know of a tech. company, whose IP/ products were given by Chinese customers with express desire create/ develop a local Chinese supplier. Of course backed by the Chinese/ state governments.
So the customer and supplier both get subsidies from the government. The supplier ships the product to the customer. Supplier gets paid by the government for "developing" an industry and creating jobs, and only a token amount is paid by the buyer. The buyer in turn also gets free money/ subsidies.
Why would a buyer buy from a non-Chinese supplier, when the government helps steal the IP, and then pays the local parties to make the transaction happen.
The whole thing stinks, and if we don't course-correct, our technology advantage is doomed!
7
Trump lives in 1970. He doesn’t know Japanese car companies manufacture in the US and is pushing coal. He will never understand that ideas and tech make the real money.
16
America! Wake up! You have about three minutes to act! Otherwise, it's bye-bye American Dream. And then America slips forever on the global trading stage.
7
China doesn't play fair and represents the biggest threat to the US in the long run. The greed of global enterprises drives Chinese ascendency.
3
So you are saying greed of global enterprises doesn't drive the US global trade mission? I hardly think we exempt from the tar on that brush.
2
We have no say in what the Chinese government demands of those who choose to manufacture there, and we have no real control over what foolish corporate managements are willing to concede in order to do so.
US government sovereignty ends at our borders.
10
This is the problem with Trump and his dedicated base, they are trying to bring back the 1950's , with things like coal and steel and good manufactured on assembly lines, which are relics, meanwhile Trump and the GOP are making every effort, unlike the Chinese, to slash spending on research that drives the high tech market (not surprisingly, given that the GOP and its fundamentalist Christian base see science as a threat, not as a means to prosperity).
The thought of China dominating tech is truly scary, they can leverage that position to do many harmful things. Chinese computer and routers, for example, can have all kinds of backdoors built in them to allow the Chinese to spy, and they also could use dominance in technology to force the rest of the world to adopt their paranoid, controlled vision of the internet, banning things the chinese consider "dangerous' and so forth. Competition is a good thing, and if China can for example develop Solar power or electric cars the way the Japanese revolutionized the car industry and electronics, it could harken in the end of gasoline engines and dirty power (to the chagrin of the Trumpites, who probably want cars to go back to having carberators), and could spur innovation in the US..but if it is single sided, if the use cedes this, prepare for a world run by Chinese government ideas, forget open sharing of ideas or the power of the individual, China in that way is still in the Han dynasty.
5
We have a number of structural problems that are unlikely to be fixed under the Trump administration when we need strong government leadership to Keep America Great. US executives are very short-sighted as their bonuses are often tied to short-term profits. The will give away the technology today and take the bonus, even if it leaves the company and the country weaker in the long-term. The government must stop this.
The United States led one initiative that would have helped somewhat to protect United States IP and that was the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but Trump destroyed that one. He would rather have bilateral agreements which will never work when dealing with China, Inc. The only way to do so is for many countries to coordinate and negotiate in blocks, otherwise China, Inc. will just divide and conquer. Trump fails to see this. He encouraged Brexit, which is just the opposite of what the West (and the East, other than China) needs to do, which is to form giant trading blocks. In fact, one area, by way of example, the US and the EU should coordinate closely on is aerospace. The EU and the US should just agree that there will be minimal, if any, technology sharing by Boeing and Airbus with China, Inc. Otherwise, China will just play Boeing and Airbus off against each other and the technology will just be lost.
6
As Americans cheer Trump's vacuous "Make America Great Again", it's only fair that Chinese embrace "Make China Great Again", although Xi does not say so explicitly. But in the end, it is not the blowhard slogans that count. It is execution. Here is a contest between two different political systems, how they manage and deploy their human resources. Put it another way, think of China and USA as two huge multinational corporations. How do their board of directors and top executives measure up? Which one has a clearly articulated corporate mission statement and measurable strategic plan to realize their goals? Which company emphasize continuing education and training of their human assets and improve workplace environment? At this point, it is quite obvious which one is moving in the right direction.
64
Only it's "Make China Great:" no "Again." When you--we--use that word, it implies that things aren't so good right now. And they aren't, for us, nor are they apt to get better if we're focusing on bringing back the coal industry. If there's one thing positive you can say about totalitarian governments--or at least the Chinese model, it's that they have defined goals and a committment to get there.
2
Gee, Obs, is that why rich Chinese Communists have bought up, so much property in Vancouver, B.C. .. so "righteously? And the 300,000 best/brighest China students in the USA, financially propping up USA academia?
Quite obvious, the USA is winning, IMHO -- 300,000 Chinese students can't be wrong.
1
NUMMI is a good example, albeit an imperfect one of what's happening in China. Under pressure, Toyota shared manufacturing experience with the U.S. (GM) for the purpose of profit - to be able to expand its market in the U.S.
Today, U.S. companies are sharing technology with Chinese companies for profit. Through JV agreements, U.S. companies are able to gain access to new customers and compete with Japanese/European who are doing the same thing.
