14 Asian countries signed China-led trade pact

[Sundiata]

Nice work fucking it all up Trump. Pulling out of trade deals meant to contain China worked out really well, didn't it?

While unfortunate, it's like, what do you expect from a protectionist? If it's not broken, it shouldn't be fixed.

[Infected Mushroom]

The free trade agreement will help China develop mutually beneficial free trade, investment and business deals with other countries. I like this.

[Novus America]

Unfortunate, especially as it it includes zero environmental or worker protections. In a region with major pollution problems and poor worker rights this will be bad for the workers and the environment, although it really does not change that much.

But with Japan wanting to move their manufacturing back home why would the sign this? Seems completely contradictory. Their workers are treated pretty badly sure, but they still cannot compete with many other places in worker abuse.

However with India and Taiwan out of it, we can counter it by signing bilateral trade agreements, with both Taiwan and India (bilateral agreements are better than multilateral ones in regard to trade in most cases).

Then we can offer some bilateral deals to members of this to give them an alternative option.
And our bilateral deals can and should provide worker and environmental protections.

Rather than rejoining race to the bottom neoliberalism, which is a dead end to ruin, we should offer an alternative to it.

[Myskatonia]

This is horrible

no kidding, the CCP must feel so hard right now.

[Picairn]

The free trade agreement will help China develop mutually beneficial free trade, investment and business deals with other countries. I like this.

Yes, and my country will also benefit from it economically. But I'm more concerned about China's influence on smaller states through their economies than just upfront benefits. In free trade agreements, nations with the strongest economies usually dominate trade.

[Infected Mushroom]

According to Wikipedia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regiona ... artnership

According to a 2020 projection, the agreement is expected to increase the global economy by US$186 billion.[5][12]

[Cordel One]

And the Chinese capitalist empire expands as the American one continues to decline.

[Novus America]

The free trade agreement will help China develop mutually beneficial free trade, investment and business deals with other countries. I like this.

Yes, and my country will also benefit from it economically. But I'm more concerned about China's influence on smaller states through their economies than just upfront benefits. In free trade agreements, nations with the strongest economies usually dominate trade.

The millionaires and billionaires might, the average workers not so much. This screws the workers are very to benefit the richest. No worker protections included.

[Resilient Acceleration]

The free trade agreement will help China develop mutually beneficial free trade, investment and business deals with other countries. I like this.

Yes, and my country will also benefit from it economically. But I'm more concerned about China's influence on smaller states through their economies than just upfront benefits. In free trade agreements, nations with the strongest economies usually dominate trade.

This will also boost my country's recovery post-2020, but I'm also a bit concerned at the other aspects. Coincidentally we have just passed a sweeping jobs law that severely curtail red tapes, including labor and environmental protections, in favor of foreign investment, so the boost would be even bigger.

At least according to the finance minister during her speech in my college acceptance ceremony, we need around 6-6.5% of annual economic growth to prevent a looming population ageing disaster and middle income trap in respectively 2045 and 2030's. With how things stands today, I'm heavily sceptical that relying on the US is enough to achieve that. The good news is that Biden is very likely to pursue a "soft" approach of offering TPP-esque agreements as opposed to slapping tariffs everywhere that achieves very little, so both sides of the Pacific offering lucrative (at least for us) deals = great.

[Resilient Acceleration]

Then we can offer some bilateral deals to members of this to give them an alternative option.
And our bilateral deals can and should provide worker and environmental protections.

Considering we went great lengths exactly to crush that, I don't think it'll be very popular.

Especially regarding the environment. The developed world built their wealth through the rampant exploitation of the environment. Now when we want to modernize and catch up by doing the same, we are prevented. If the West wanna enforce environmental protections on us, they better offer something equal of value to cover the "sacrifice" we'll have to make, else we obviously won't listen. Any tariffs or embargo will just push us closer to China and not solve the orginial problem.

[Zarnicovia nova]

our influence is expanding!

[The Shadow Lotus]

It's good, I guess

[Novus America]

Then we can offer some bilateral deals to members of this to give them an alternative option.
And our bilateral deals can and should provide worker and environmental protections.

Considering we went great lengths exactly to crush that, I don't think it'll be very popular.

