re: US to impose fees of up to $1.5M per port call for ships made in China starting April 17th

Someone will run to the DC district court and get a TRO forbidding Trump’s order.

quote:

---

Hyundai finna eat

---

frick the real Koreans. They're grifters too, as y'all say.

quote:

---

Ocean carriers have announced that to reduce the fees they will skip the smaller ports like Seattle, Oakland, Boston, Mobile, Baltimore, New Orleans, etc. Some carriers have said they'll just move the capacity serving the U.S. to other trade lanes altogether

Similarly the major ports (LA, Long Beach, Houston, and New York) will be unable to keep up with the flood of extra volumes and are likely to become congested, similar to what we saw during Covid

---

Ships lose money sitting in the water. I'm supposed to believe that ships will make themselves less productive and willingly just wait offshore for days or weeks instead of going to a different port?

Even if that does happen, you reduce the fees at smaller ports to make it more advantageous. It's a solution so simple that the problem is not even worth mentioning. People are just looking for any reason why things won't work.

Dude anyone who wants Twitter can get it. You don’t need to index every tweet here.

China has been the bully worldwide for international trade due to their tariffs and money manipulation. I think Trump is wanting to kill the bully for the good of all international trade more so than ship building coming back to America. We have to pick a fight with the bully and kick their arse once and for all and the time is now.

quote:

---

Dude anyone who wants Twitter can get it

---

What is this Twitter you speak of?

No one can get Twitter.

quote:

---

Seems we should have a bunch of ships to move our goods

---

Why?

That's like saying we have the best tech industry in the world, and since they're so good at typing code, it seems like they should also do their own typing of non-tech output (instead of secretaries, AI, etc.).

Grok is amazing. Highly recommend playing with it. It is very thorough so depending on what you are looking up I recommend asking it to keep it brief.

Sorry for the wall of text. There’s basically six key points and a brief overview of each.
—————

Discussing “anti-competitor tactics” requires a careful approach, as it can imply a range of strategies, from legitimate business practices to potentially unfair or illegal actions. Based on my understanding, I’ll outline some tactics that have been associated with Chinese firms or the broader economic environment in China, while keeping the focus on general strategies observed in competitive markets. These are drawn from patterns in global trade, business reports, and economic analyses, without speculating or diving into unverified claims. I’ll aim to balance this by noting that many of these tactics aren’t unique to China and are seen in various forms worldwide.

1 Subsidies and State Support: Chinese companies, particularly state-owned enterprises, often benefit from government subsidies, low-interest loans, or tax breaks. This can allow them to offer products at lower prices than competitors, making it tough for foreign firms to compete on cost. For example, industries like solar panels and steel have faced global criticism for alleged “dumping”—selling below cost to capture market share. While this can be seen as anti-competitive, it’s also a strategy used by other nations to boost key sectors.

2 Market Access Restrictions: Foreign companies operating in China sometimes face regulatory hurdles, such as licensing requirements, joint venture mandates, or selective enforcement of rules. These can create an uneven playing field, favoring domestic firms. For instance, tech companies may need to partner with local firms, which can limit their control and profitability. This isn’t exclusive to China—many countries use similar barriers—but it’s been a point of contention in trade talks.

3 Intellectual Property Practices: There’s been ongoing debate about intellectual property (IP) protection in China. Some foreign firms claim their technology or designs are copied or reverse-engineered, often through partnerships or lax enforcement of IP laws. While China has strengthened its IP regulations in recent years, critics argue that earlier practices allowed domestic firms to gain a competitive edge by leveraging foreign tech. Again, IP challenges aren’t unique to China, but the scale of its market amplifies the impact.

4 Price Undercutting: Chinese firms, especially in manufacturing, are known for aggressive pricing strategies. By leveraging economies of scale, low labor costs, and efficient supply chains, they can offer products at prices that competitors struggle to match. This can force rivals to exit markets or innovate rapidly. While this is a standard tactic in global competition, it’s particularly effective in China’s high-volume production environment.

5 Control of Supply Chains: China dominates certain global supply chains, like rare earth minerals or electronics components. By controlling key inputs, Chinese firms can influence costs or availability for competitors. For example, export restrictions on critical materials can raise prices for foreign manufacturers. This is less about direct sabotage and more about strategic leverage, something other nations also pursue when they hold similar advantages.

6 Data and Platform Advantages: In the tech sector, Chinese companies benefit from access to vast domestic user data, which can be used to refine algorithms, target customers, or outpace competitors in AI and e-commerce. Foreign firms often face restrictions on data access or storage, which can hinder their ability to compete. This is a growing issue globally, as data becomes a key competitive asset.
On the flip side, it’s worth noting that many of these tactics reflect China’s focus on building domestic industries and achieving self-reliance, especially in strategic sectors like tech and energy. Critics argue this comes at the expense of fair competition, but defenders point out that China is playing catch-up in a global economy long dominated by Western firms. Other countries, including the U.S. and Japan, have used subsidies, tariffs, or regulations to protect their own industries, so the broader context matters.

Thanks. That explains a lot