How about government intervention? That's up for debate. Our experience in the U.S. suggests government involvement doesn't work over the long term. Maybe China has figured it out?? I don't know.
1
who said government intervention doesn't work in the US? almost every innovation underlying America's post war prosperity came from government intervention during WW2.
7
The article misses other points. Technology enables centralization of transactions within geo-political-cultural l spheres. Ownership and the value of ownership is challenged.
"The goal is not simply to beat the United States. China is preparing for a day when cheap manufacturing no longer keeps its economy humming. It wants to embrace industries offering skilled jobs that do not blacken its skies and cloud its rivers."
Should that be the goal of any inspiring country in the world?
74
Nope, apparently our current government wants to blacken the skies with coal for the benefit of a few west virginians.
1
Years ago I did a questionnaire to approximate my personal carbon footprint. At that time, living in upper middle class home, both my spouse and me driving separate cars and eating meat several times a week gave me a score implying it would take seven planets for everyone to live as I did.
China was just rising. A couple of years later we had shortages of steel and ran out of asphalt because of Chinas demands.
Meanwhile we outsourced most of our jobs and manufacturing to them. They enhanced their market share by purchasing outright the outsourced American-owned companies.
Billions of people later, who do you think will get the windmills, electric cars and solar panels? They all require rare earths and China owns the majority (was 80%) of rare earth mines. Which btw are extremely destructive to the environment to mine.
Dystopic maybe, I’d like to envision something else but our whole country is the worlds 1%. (And our 1%is hiding trillions offshore in corporate accounts robbing many economies of helpful tax dollars).
4
There is no intrinsic shortage of rare earth minerals (which aren't particularly rare, BTW). Most mines are in China because they've been willing to mine them for lowest cost, i.e. without adequate environmental control. But there are plenty of reserves elsewhere.
2
This article ignores a lot of reality. China educates and graduates more technical people than any country on earth. It alsp has tremedous resources namely cheap capital and cheap labor. I spent a month touring China a few months ago and I could tell the people most people wants to have a middle class life and with the government swimming with trillions of money, it is a perfect solution for domination in major industries into the future. Yes China want to leapfrog and gain access to western technology but for the west to sell to China they need to share but the reality eventually China would gain this technology from somewhere else whether outside or inside
4
Trump's America first may backfire as other countries like China feel the need to assert a China First policy and thru sheer economic power overshadow America;s current economic leadership. China now has its most powerful leader to date while the USA has an unpopular weak and ignorant leader trying to take us back to 1950 ,the writing is on the wall in Chinese.
87
1950? We'll be lucky not to hit 1850.
2
By the middle of this century, the USA is going to look like an old-fashioned, run-down country, while China zooms to the forefront of technology. One of the major reasons: the USA is giving up on the idea of reinvesting its wealth in research, development, education and infrastructure. Instead, so much of its profits are being handed to the individual oligarchs aka "the 1%" for their private use. Have you read the tax cut bill now pending in the Republican-controlled Congress?
162
the US already looks like an old fashioned run down country. seen the roads and bridges lately?
5
"By the middle of this century"? "is going to look"?
You're otherwise right, but we're living in a developing country NOW.
2
J, that's right, ignore the 300,000 best/brighest students from China in the USA today, most of whom would stay in the USA, if they could bring their parents and grandparents here.
China does not have (1) rule of law and (2) freedom -- it will NEVER defeat the West, IMHO.
That "1%" stuff of "socialist" Bernie Sanders, age 75 and with a $600,000 beach house, is as old as Lenin's speeches -- laughable.
1
Regardless of political affiliation, people in the United States need to wake up and realize that the U.S. and the West are NOT playing on the same field as the Chinese. Requiring sharing of technology and intellectual property will eventually lead to long-term losses for these very same companies that are seeking short-term profits and bowing to Chinese rules. How is it that all these companies are deciding to look past the very plans (e.g Made in China 2025) that the Chinese government--which is backing many of the businesses that INDEPENDENT foreign entities are making deals with--hopes will run foreign business out of China?
13
There is a major advantage that China has in the technology arena, that is the ability to execute a long term plan. We as a democracy have major shifts in direction every time we have a new president and / or a new majority in Congress. We should be thinking about ways that we could have consistent long term plans.
45
@ Gary Bischoff: I agree with the need for consistent long term plans, but the WE to which you refer is really THEY -- i.e. the leaders of the two parties. They seem concerned with nothing but slinging mud at each other. A plague on both their houses!
5
Either eliminate Fox news, or eliminate its supporters or enemies. There isn't room in this country for both sides while Fox news still poisons the airwaves.
The advantage of China is that it can execute a long-term plan. The disadvantage of China is that it will execute a long-term plan.
Things change. Technologies change. Ten-year plans are most effective if you get it right ten years into the future - but that is pretty difficult to do. China could get lucky, but it *will* need luck. Democracies tend to be nimbler than oligarchies, because every once and a while the bums get thrown out. So don't count the US (or the West) out, not yet anyway.
1