Slashdot Mirror


Trillion-Dollar World Trade Deal Aims To Make IT Products Cheaper

itwbennett writes: A new (tentative) global trade agreement, struck on Friday at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, eliminates tariffs on more than 200 kinds of IT products, ranging from smartphones, routers, and ink cartridges to video game consoles and telecommunications satellites. A full list of products covered was published by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which called the ITA expansion 'great news for the American workers and businesses that design, manufacture, and export state-of-the-art technology and information products, ranging from MRI machines to semiconductors to video game consoles.' The deal covers $1.3 trillion worth of global trade, about 7 percent of total trade today. The deal has approval from 49 countries, and is waiting on just a handful more before it becomes official,

97 comments

  1. Just products, or services too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So does that include a treaty binding agreement to allow an infinite amount of H1Bs to provide minimum slave-wage IT services?

    1. Re:Just products, or services too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nope, it just means that the US won't tax imports which are likely priced so low that it drives domestic companies to bankruptcy, similar to solar panels priced lower than the rare earth components a few years back.

      It would be nice if a treaty to remove tariffs for US goods in China or other countries would be enacted, but when "free trade" is mentioned, it usually is just one way.

    2. Re:Just products, or services too? by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 2

      You can look up the products and see which ones have US-sided tariffs that are being eliminated

      For example, non-volatile memory
      http://hts.usitc.gov/?query=85...

      Switches and routers
      http://hts.usitc.gov/?query=85... ...have no existing US tariffs, and we would benefit from other countries dropping their barriers to trade

      However, stereoscopic microscopes enjoy a 5-7% US tariff, and will see competition

      It will take a while to sort out, but this may work in our advantage

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    3. Re:Just products, or services too? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      I don't see why it wouldn't work to our advantage. The US has always been top notch in the tech sector, and hasn't depended on tariffs to do so. A lot of countries (especially ones in Europe) have tried using tariffs to try to counterbalance that, but it's never done anything other than make technology more expensive in those countries. If those trade barriers fall, then we'll see a LOT more money headed our way.

    4. Re: Just products, or services too? by WindBourne · · Score: 1, Troll

      Not likely. Other nations such as china have implemented 'consumption tax', for all goods, which is then forgiven on locally produced goods.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:Just products, or services too? by MrKaos · · Score: 2

      I don't see why it wouldn't work to our advantage. The US has always been top notch in the tech sector, and hasn't depended on tariffs to do so. A lot of countries (especially ones in Europe) have tried using tariffs to try to counterbalance that, but it's never done anything other than make technology more expensive in those countries. If those trade barriers fall, then we'll see a LOT more money headed our way.

      People who understand quality pay for it, everyone else buys the rubbish that passes as merely a consumer item.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  2. Sure, ok. by jcadam · · Score: 1

    the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which called the ITA expansion 'great news for the American workers and businesses that design, manufacture, and export state-of-the-art technology and information products, ranging from MRI machines to semiconductors to video game consoles.'

    That certainly smells like BS.

    1. Re:Sure, ok. by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that my iPhone and Mac aren't made in the USA??????

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:Sure, ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't know man. As an American worker making minimum wage, I'm rather excited about the lower cost of imported communication satellites.

    3. Re:Sure, ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are you saying that my iPhone and Mac aren't made in the USA??????

      Those are consumer devices that are nowhere near the level of a MRI machine - that is made in the USA, or at least most of it.

      Apple, Microsoft and others are consumer commodity device and software makers.

      But what kills me about these trade deals is that they benefit the multinationals. They now can arbitrage worker pay, import workers, etc ... and lower their costs, but yet increase their markets and keep prices the same.

      If anyone thinks that "Comparative Advantage" exists in the 21st century, you need to get with the times. Those high tech whatevers have parts, design, assembly done all over the World. And it doesn't matter what industry it is. Your Toyota Camry is more American than the F-35.

      The only comparative advantage any country has to offer is who has the cheapest and most educated workers.

      Spiral to the bottom.

      And the owners - the folks with capital - will be the winners.

    4. Re:Sure, ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It smells like BS because it is BS.
      It will more likely help PRC and Vietnamese workers since the electronics are actually made there and not in the US.
      The US designed is a different matter, they bring in visa workers for that or outsource the whole thing.

