China is acting blatantly protectionist in industry that's important to US | Hacker News Reader

China is acting blatantly protectionist in industry that's important to US

cnbc.com

28 pointsSirLJ13 comments

The reason for blackout can be simplely find in the movie "War machine", by brat pitt. In the movie, Afghanistan was supposed to set free. The farmers in Afghanistan can grow whatever they want. The best thing to grow can be cotton or opium. But since US is one of the largest cotton exporter, U.S. would never give the money to Afghanistan to help farmers growing cotton. Thus,they only get money for growing opium. I would say it is conflicted interest. Chinese movie industry has grown to a level it has the same level of power to affect Chinese people's recognition of the world as Hollywood. So when summer arrives, the industry has prepared a lot of movies for the teenagers in China, of course they would wield the commercial protection club to promote it own movies. Just like what U.S. do for their steel industry, farming and all other industry. I would say deal with it Hollywood and all U.S. media, considering the fact that you have never given Chinese enough respect (remember that your media encouraging children to speak "kill all Chinese" in the broadcast? Remember that the black dude made a song singing about killing Chinese and robbing them, and what YouTube do is simply saying it's personal opinion?), a simple summer blackout is way more friendly than I thought.

The US subsidies don't involve banning of foreign products. Steep tariffs would be just as effective but would make China a lot more money.

It's pretty apparent from this that the restriction of western movies is political, not to "help the domestic market"

Also your comments about China and respect are classic whataboutism.

I live in the US and have no idea what you're talking about with either of those events. I don't doubt that it happened, but if your standard for events that show bias is so low I'm sure I could find a reference to "prove" almost anything.

You complaints seem focused around freedom of speech. Are you really complaining that the US won't take down a YouTube video? It's a single guy in a population of over 300 million. I'm sure I could find tons of videos talking about killing and robbing Americans that youtube hasn't taken down either

A summer-long embargo seems a little extreme, but I can understand why restrictions like these are done. Probably not for an overt political motive, but rather to let one's own country have a more fair opportunity to build its own film industry.

> more fair opportunity

'Fair' is irrelevant, an excuse at best - they will do whatever is advantageous. They didn't roll back protections for any of their other industries, and they won't for this one, either.

Well, yeah, of course it happens at an advantage. Most other nations do too though, right? The United States has had trade protections for its industries before, so it strikes me as understandable for a nation to manage their growth that way.

Nations have done far worse than trade protections to help their prosperity, so it's very understandable.

What's less understandable are the calls of "We live in a globalized world, that's just how things work now!" when Western nations try the same.

No it's purely political. A good economy keeps people from asking for changes from their government. Like a new one or a voice to change policies.

They've done this for years. The US believe so much in globalisation they refuse to do anything.

"Globalization" has probably benefitted most of the people in the US, which is why most people like it. It has cost some jobs but it has also created other jobs and gotten us access to much cheaper goods and in balance is probably good overall (at least for me personally). It's probably to blame for some employment issues but for most of America employment is decently high and manufacturing (and also stuff like coal mining) jobs would probably be on the decline with or without globalization.

No, I don't believe it does. I keep seeing this comment and it never made sense because the promise of globalization was that it would drive down prices because of cheaper labor. But shoes, computers, and cloth cost just as much as ever. It seems only the rich have benefited from this.

It's not everything but stuff like smart phones, jeans, and shoes would be much more expensive if they were manufactured in the US. For example sneakers already have high tariffs (high end shoes being taxed an extra about 12% and most other mass market shoes being taxed at around 35-48% from the data I found) but about 98% of shoes in the US are foreign made because even with the tariffs and shipping costs the US can't compete. The total labor cost per hour is often about 10x what it is in countries like Bangladesh so it seems pretty clear that especially for things where labor is a large part of the cost they are going to be much cheaper if manufactured outside the US.

If the costs outweight the benefits for the Chinese government, then they won't allow it.

Same goes for the US. I highly doubt the US would want to give up anything to China or compromise anything they already have so that China would open up their cinemas, its definitely a realpolitik way of looking at it, but its usually how things go.

I think your argument is a bit naive because it does hurt most Americans from what I've seen, but these arrangements help the very few that can truly influence these policies. As for the Chinese yes, a strong economy is a huge reason why they are in power. Protectionist policies are one way they've used to keep people happy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com