Zaktor ( @Zaktor@sopuli.xyz ) English14•1 month agoWow, the libertarian magazine doesn’t like tariffs??
DdCno1 ( @DdCno1@beehaw.org ) 12•1 month agoAs expected, the article doesn’t even mention China’s own extremely restrictive tariffs, including those on foreign-made cars.
InevitableList ( @InevitableList@beehaw.org ) 3•1 month agoWhy would it? Reason has never targeted a Chinese audience.
DdCno1 ( @DdCno1@beehaw.org ) 9•1 month agoBecause context matters. In the same vein, the hidden and thereby illegal state subsidies Chinese electric car makers are receiving should also be mentioned. Biden’s tariffs aren’t happening in a vacuum.
The Doctor ( @drwho@beehaw.org ) English4•1 month ago“Illegal state subsidies?” From whom?
DdCno1 ( @DdCno1@beehaw.org ) 3•1 month agoI’ll let you figure out where Chinese car makers are getting their subsidies from.
Dark Arc ( @Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg ) English4•1 month agoI think their point is legality is relative … surely what China is doing is legal in China. “Unreasonable” would be a better term than illegal.
The Doctor ( @drwho@beehaw.org ) English2•1 month agoGot it in one.
DdCno1 ( @DdCno1@beehaw.org ) 2•1 month agoIt’s not relative. The moment a Chinese good is being sold outside of China, it has to follow local laws, which includes laws against market manipulation. Chinese manufacturers and sellers have been ignoring them for a long time, but there is finally some pushback.
leetnewb ( @leetnewb@beehaw.org ) 8•1 month agoNot all that convincing, particularly when it draws quotes from other libertarian sources.
Did you want communist sources?
off_brand_ ( @off_brand_@beehaw.org ) 6•1 month agoWait what source would you consider Communist outside of relevant state medias?
pbjamm ( @pbjamm@beehaw.org ) English4•1 month agoanyone left of NewsMax
leetnewb ( @leetnewb@beehaw.org ) 2•1 month agoStrangely, no notification of your response on my screen like I normally get from post responses.
Anyway, I’m just saying that an article from an expressively libertarian education platform citing an outwardly libertarian think tank is a double whammy of credibility degradation. A communist source would generally be bad, a communist source citing a communist source would be double bad. I just don’t think publications with a proud ideological bent make for reliable sources, but that charge is less meaningful if they draw on information and content that is unaligned with their core beliefs.