    5. Re:Sure, ok. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

      Yeah, now I can afford to buy 0.0000002% of a communications satellite instead of 0.0000001%. Yippee!

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    6. Re:Sure, ok. by knightghost · · Score: 2

      And the owners - the folks with capital - will be the winners.

      Capital - such as 401k - is not enough. It has to be in the billions to get those backroom deals.

    7. Re:Sure, ok. by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      MRI machines
      http://hts.usitc.gov/?query=re...

      Have no US tariff, this would allow us to sell more machines overseas to countries that have just eliminated their tariffs

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    8. Re:Sure, ok. by edgedmurasame · · Score: 1

      Except that the Camry is a Japanese design with US assembly by individuals working for a foreign company. The F-35 on the other hand, is a US design from the ground up - not a "let's translate the user manual" job like the Camry.

      --
      "Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
    9. Re:Sure, ok. by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 0

      Spiral to the bottom.

      Every time a free trade deal is announced, a lot of people come around and say exactly this. And you know what? All of them have ended up in our favor.

    10. Re:Sure, ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Name one that has helped workers in the US -- including knowledge workers.

    11. Re: Sure, ok. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Really? What nation are you from because America has NOT benefitted from any trade deals, outside of NAFTA, while the other nations manipulate their money and put on backdoor tariffs.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    12. Re:Sure, ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Spiral to the bottom.

      The bottom would be no food supply which happens on the continent of Africa with alarming frequency.

      Next is subsistence farming and slave-level farming (eg. Brazilian coffee in the 1970s): There is no opportunity to change crops and no profit.

      Next is a regular job with a low mortality rate.

      Next is government-led infrastructure. Capitalism can fail here, when municipal councils turn a socialist profit into a kleptocracy or oligarchy.

      Next is education-driven service jobs. Ie. a middle class. Capitalism can fail here, when multi-nationals bring in their own staff, when they refuse to pay middle-class wages, or when infrastructure is privately-owned.

      Next is entrepreneurial capitalism: Where one can leverage the finance system (and the school-tie network) to build factories. Capitalism can fail here when the finance system takes inappropriate risks (too high, obviously but also too low) as measured by economic stability and elasticity.

  3. Just Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because of course big business is going to eat this cost by dipping into profits and not employee wages

    _sigh_

    1. Re:Just Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading comprehension fail.

    2. Re:Just Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So they drop the import tax on Widget, locally made Widgets had already been competing with that established cost, what do you think this is going to happen to the local Widget maker?

      Yeah, this is good news for manufacturing centers that already scrape the barrel because they flip profit overseas, for them its a minor adjustment, for the local company holy shit, imports (your competitors) just got cheaper.

      So... you FAIL

  4. What were the levels of the tariffs? by hattig · · Score: 1

    That list has some very specific entries on it.

    What would be useful to know is what the end-consumer could expect to see in terms of savings from this tariff removal (should it be passed on at retail).

    1. Re:What were the levels of the tariffs? by wardrich86 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Safe to assume that we'll see nothing and the corporations will rake in the savings.

    2. Re:What were the levels of the tariffs? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      You must have missed all the "Other" and "Parts" in that list.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:What were the levels of the tariffs? by Sandman1971 · · Score: 2

      Yup, that's my feeling exactly. For consumer/SOHO products, stores will never pass on the savings that this would bring, instead will just be raking in more cash.
      However at the enterprise level I could see prices drop in accordance to this.

      --
      It's better to burn out than to fade away
  5. Even better news for China by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And all the other countries that actually make those tech products.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Even better news for China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American components, Russian Components, All made in Taiwan!

    2. Re:Even better news for China by war4peace · · Score: 1

      *bangs device with wrench key*

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:Even better news for China by ic3m4n1 · · Score: 1

      Those products wont work by hardware themselves. As can be seen from profit margins that they are being sourced from compared to margins on IP and content.
      It doesnt matter if those countries get 100 bucks if 99 of them end up going back to cost of manufacturing.

    4. Re:Even better news for China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China will just steal all the IP. Then they can have that business too.

    5. Re:Even better news for China by ic3m4n1 · · Score: 1

      They can steal what is already out there and may be gain some benefit from it.
      But without robust protection for anyones IP they will never be able to support indigenous creation. As there will be no incentive for anyone to do so.
      As such they will always trail or depend on others.

