Utopia Talk / Politics / Unfair Trade Practices

Seb rank	Fri Jan 23 00:08:38 Habebe: Why is tech transfer an unfair trade practice? You use tariffs to repatriate manufacture; and you weaponize dependency, and you use that to try and force other countries to reduce their food and product standards to benefit US producers selling inferior products. It is within a countries jurisdiction to grant protective monopolies on ideas, but there is no reason for any other jurisdiction to do so. Global IP rules work if there is, broadly, free flow of capital, good and services. Since you are actively subverting those ideals, far from complaining about Chinese "unfair practices" we in Europe should be adopting them. There is no reason to pay huge royalties to American firms for easily repeatable ideas implemented on commodity technology we can buy from other parties. None at all. Certainly not when the US is using tarifs on our good exports to encourage the manufacturers to move their production to US soil. By all means, manufacturer your own goods; and we will make our own forks of your firms software. Just as it was when America industrialised on stolen designs.
Habebe rank	Fri Jan 23 01:55:57 Seb, You mistake me for claiming the US doesn't use unfair trade practices. That said, I beleieve*(could be wrong) That the EU forces US pharmaceuticals to limit IP gains for example for cheaper pills.
Habebe rank	Fri Jan 23 02:04:41 Everyone uses tariffs. But DJT uses Tarriffs like China steals IP....on a grand scale.
Sam Adams rank	Fri Jan 23 02:49:10 Seb has a low IQ. Sebs government also enacts lots of red tape and taxes such that high IQ jobs move to America. Seb screams that the high IQ jobs not being his are unfair. Lmfao.
Seb rank	Fri Jan 23 09:04:34 Habebe: We don't force them to. We say "this of the price we are willing to pay, otherwise no deal". You know, supply and demand? This idea that the free market means manufacturers set a price and you *must buy at that price* is madness. The fact you insist on leaving healthcare to lots of tiny, weak organisations with much less market power who generally have to pay what drug manufacturers demand is a structural issue with US healthcare, not the result of unfair trade practices.
Seb rank	Fri Jan 23 09:11:11 Sam: Fact: if we are exporting goods and services to the US, it's because they are better value for money than this US domestic equivalent. It means our workers in that industry are better than yours. Fact: if you are resorting to tariffs to make them less value for money and restore production to poorly trained less efficient US workers, then that's the US creating red tape for US consumers because you can't compete. Please stop bringing your childhood trauma resulting from your neuro diversity being mistaken for idiocy into every conversation.
Habebe rank	Fri Jan 23 17:29:20 Seb, How is that different from Tarriffs, or IP offers? These are all willingly made decisions because the other end still profits.
Sam Adams rank	Fri Jan 23 20:03:21 "then that's the US creating red tape for US consumers because you can't compete." Yes seb we are not perfect. However your incompetence is much worse.
Seb rank	Sat Jan 24 19:02:59 Habebe: Tariffs attempt to increase the cost of foreign products to force domestic manufacture. It's unfair because it targets a particularly country of origin, and it affects access to the entire economy. Countries that operate national health care systems set a price *they* are willing to pay for classes of drugs, largely based on the medical value of the drugs (irrespective of who produces them or where they are produced). Companies can always choose not to sell drugs to the public providers, and sell to private healthcare providers instead. Sam: You accept your initial statement was incoherent rambling, and then accuse me of incompetence.
Sam Adams rank	Sat Jan 24 19:06:05 You are actually retarded.
Habebe rank	Sat Jan 24 23:02:58 Seb, "It's unfair because it targets a particularly country of origin, and it affects access to the entire economy." Trump seems to be levying tarriffs to everyone. And the IP transfer will otherwise affect access to the entire economy. IP is capital , just like money. I get why you say it's not fair, I don't really argue that it is. In both cases the respective nations are using their economic leverage to benefit themselves. Now, it's arguable how beneficial tarriffs are, that's more.pf a case by case situation. He often does nation specific tarriffs because they have greater leverage.
Seb rank	Sat Jan 24 23:36:05 Habebe: No, he's laying differential tarrifs for different countries to secure a positive trade balance with each. He said as much. "IP is capital , just like money" Firstly, Europe hasn't hitherto engaged in forced IP transfer. The US does though, using ITAR (forces European firms to transfer defence relevant dual use tech to US firms). Secondly, no, IP is not capital. IP is a construct of patent law, which is an anti-free market intervention to grant a temporary monopoly to foster innovation by having the innovator publish their innovation rather than keep it a secret and have it potentially die with them rather than eventually become commons, and perfected. This only makes sense internationally *IF* there's free flow of actual capital and goods. If there isn't, because one party is using tariffs and regulations to try and force relocation of supply chains, there's absolutely no reason international patent recognition.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: