Comment by dolkycape
11 hours ago
I don't see why non-US companies should "vote with their wallet" by over-spending so that they can have a US supply chain instead of a Chinese supply chain. They're both foreign, outside their control and vulnerable to political stunts.
> vulnerable to political stunts.
They are different political stunts though. If your supply chain is vulnerable to politics then you want options so that any one stunt cannot hurt you.
Also, while there are political stunts, my current reading is the US stunts are more temporary and the next president won't continue them. While China's are likely longer term - there is a reasonably possibly China will attack Taiwan and Europe will join with the US and defending. Only time will tell, but that is my read on the situation.
China has not threatened to invade Canada yet.
They're literally probing Canadian defenses.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/vancouver/article/canadian-military-e...
“The next president won’t continue this” is what I’ve been hearing since the 90s.
Trump was elected twice. This time, his vice-president is absolutely someone who would continue the same policies, albeit in a more sober way.
I am not sure you understand the damage this administration has done.
Or, frankly, the way in which the rotation between the Democrats and the republicans works and is critical to the overall direction the US is heading and has been heading since the 80s.
2 replies →
I think their point is that non-US regions should set up their own non-China supply chain.
And here in Europe we're busy divesting from both. The priority for now is getting rid of the US simply because of the erratic President but if you read between the lines, a lot of the plans also aim for getting rid of the dependence on China.
Yeah Europe needs this capability too, we have offices in Europe so you can probably guess where this is going :-)