    6. Re:Even better news for China by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It doesnt matter if those countries get 100 bucks if 99 of them end up going back to cost of manufacturing.

      Part of "cost of manufacturing" is paying workers. There and here. So it does matter. When my $100 goes there instead of here, our economy takes a hit. Tiny, sure, but when it's thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of "whatever", then it's no longer a tiny hit.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  6. should result in lower prices by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    Ha ha ha! Very funny!

    ...to technology buyers..

    Ah, okay, not necessarily you and me. This so the industry can shift inventory around a little easier.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:should result in lower prices by ITRambo · · Score: 2

      Don't be surprised when we see another round of benefits being decreased in order for businesses to "stay competitive". These guys have all the angles covered.

    2. Re:should result in lower prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it will result in lower prices. Lower prices, that is, for labor i.e. wages.

  7. Is this 1 April? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is "great news for American workers"? The multinationals have already moved a vast amount of tech manufacturing to China and southeast Asia. And we've been reading and seeing stories about how the US manufacturing is picking up... and it turns out to be a) not very much, and b) heavily automated, meaning far fewer jobs.

                  mark, considering firmware and hardware backdoors in chips, memory, and drives....

  8. Manufacturing cost got cheaper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Will those savings be passed to us, the consumers? Nope.

  9. Not for Brazil by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here the parasitic "eletronics industry" (in quotes because we do not have a real electronics industry) managed to keep the barrier of 60% (minimum) of import taxes on any and every electronic product. And that when the customs or the post office do not simply steal it.

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    1. Re:Not for Brazil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here the parasitic "eletronics industry" (in quotes because we do not have a real electronics industry) managed to keep the barrier of 60% (minimum) of import taxes on any and every electronic product. And that when the customs or the post office do not simply steal it.

      Sad truth...

    2. Re:Not for Brazil by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Really? I thought getting rid of that "free trade" stuff would magically make Brazil an electronics powerhouse??? I guess those dang economists are right.

  10. Trained Seal Show! by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    You will see 49 trained seals performing, with more to come! And everyone knows the hard work it takes to feed a seal one more fish.

    The one thing I've seen through the years is that if someone wants something, they get it. Computer hardware is at the top of that list. So we can dispense with the "good for everyone" litany. But lets ignore the obvious tax dodge and ramifactions. I wonder, "is computer hardware accessable to more people?"

  11. Giant sucking sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For those of you who remember the 90s. That giant sucking sound is the last of our industry leaving the US.

  12. Non-tariff barriers? by nbauman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What about the non-tariff barriers? https://www.wto.org/english/tr...

    That's where they sneak in the provisions about intellectual property rights, "market pricing," "investor-state dispute settlement"?

    Is this like the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

    Are they going to settle disputes by private arbitrators, whose decisions can't be reviewed by courts or changes by national legislatures?

    1. Re:Non-tariff barriers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is this like the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

      I'm still waiting to see how long it will take before someone realizes that America's anti-sex tourism regulations cut into a lot of business in Asia. While the Philippines were left out, I'm pretty sure the Japanese Yakuza manage a brothel or two dozen. I wonder what exactly those terms are that decide which corporations can sue over which regulations.

    2. Re:Non-tariff barriers? by nickweller · · Score: 1

      @nbauman: 'What about the non-tariff barriers? link

      That's where they sneak in the provisions about intellectual property rights, "market pricing," "investor-state dispute settlement"?

      Is this like the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

      Are they going to settle disputes by private arbitrators, whose decisions can't be reviewed by courts or changes by national legislatures?
      '
      -------

      @Anonymous: "I'm still waiting to see how long it will take before someone realizes that America's anti-sex tourism regulations cut into a lot of business in Asia. While the Philippines were left out, I'm pretty sure the Japanese Yakuza manage a brothel or two dozen. I wonder what exactly those terms are that decide which corporations can sue over which regulations."

      You go right ahead and piss all over the original posters very relevant points ;)

  13. Free trade with non-free countries? by mi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I doubt, free trade with non-free countries is beneficial to humanity. Though one can argue, that it makes such non-free countries more free, it is not at all evident, that that's what happened to China, for example.

