Hacker News Reader

Comment by roenxi | Hacker News Reader

If we're going to be objective, technically the Chinese Communists are the greatest success for humanity; I think they've overseen the biggest upwards change in living standards from when they came to power to today (even after the regressions of the Cultural Revolution). They have done a better job of preserving peace than almost any alternative superpower except maybe India.

The CCP is still a disaster. The EU has the same nature - just because great things were achieved and the EU was the political organisation present doesn't mean the EU was good. It might be, I don't have any particular view. But it is interesting that the EU has serious energy problems, brewing war on the border implying diplomatic failures and is largely reliant on American military assistance. These are points against it. HN has celebrated their redesigning the iPhone to use a more standard connector though so there are pro- and con-.

View on HN

> HN has celebrated their redesigning the iPhone to use a more standard connector though so there are pro- and con-.

Can't tell if you're being flip, so I'll add this one: the ease of producing products in country A and shipping them to country B without having to go through customs.

Given that Brexit happened and companies which predate Brexit still exist in the U.K., the reader has plenty of data to decide whether this constitutes a significant digit in the "pro" column.

It is extremely arguable whether the EU is necessary for that though. There is no magic barrier preventing goods moving across the border except that the customs department decides to interfere.

> Can't tell if you're being flip

I can't tell if HN is being flippant. I've never seen such unanimous approval for a powerful entity engaged in triviality. The world has not confronted the level of threat we currently have of international industrial war for 70 years, and one of things that most bought people together celebrating the EU's contribution to the world seemed to be ... phone charger cables. It seemed to be the stand-out example of the EU doing something simultaneously newsworthy, well liked and good, which is concerning.

People in the halls of power in the EU don't seem to have been focusing on the important issues if issues like that are what generate praise. Doubly so because the EU has failed to produce anyone who knows how to design a good phone. All the industrial muscle for that is in Asia and America along with the track records of success.

> There is no magic barrier preventing goods moving across the border except that the customs department decides to interfere.

Customs policies are based on international trade agreements and local policies. The 'custom department' is just executing.

> one of things that most bought people together celebrating the EU's contribution to the world seemed to be ... phone charger cables

You made that up.

That suggests there is a problem with the local policies. I recall when the US had that baby formula crisis and people couldn't import the stuff because of local policies. Which is obviously stupid. There were starving babies. US babies aren't that different from EU, APAC, or South American babies.

The crisis was a self inflicted wound. And by far most of the time, the idea that a good is OK in one country but unacceptable in another is silly. It is quite rare that a good that can be sold somewhere needs to be restricted somewhere else. It happens in rare cases, but far less than most policies would have us believe.

> the idea that a good is OK in one country but unacceptable in another is silly.

Goods are produced under very different standards, different subvention systems, different economic systems, different economic policies, ...

For example in the EU the Chinese Covid vaccine(s) have no permissions. Likewise China does not allow European vaccines to be imported. Each country has their own reasons for that. It's not because the regulators are silly. It's because they have different standards and different interests.

In large free trade zones and joint markets like the EU, there are common standards and a common court for disputes. The EU as a union, just like any country in the world, negotiates the trade agreements with other countries, ...

That example does sound a bit silly. I took an American one. I'm not American. I'm fine. They're safe enough. The vaccine doesn't know it moved countries. Why shouldn't people in China be able to use European vaccines? Are their policies not evidence based? Are we going to call Chinese people unvaccinated en mass until they take European vaccines? If not, why can't Europeans use Chinese vaccines?

> Goods are produced under very different standards, different subvention systems, different economic systems, different economic policies, ...

That isn't an explanation or an argument, that is just a list of things which are true. I'm happy to read that list and then buy things that are different from what I'm used to. I'll buy stuff made by Communists, Capitalists, Muslims, fools, industrialists; all good enough for me. Halal kebab makers are the only true kebab makers! If a billion Chinese can use something without it being a problem, it seems quite likely that I can too. We're all the same species and have mostly the same problems.

It doesn't actually make sense that I need a foreign union to negotiate to let me use foreign goods. My own government could, I kid you not, just let me buy what I want and get it shipped over. It'd be easier. The local standards aren't perfect.

> I took an American one.

Me, too.

> They're safe enough.

How did I know that? Because, the EU and the US work closely together and the regulations make sure that they work with common standard levels.

Each country has a system which regulates which vaccines it considers safe. In EU this is expanded such that the permissions are valid for the common market. The EU has EXPANDED the region where vaccines are permitted under a common regulation, it has not reduced it. Just the opposite.

> Why shouldn't people in China be able to use European vaccines?

For example because China wants to reduce the influence of other countries? Because it wants to promote their own companies? Because foreign vaccines are too expensive?

> If a billion Chinese can use something without it being a problem

How do you know that it does not cause problems for you? Currently it looks like China has a problem with Vaccines.

> We're all the same species and have mostly the same problems.

That sounds silly. Governments, regulators, companies, ... all have different policies, interests, etc. That creates a lot of DIFFERENT problems.

> need a foreign union to negotiate to let me use foreign goods. My own government could

The EU is not a foreign union. It the Union I'm living in. Just like my city, my state, my country, the EU all have different responsibilities. Why should my country dictate laws to my city? It does. Because we are all the same species and have mostly the same problems. In my state, my country, the EU. Those all have negotiated the levels of power they are responsible for.

I mean, you're in a position where you live in the EU and took an American vaccine that was approved for use in the US.

All your customs office has contributed here is a rubber stamp saying "the work the Americans have already done is good enough" in case you are a jingoist who doesn't trust the US standard. The potential downside is if they vacillate then they'll delay the vaccine availability despite the fact that the option was available.