Especially regarding the environment. The developed world built their wealth through the rampant exploitation of the environment. Now when we want to modernize and catch up by doing the same, we are prevented. If the West wanna enforce environmental protections on us, they better offer something equal of value to cover the "sacrifice" we'll have to make, else we obviously won't listen. Any tariffs or embargo will just push us closer to China and not solve the orginial problem.

I mean given the rampant problems with the environment in the region, what is the point of modernization if you end up in a toxic wasteland? I do not see why you want to repeat our mistakes.
You could modernize without taking the most destructive routes.

Also we should not allow our trade partners to screw our workers and undermine our environmental protections.
I guess that is one “advantage” of the PRC, they have no such concerns.

But I would rather us go alone, but protect our environment and workers, than undermine both just to make a deal.

Which is why we might be better off looking at Taiwan who would be better suited for trade with us than a cyberpunk hell. If that is our only choice.
But maybe there is some sort of compromise like military equipment and energy technology we could offer.
That could allow you to improve economically via more productivity and efficiency over race to the bottom.

Surely there has to be an alternative to the worst excesses of neoliberalism. We cannot out compete the PRC by racing to the bottom, we have to look at other ways. We have to offer something different than them, not more of the same. We have to help the average people as an alternative to only helping the billionaires.

But maybe much of Asia will not work for the US, and we might have to look at Europe and the America’s who are more willing to work with us on those things perhaps.
Environmental and work protections have more political support those places.

[Zarnicovia nova]

Considering we went great lengths exactly to crush that, I don't think it'll be very popular.

Especially regarding the environment. The developed world built their wealth through the rampant exploitation of the environment. Now when we want to modernize and catch up by doing the same, we are prevented. If the West wanna enforce environmental protections on us, they better offer something equal of value to cover the "sacrifice" we'll have to make, else we obviously won't listen. Any tariffs or embargo will just push us closer to China and not solve the orginial problem.

I mean given the rampant problems with the environment in the region, what is the point of modernization if you end up in a toxic wasteland? I do not see why you want to repeat our mistakes.
You could modernize without taking the most destructive routes.

Also we should not allow our trade partners to screw our workers and undermine our environmental protections.
I guess that is one “advantage” of the PRC, they have no such concerns.

But I would rather us go alone, but protect our environment and workers, than undermine both just to make a deal.

Which is why we might be better off looking at Taiwan who would be better suited for trade with us than a cyberpunk hell. If that is our only choice.
But maybe there is some sort of compromise like military equipment and energy technology we could offer.
That could allow you to improve economically via more productivity and efficiency over race to the bottom.

Surely there has to be an alternative to the worst excesses of neoliberalism. We cannot out compete the PRC by racing to the bottom, we have to look at other ways. We have to offer something different than them, not more of the same.

But maybe much of Asia will not work for the US, and we might have to look at Europe and the America’s who are more willing to work with us on those things perhaps.

I'm Chinese and I read a Chinese report on this. They are addressing environmental issues

[Kowani]

I mean given the rampant problems with the environment in the region, what is the point of modernization if you end up in a toxic wasteland? I do not see why you want to repeat our mistakes.
You could modernize without taking the most destructive routes.

Also we should not allow our trade partners to screw our workers and undermine our environmental protections.
I guess that is one “advantage” of the PRC, they have no such concerns.

But I would rather us go alone, but protect our environment and workers, than undermine both just to make a deal.

Which is why we might be better off looking at Taiwan who would be better suited for trade with us than a cyberpunk hell. If that is our only choice.
But maybe there is some sort of compromise like military equipment and energy technology we could offer.
That could allow you to improve economically via more productivity and efficiency over race to the bottom.

Surely there has to be an alternative to the worst excesses of neoliberalism. We cannot out compete the PRC by racing to the bottom, we have to look at other ways. We have to offer something different than them, not more of the same.

But maybe much of Asia will not work for the US, and we might have to look at Europe and the America’s who are more willing to work with us on those things perhaps.

I'm Chinese and I read a Chinese report on this. They are addressing environmental issues

Sources: "bruh just trust me"

[Costa Fierro]

I love how all the talk is "THIS IS BAD FOR AMERICA" when in reality it's bad for New Zealand.

[Novus America]

I love how all the talk is "THIS IS BAD FOR AMERICA" when in reality it's bad for New Zealand.