    Meanwhile, the US is gradually losing freedoms as there appear more and more things we aren't allowed to do or even say, and the list of places requiring identification is growing.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You know what? Free trade with the US is bullshit too, because free trade is a lie.

      America still heavily subsidizes corn, but insists everybody else stop agricultural subsidies.

      America is protectionist of their steel industry, despite being told not to.

      America imposes tariffs on softwood lumber, despite WTO rulings against them.

      America has instituted Country of Origin labeling requirements, which have been deemed by the WTO as illegal and harmful to anything but US business.

      Trade with the US a pretty much a bullshit agreement when American assholes ignore the rules, claim they don't apply, and then whine and complain about hoe undemocratic the WTO is when the rulings don't go their way.

      Fuck America. Fuck one sided trade agreements. Fuck you bunch of assholes who refuse to abide the rules you've insisted everybody else to.

      America is the most protectionist and dishonest player at the table here.

      Why the fuck should the rest of the US sign on to any agreement which improves the ability oft asshole Americans to sell into a country, while simultaneously ignoring their obligations to us?

      Free trade with Americans is a fucking joke and a lie. Because America refuses to play by the same rules.

      Fuck all of you. Free trade is a fucking libertarian fucking lie.

      Worthless cunts.

    2. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Things like Country of Origin labelling requirements (especially for perishable goods and food: the WTO case I know of regarding this was on beef and pork) are Good Things that most countries want. Europe is fanatical about not only country-of-origin but region-of-origin for many products (i.e. Champagne).

      The US puts tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber because Canada subsidizes logging: the tariffs even out the cost, so that there's competition in the marketplace. The same goes for steel. The only thing you've listed that is an actual trade problem is corn, but it's not like the rest of the world doesn't heavily subsidize agriculture (see here the European CAP, also known as payments-to-the-French-and-Spanish).

      Trade isn't as one-sided a deal as you (and other propagandists) suggest.

    3. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      I'm sensing a slight hesitancy towards this agreement.

    4. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by ITRambo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would prefer that you specify America assholes as the billionaires and government lackeys that support this shit. The American people have only lost jobs and experienced a lowered standard of living, except for those chosen to work 70+ hours per week. .

    5. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      LOLOLOLOL. America is the most protectionist? That's a good one Chuckles. Try actually selling something in China you brain dead reject. You have to get in bed with a Chinese company to even exist. Christ you're an uninformed twat if you think America is the most protectionist. Are there some things wrong with America? Sure. But everyone does it. Germany taxes American chicken, one of the Scandanavian countries has a cheese cartel, Canada makes a killing on fine wool suits by buying from embargoed countries. If you think the U.S. is what's wrong with this world you're willfully blind to a lot of other terrible crap before it. So why don't you calm down there Chuckie, take another government provided happy pill and chill.

    6. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canadians and Brits, where understatement and politely telling people off is an honest art form. You're alright with me, even if you're a Mac fan.

    7. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Khashishi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hasn't China become more free?

    8. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Same with the wankers from Europe. If a bunch of politicians say it's good, I'd be very surprised indeed if it's us poor wage slaves who get the benefit. The British government are trying to funnel all the money to the south-east and shunt the rest of us back to Dickensian times, then there's this crap that's even worse.

      I'm tired of this planet. I want to go home.

    9. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somewhere in Chicago a community is missing its organizer.

      Somewhere in the world is missing its village idiot, and he's here on Slashdot, disguised as "mi".

    10. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by cynicist · · Score: 1

      Are you seriously blaming Libertarians for "Free Trade" legislation like this? So I guess you would blame them for the USA "Freedom" Act too right? Since they are always talking about freedom... what liars...

    11. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So agree. The useless corrupt cunts in the European Commission are trying to make us swallow TTIP at the moment. The actual negotiations are very secret, already undemocratic, but we 'know' that this will result in lower US-style safety standards, neonicitinoids to kill bees. antibiotics-loaded meat etc. etc.

      Of, then there's the 'cultural' aspect unfunny sitcoms and hip-hip artists with their gyrating bitches [incidentally why don't feminists complain about this, I'm a white male and I find it sleazy and disempowering?]

      Yes, it is economic terrorism and an attempt at cultural hegemony and we have to resist the whole lot.

    12. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Altrag · · Score: 1

      Generally speaking, that should be an obvious "yes."

