• Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    30 days ago

    I’ll bite, though I’m pretty sure you’re not discussing in good faith. Globalisation and free trade are a good thing as long as everyone involved is doing it with good intentions. Meaning I’m good at something, so I sell it to you - I gain money, you gain a thing you didn’t have.

    Now include actors with bad intentions - like a country subsidizing stuff so that companies can sell stuff at a permanent loss which means no one else can compete and the good actors become dependent on the bad actor - and it goes to shit.

    The first scenario is great, free trade and globalisation are really great tools for exchange of goods and money. But it’s very bad when someone has different intentions than making money, like getting other countries dependent on them.

    That’s how the same thing can be really great and really bad at the same time.

    Sure, if you wanna do absolutes, you could probably calculate whether the bad effect of China fucking up the world by giving their companies an infinite money cheat code is worse than the benefits. And you’d arrive at some result. But most of us are content with recognising the good stuff it gives us and the bad stuff China is abusing it for.

    • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      30 days ago

      I’m not sure why you only speak about China as being ‘bad’. I mean China didn’t start the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq and still hasn’t contributed as much CO2 as the US and EU combined (source).