>>1384489>Maybe they should have manufactured in a country which isn't adversarial, like Taiwain, or Indonesia?they're "adversarial"(this could mean anything really, where did you get that term?) because daddy trump said so? because he decided to start a losing trade war with the country most directly linked to america in terms of trade? yes, perhaps "taiwain" can do everything china was doing overnight. but that simply isn't the reality of what's happened over the past year
>>1384694>It's bullshit. Only low tier components are made in China because of the risk of IP theftlisten, /pol/, you'll notice that there aren't any economists with functioning brains who are echoing what you're saying there. because they understand an extremely simple point: china matters very much to america when it comes to basic materials (metals). even high-class or luxury equipment/products will often have chinese parts or labour involved. or at the very least the chinese market will be involved. it's not as simple as "oh the product is good so it's not made in china anyway so it's irrelevant". you won't hear people with economics degrees talking like that. especially considering the state of the stock market