      Very few of us outsiders deal directly (in a business sense) with any individual American people so when we bitch about "America" we are almost always referring to their generally horrific foreign policy rather than any specific person.

      We all read /. and other news sources. We're well aware that much of your internal policy sucks as much if not more for Americans than your foreign policy sucks for non-Americans. But we've all got our own internal problems to bitch about so we generally only rant about America's foreign policy since that's the part that affects us (somewhat) directly.

    13. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This quote from the movie Syriana has stuck in my head for years (Tim Blake Nelson is pretty awesome in everything):

      Some trust fund prosecutor, got off-message at Yale thinks he's gonna run this up the flagpole? Make a name for himself? Maybe get elected some two-bit congressman from nowhere, with the result that Russia or China can suddenly start having, at our expense, all the advantages we enjoy here? No, I tell you. No, sir! Corruption charges! Corruption? Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations. That's Milton Friedman. He got a goddamn Nobel Prize. We have laws against it precisely so we can get away with it. Corruption is our protection. Corruption keeps us safe and warm. Corruption is why you and I are prancing around in here instead of fighting over scraps of meat out in the streets. Corruption is why we win.

    14. Re:Free trade with non-free countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada doesn't subsidize logging. The United States claims that Canada subsidizes logging, on the basis that stumpage fees in Canada are cheaper. Canada says that's a result of being in a bigger, less populated country with more forest cover. Arbitration has generally ruled against the US (it does tend to split on judge's nationality to be fair, but when they brought in external 3rd parties they ruled in Canada's favour).

  14. IP Chapter? by CanEHdian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Did anybody leak the "IP Chapter" yet? I mean, that can't be a US-involved Trade Agreement without the Hollywood-mandated obligatory IP chapter, right?

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
  15. More slashdot propaganda for the US regime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When has any of these 'free trade' agreements actually benefited workers? or even been about real liberalisation of trade laws?
    This is just another 'agreement' made behind closed doors, by unelected apparatchiks, to implement policies that allow more redistribution of wealth to the rich, and to large corporations.

  16. Oh please by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...anytime they say it's going to be "great news for American workers", you know it's going to be the exact opposite. More like, "great news for multinational conglomerates who couldn't care less about individual workers".

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Oh please by IMightB · · Score: 1

      I'd like to refer you to the Roman Senate's Salute to the Poor

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    2. Re:Oh please by houghi · · Score: 1

      I am at a point where when the USofA is for it, I will be against it by default. And unfortunately it turned out to be more correct than I would like it to be.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    3. Re:Oh please by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Nobody should be allowed to run a conglomerate unless they personally know and care about all 100,000 individual workers.

      I think caring about them collectively would be a good starting point. What, exactly, would be so heinous about that?

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    4. Re:Oh please by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 1

      Not just that. When a piece of legislation (e.g, TPA) includes creating a new government program to retrain workers displaced by "global competition", you know displacing the workers was exactly the point. Thanks, Obama!

  17. NAFTA/FRee Trade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From my experience, no "Trade deal" ever actually lowered the cost of goods to the 'people'.. NAFTA saw the costs nearly double to purchase goods from the USA and was designed to allow the search/taxation of imported goods far in excess to the consumer... It did however let the corporations move goods more freely and without taxes(minor fees at border)..
    IMO Free Trade= Not FRee, and not good..

  18. To put worldwide trade in perspective by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    $1.3 trillion! That's a lot of money! It's a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier every 30 hours, or about what the US borrowed every year just a few years ago zomfg that's alotta money!!!1!111

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  19. I don't want cheaper!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't want cheaper, nobody does. We want better instead.

    You know, a device that doesn't literally shatter when you drop it. Or doesn't get a scratch for every brush against your trousers, or a battery that actually lasts MORE than the warranty.

    Because it seems to me, that without the law forcing them, the manufacturers are confusing device warranty with device lifespan. Before 2001, in my country, a term was coined, sounds a lot like "Chinoiserie" but with a different meaning, "Chinese POS" (antonym: German quality) because the items would look pretty and shiny, but fail after a short while, with no other use than the garbage dump.

    With no idiots in power back then to force people into choosing one over the other, the Chinoiserie stayed in it's shitty corner for decades.