I put it to you that this is why the EU gets a lot of hate. People struggle to come up with examples of where it helped things along. There are decent odds here that Trump's policies did more for you on this topic than your own regulators, which I think it not be what you want in an example that you bought up.

> For example because China wants to reduce the influence of other countries? Because it wants to promote their own companies? Because foreign vaccines are too expensive?

You argue a few lines down that the Chinese have a problem with vaccines, so I put it to you that you actually believe the Chinese policy is worse than nothing. These reasons are terrible excuses for not letting a product over a border. Literally sacrificing lives for business interests in defiance of what a free market would do.

>> We're all the same species and have mostly the same problems.

> That sounds silly.

I'm not sure I can argue against this, but I urge you to reconsider what species you are a part of, and what the implications are if the problems are being created by the regulators rather than the underlying reality.

> All your customs office has contributed here is a rubber stamp saying "the work the Americans have already done is good enough"

The customs office does not test nor does it approve vaccines. That's done by the European Medicines Agency ( https://www.ema.europa.eu/en ). This Agency is under EU control. The respective US authorities are not under EU control, they are under the control of the US government.

I would also not expect that the US companies give me the same vaccines from the same production sites.

> who doesn't trust the US standard

I trust EU standards. Which my government can influence.

> People struggle to come up with examples of where it helped things along.

Maybe you, I can come up with lots of examples. EU standards are one. Your view on standards and regulations differs from most people.

> Literally sacrificing lives for business interests in defiance of what a free market would do

The Chinese market is not free. That should be known.

> but I urge you to reconsider what species you are a part of, and what the implications are if the problems are being created by the regulators rather than the underlying reality.

Nations, organisations, science, companies, money, laws, politics, ideology, are all reality. You seem to live in a fantasy world of 'species'.

> It is extremely arguable whether the EU is necessary for that though.

We were talking about the very real pros and cons of the EU.

You provided a single "pro" EU datum about chargers that is a) real and b) IMO trivializing at best wrt the benefits of EU-membership as the EU currently exists.

I gave you what I considered to be a more representative example: the convenience of shipping times/costs intra-EU. Brexit gives us plenty of data to compare pre vs. post on this issue.

Now you're waxing philosophical about whether the EU is necessary to achieve the "pro" that I gave you.

It's as if I just slid down the flagpole in Super Mario Bros., but now the game wants me to go backwards and consider how to build other routes for this same level.

> I think they've overseen the biggest upwards change in living standards

For a few, while the poor countryside has no money and toxic boosters raining down on them.

Empirically, it's mostly been rural communities that have had their living standards raised (by moving into cities). It's not very pretty, but on a purely numerical level the benefactors far outnumber the hurt (using a very specific framing of increased lived experience).

How much countryside is there anyway? On the map, China looks like a tightly-knit mesh of huge multi-million cities, all with high speed rail and subway systems, and huge malls. I doubt they're as poor as miserable as they should be according to the picture painted.

I am not a fan of the CCP to put it mildly. China is the only country with poor Chinese people for a reason and the reason is the CCP. But in the 11 years I’ve lived in Shanghai things have quite visibly improved, in terms of infrastructure, quality of basically every consumer good, wages. Things have improved less here, relatively, than elsewhere.

The countryside is emptying of people in China as in every other country, just starting later and moving faster. Being a peasant is no fun. That’s why people leave as soon as they can.

> the EU has serious energy problems, brewing war on the border implying diplomatic failures and is largely reliant on American military assistance.

The first two are essentially just a matter of geography; pretty sure it would have played out the same in broad lines if there had been no EU. If anything, I expect it would be worse: a more divided Europe would have been easier to defy by Putin. To call this a "diplomatic failure" is a huge simplification; you can only do so much diplomacy with someone who is not willing to engage in diplomacy with you. Ask Neville Chamberlain how his diplomacy worked out.

The US is convinced it needs an humongous army to do all sorts of useful things, like dropping napalm on children in Vietnam, drone strikes on journalists, invasion of countries for no clear reason in particular with intentionally falsified data. You know, essential stuff like that.

I'm putting it rather sharply here and I do think the US military does good things too and I "half believe" in Pax Americana, sort of, but let's not kid ourselves and claim that the US military is needed for the defence of Europe. Defend from whom, exactly? Russia? The Soviet military was already collapsing in the 80s together with the rest of the Soviet union, and we've all seen how well they're doing in Ukraine. That view is about 50 years out of date. We even have our own nukes, should it really come down to it. And who else is there to seriously threaten Europe/EU militarily? No one, basically. Even during the second world war things are not as simple as "the United States single-handedly comes to save the day in Europe" as some Americans seem to believe.

> If we're going to be objective, technically the Chinese Communists are the greatest success for humanity; I think they've overseen the biggest upwards change in living standards from when they came to power to today (even after the regressions of the Cultural Revolution). They have done a better job of preserving peace than almost any alternative superpower except maybe India.

Huh!?

No way. The CCP is a massive failure economically.

Taiwan was part of China. Taiwan had massive growth while China was stagnant. Taiwan is one of the richest countries in the world, China is still one of the poorer countries in the world today. China ranks 66 below Costa Rica and Russia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...

The true successes are places like South Korea and Taiwan that started exactly in the same place as China and delivered massive economic growth in an incredibly short time.

The Chinese Communists used capitalism to get their country filthy rich while the supposedly "capitalist" west turned into a bunch of socialist dictatorships with high taxes and regulations.

Nothing surprising, if not the fact the western citizens allowed it to happen without revolting. Most likely they were glued to their phones while it happened.

> If we're going to be objective, technically the Chinese Communists are the greatest success for humanity

That ‘success’ came largely from western investment and western consumption, and at the cost of ~100,000,000 lives under Mao.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com