True, but why did your government sign it? At least we did not.
Did the government not care about the notable lack of worker and environmental protections?

Did your government really think they can compete with PRC predatory state subsidized dumping?

[Resilient Acceleration]

Considering we went great lengths exactly to crush that, I don't think it'll be very popular.

Especially regarding the environment. The developed world built their wealth through the rampant exploitation of the environment. Now when we want to modernize and catch up by doing the same, we are prevented. If the West wanna enforce environmental protections on us, they better offer something equal of value to cover the "sacrifice" we'll have to make, else we obviously won't listen. Any tariffs or embargo will just push us closer to China and not solve the orginial problem.

I mean given the rampant problems with the environment in the region, what is the point of modernization if you end up in a toxic wasteland? I do not see why you want to repeat our mistakes.
You could modernize without taking the most destructive routes.

Also we should not allow our trade partners to screw our workers and undermine our environmental protections.
I guess that is one “advantage” of the PRC, they have no such concerns.

But I would rather us go alone, but protect our environment and workers, than undermine both just to make a deal.

Which is why we might be better off looking at Taiwan who would be better suited for trade with us than a cyberpunk hell. If that is our only choice.
But maybe there is some sort of compromise like military equipment and energy technology we could offer.
That could allow you to improve economically via more productivity and efficiency over race to the bottom.

Surely there has to be an alternative to the worst excesses of neoliberalism. We cannot out compete the PRC by racing to the bottom, we have to look at other ways. We have to offer something different than them, not more of the same. We have to help the average people as an alternative to only helping the billionaires.

But maybe much of Asia will not work for the US, and we might have to look at Europe and the America’s who are more willing to work with us on those things perhaps.
Environmental and work protections have more political support those places.

I mean, climate change is a global thing, so the planet will still turn a "toxic wasteland" if only half of the planet put real effort in environmental protections.

Though for short-term environmental problems, the term "cyberpunk hell" is a bit misleading. The worst environmental disasters I think has been the wildfire smog, but it's not unmanageable and so far we've been successful in minimizing that. I mean, it's not like we're completely against environmental protections as we're not stupid. Which might explain why most environmental deregulations are concerned with objects far far away from the population centers of Java island, such as in mining and plantation. The damages on ourselves won't be too big of a hassle, as most of it will be distributed equally to the whole world in the form of the loss of carbon-capturing rainforests, carbon emissions, etc.

Also to maybe clarify, environmental protections also don't only impact the richest 1%, but also the rest 99%. For example, during the last election, regions in Borneo and Sumatra voted in a landslide against the incumbent president. Originally, I thought the reason is solely due to the rise in Islamism, but no, the actual reason is because the global price for crude palm oil happened to drop (part of which iirc is thanks to EU embargo), leaving millions of palm workers in economic strain. Putting more artificial pressure on the industry would be a bit hard politically, to say the least.

But maybe there is some sort of compromise like military equipment and energy technology we could offer.

I think we're pretty good on that area. After gutting down red tapes for example, my country's super-powerful investment minister immediately met with Tesla executives to discuss about building a battery factory here, as we're the world's largest exporter of nickel. Obviously much more mutually beneficial relationship in that area is needed.

[Novus America]

I mean given the rampant problems with the environment in the region, what is the point of modernization if you end up in a toxic wasteland? I do not see why you want to repeat our mistakes.
You could modernize without taking the most destructive routes.

Also we should not allow our trade partners to screw our workers and undermine our environmental protections.
I guess that is one “advantage” of the PRC, they have no such concerns.

But I would rather us go alone, but protect our environment and workers, than undermine both just to make a deal.

Which is why we might be better off looking at Taiwan who would be better suited for trade with us than a cyberpunk hell. If that is our only choice.
But maybe there is some sort of compromise like military equipment and energy technology we could offer.
That could allow you to improve economically via more productivity and efficiency over race to the bottom.

Surely there has to be an alternative to the worst excesses of neoliberalism. We cannot out compete the PRC by racing to the bottom, we have to look at other ways. We have to offer something different than them, not more of the same. We have to help the average people as an alternative to only helping the billionaires.

But maybe much of Asia will not work for the US, and we might have to look at Europe and the America’s who are more willing to work with us on those things perhaps.
Environmental and work protections have more political support those places.