    1. Re:I don't want cheaper!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll sell you better. You tell me what item you want and I'll sell you a better model. Or at least I'll put it in premium looking packaging and write some copy about it being better. Feel free to come back to me and complain if anything goes wrong. Of course I'm going to have to charge you a premium price or you wouldn't believe it's really better. Oh, and this is a new business model for me so you're just going to have to take my word on it. I mean, you can't expect a company operating on the principle of top quality to spring fully formed onto the scene with 50 years of credibility.

      So go ahead and take a gamble on my new company, there's a chance I'm not full of shit. Or you can play it safe by buying a cheap version that at least you know is cheap rather than buying my premium priced version and hoping that I'm honestly starting my new business with an honest intent to build better products. Of course I could still go belly up and leave you holding the bag. After all, this "better" business is a new idea for me and I may make mistakes. If I don't get enough customers willing to pay my premium prices I'll go bankrupt trying to build "better" and I won't be able to make good on my honest mistakes.

    2. Re:I don't want cheaper!!! by Altrag · · Score: 1

      I don't want cheaper, nobody does. We want better instead.

      Sadly, only for a very tightly constrained definition of "we." Far too many people are either too poor or too stupid to buy quality products when they can save 20% and buy a similar product, even if it will only last 50% as long.

      Even those that fall more to the "poor" side of the argument are stuck banking on the fact that the 30% difference is a future cost and buy the cheap shit anyway, because its that or nothing.

      Its a well-known and well-documented phenomena. Unfortunately its also well-ignored. All "simple" economic arguments (ie: the only ones the people in power care about) start along the lines of "assume two equivalent competing products" and proceed to draw out pretty graphs showing marginal profits at various price points. You very rarely see quality difference being used as a pricing measure in these arguments (just like you rarely see irrational consumers in them.)

      I mean I'm sure all of this stuff is covered as you get more in-depth into economic theory but very few politicians, never mind lay people, have degrees in economics. Most people know the major talking points from ECON101, if that, and precious little else.

  20. Slashdot - now a globalist mouth-piece. by pecosdave · · Score: 1

    Slashdot has just enough of the old Slashdot in it for me to stick around, it's still the definitive tech site. I have to say however the latest sale/purchase has really disappointed me. Any and all stories of a controversial nature are not by default slanted to a pro-globalist narrative wording. It was incredibly obvious with gamer gate, the repeated beating it into my head I should feel guilty that more women don't even want my job, and now pro TPP (which basically includes SOPA and PIPA in the text) and related treaties disguised as trade agreements.

    I'm all for less taxes in nearly every instance, but these treaties are incredibly dangerous.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:Slashdot - now a globalist mouth-piece. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have a very simple rule I use when I decide to ignore something, go along with it or fight it.

      1. Does it take MONEY or some kind of CONTROL out of my hands and put it in the hands of government or a corporation?

      If it does, then I am completely against it and will fight it any way that I can. You should ask yourself this for everything in your life, and find ways to get stuff under YOUR control. Here are some examples for you to think about.

      BANKING - If your money is all in the bank, it's under THEIR control, not yours. Just like Cypris or Greece.

      CREDIT SCORE - If you buy things on credit, you are subject to a credit score. But if you don't buy on credit, the credit score can be anything without impact on you.

      INSURANCE - If you are being forced to buy insurance, and you are getting less out of it than you put into it, then look at other options. There are ways to self insure. As long as you don't get sick, you COULD drop insurance and save enough money to pay a major operation every couple of years, and not worry about it being denied.

      Get your freedom back, get back your control of everything.

    2. Re:Slashdot - now a globalist mouth-piece. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite amazing they dont mention TPP/TPPA in the headline afterall that is what its known as. Funny how nobody seems to want it other than lobbyists, the dim witted and the corrupt politicians putting it through. The only people who will win out of the is is Copyright industry and maybe anyone who is a futures investor and wants to sue governments for loss.

    3. Re:Slashdot - now a globalist mouth-piece. by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      It's almost like Slashdot, after helping to fight them off initially, is helping to sneak SOPA and PIPA in the back door....

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  21. screwing Americans for China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In electronics manufacturing, there is only one nation that matters: CHINA. Notice that China is on the list of nations. Therefore, the nation that really benefits is China. Another example of corporate America screwing America to benefit China. Just like in the 90s.