I mean, climate change is a global thing, so the planet will still turn a "toxic wasteland" if only half of the planet put real effort in environmental protections.

Though for short-term environmental problems, the term "cyberpunk hell" is a bit misleading. The worst environmental disasters I think has been the wildfire smog, but it's not unmanageable and so far we've been successful in minimizing that. I mean, it's not like we're completely against environmental protections as we're not stupid. Which might explain why most environmental deregulations are concerned with objects far far away from the population centers of Java island, such as in mining and plantation. The damages on ourselves won't be too big of a hassle, as most of it will be distributed equally to the whole world in the form of the loss of carbon-capturing rainforests, etc.

Also to maybe clarify, environmental protections also don't only impact the richest 1%, but also the rest 99%. For example, during the last election, regions in Borneo and Sumatra voted in a landslide against the incumbent president. Originally, I thought the reason is solely due to the rise in Islamism, but no, the actual reason is because the global price for crude palm oil happened to drop (part of which iirc is thanks to EU embargo), leaving millions of palm workers in economic strain. Putting more artificial pressure on the industry would be a bit hard politically, to say the least.

But maybe there is some sort of compromise like military equipment and energy technology we could offer.

I think we're pretty good on that area. After gutting down red tapes for example, my country's super-powerful investment minister immediately met with Tesla executives to discuss about building a battery factory here, as we're the world's largest exporter of nickel.

I do not see how destroying the more distant and rural areas so fewer people notice is really good.
I mean sure there are poor people who might benefit short term from environmental destruction too, but unlike the rich they cannot just jet off to Switzerland when there is nothing left to exploit. The problem with the race to the bottom is even by losing you win, and winning your lose. If you increase you wages and worker protections, you lose jobs.
So you have to keep cutting them, because someone else will cut their environmental protections even lower than yours.

And sure global warming is the whole prisoners’ dilemma. But we then all suffer long term.

But if Tesla wants to export those batteries to the US say, the US government has a say in that. We can stop it or allow it, depending on if it is good for us or not.
Point is though surely we can work out trade on slightly higher tech, higher productivity stuff, like that over race to the bottom stuff which offers no benefits to us.

We cannot compete in terms of rock bottom wages and the lowest environmental protections. So we have nothing to gain an everything to lose going down that route.

Just dabbing on the PRC is not enough. Surely we can dab on them without completely sacrificing workers and the environment.
The better route might be you offer us replacements for stuff made in the PRC though. At least that is not any worse, and better for us geopolitics wise.
In that case though you would want us to tariff the PRC more though.

If we hike our tariffs on the PRC, but offer to cut them on you in exchange for some environmental and worker right concessions you benefit more than you would from this. RCEP might help your natural resources exports but will not help your manufacturing against PRC dumping.
And if we hike tariffs on the PRC but not on you then you do not have to compete against the PRC for our market, so you do not have to be the bottom in wages and environmental protections.

[Radiatia]

I'm not a fan of this. It was negotiated in secret and the benefits are also secret apparently; to be honest I'm not surprised that New Zealand naively joined as soon as Winston Peters was out of the room.

[Bienenhalde]

I'm not a fan of this. It was negotiated in secret and the benefits are also secret apparently; to be honest I'm not surprised that New Zealand naively joined as soon as Winston Peters was out of the room.

Yeah, as good as the Ardern government was at handling the pandemic, I had a feeling that voting out One Nation and giving Labor an outright majority would be a big mistake. I guess this just proves that I was right.

[Mathuvan Union]

Fucking hell change the title. Yes, I will be the angry Australian. Australia and NZ aren’t Asia.
Also, NAFTA has a new replica.

[Cetacea]

I love how all the talk is "THIS IS BAD FOR AMERICA" when in reality it's bad for New Zealand.

Why? Removing trade barriers and getting a common regulatory system across a market of 2 billion is great for New Zealand - especially as bilateral agreementsd already exist with China and Australia, NZs two largest trade partners. Getting Japan and Korea in on the RCEP is a coup that NZ would be stupid to miss

[Cetacea]

Bump and merge?

[Western Fardelshufflestein]

Can we, like, not be so dependent on the CCP for everything? Because that would be great.