  22. Tariffs on widgets is not the problem with trade by magarity · · Score: 2

    Electronic widgets and their tariffs are not the problem with global trade. Severely protectionist tariffs and policies on agricultural commodities and large manufactured goods are the problem.

  23. Re:Let's hope so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Free trade is like the free market: it's a complete fucking lie.

    There is no free trade. Americans keep yowling about free trade, but when it comes down to it, Americans believe in a protectionist version of free trade.

    When America stops having corn subsidies, or adheres to a single WTO ruling against them, we might start to believe you.

    Until then, shut the fuck up you asshole. There is no fucking free trade. There is no fucking free market.

    Moron.

  24. BUT... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The elephant in the room is.. What's the trade off?

  25. Re: Let's hope so! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you really drive your point home more effectively if you would just get past your parochial concern about avoiding F-bombs. I think a few more sprinkled throughout your post would bring everyone in line.

  26. 2016 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, Americans, be sure to vote next year either for Hillary Clinton or Any Republican if you want to have the benefits of free trade. That is to say, you have a choice of the puppet on my left hand or the puppet on my right hand.

  27. Who remembers NAFTA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who remembers NAFTA?

  28. Have you actually looked at the list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It looks like at least half the categories are semiconductor manufacturing equipment and parts. That industry is dominated by American (Applied Materials, LAM Research, KLA-Tencor) and Japanese (Tokyo Electron) companies. It's going to be great for them.

    Free trade works and protectionism is still loser economics, no matter how much nativists might wish it otherwise.

  29. Re:Incentive by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    First to market or risk becoming obsolete is an incentive. So is, because it's there. Remind me why we play games again?

  30. Better News? by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    ...the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which called the ITA expansion 'great news for the American workers and businesses that design, manufacture, and export state-of-the-art technology and information products, ranging from MRI machines to semiconductors to video game consoles.'"

    Uh-huh. Right.

    You know what would be even better news for US tech hardware exporters?

    If they didn't have a huge boat anchor attached in the form of NSA built-in backdoors and vulnerabilities.

    Really, if you're a foreign corporation that competes in any way with US corporations/interests/research, or any government/organization/individual that US TLAs could possibly even tangentially term "of interest", would you buy stuff from US makers/manufacturers despite what's been revealed publicly over the last 20 years to present concerning US TLA activity within the US tech manufacturing/exporting industries?

    Particularly in light of the recent revelations of so many unlawful and/or unconstitutional programs and activities engaged in by US intelligence organizations courtesy of the courageous whistle-blower Edward Snowden, which keep revealing new programs that violate constitutional principles and prohibitions with every new dump from the trove.

    US tech companies have to overcome all that (quite understandable and logical) mistrust (good luck!), and *then* compete against other corporations that don't have that perceived millstone around their necks.

    This will not turn out well for the US tech industries that need/rely on exporting their goods, and with cheap imports flowing into the US, even those who were national/regional in nature will find themselves priced out of the market.

    1. Mining/Drilling - Offshored

    2. Steel mfg - Offshored

    3. Heavy Industries/Factories - Offshored

    4. Artificial politically-motivated limits on energy production and artificially-created increases in cost.

    5. ...?

    I'm not liking the direction this is trending.

    If it roughly parallels past similar historical scenarios, it doesn't end well for anyone in the US (well, except those 'too big to starve'), neither Left nor Right, nor atheists, Christians, Muslims, or whatever "ism" or party you favor.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  31. lol what a nigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i want country of origin so I can avoid food made by chinks and the associated lead & shit contamination.

  32. cheaper ink cartridges? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ya right, like that will happen.

  33. Run the math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A friend of mine has and uncle who is a big wig at a U.S. company. They manufacture doors for large industrial appliances. It is cheaper to ship raw materials to China, made the door, ship it back to the U.S. and then deliver to the customer than it is to manufacture the door in the US

  34. Private / Hidden negotiations? by Keybounce · · Score: 1

    Where was this treaty visible to the public during negotiations?

    This treaty may be horrible. But just like more well-known free-trade treaties, it seems like we are just now finding out about it, after it is too late to do anything to change it.

    *THAT* is what has to change.

  35. All this time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought the problem with computers, phones, lightbulbs etc was that the items had crappy quality, and in the case of computers some of the apps suck