
U.S. orders closure of Chinese consulate in Houston, angering Beijing - markdog12
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/china-consulate-houston-1.5658416
======
totalZero
At some point Beijing is going to fire back. They have a lot of leverage over
our global corporations.

Rather than making token attacks on them while continuing to consume the goods
they make, we should smile and be friendly while methodically moving our
manufacturing demand closer to home. There is plenty of cheap labor in Latin
America.

~~~
mlindner
> At some point Beijing is going to fire back. They have a lot of leverage
> over our global corporations.

Umm what? They have almost no leverage what-so-ever. China needs those
corporations in China to survive. Those are pieces of leverage against China,
not something that China can leverage for themselves against others. The
reason they're not striking back is because they're already scared of the
corporate flight that's occurring from the tariffs. They don't want to do
anything that would exacerbate that.

~~~
totalZero
The dewy-eyed mentality that China is powerless in the face of our mighty
consumer demand is what got us entangled in China's manufacturing sector in
the first place. I think the pandemic has made it clear that what happens in
China has an immense impact on the availability of goods in the USA and
elsewhere. This is true whether we're talking about webcams, medical PPE,
iPhones, or anything else that is made in China. If China were to shut down
the exportation of ball bearings tomorrow, the entire world would notice.

If you don't consider this to be "leverage," then perhaps you can suggest
another name.

China doesn't need any one country's corporations in order to survive. Even if
what you're saying had been true 20 years ago, I think it's incorrect to
believe that China has no leverage over corporations that do business in their
massive manufacturing sector today.

China doesn't even need the West to be involved in HK, and they have acted to
that effect. HK has become a much smaller contributor to their economy than it
was when Britain ceded HK to China, in relative terms.

If Apple's assembly campuses in China shut down tomorrow, Apple will be unable
to manufacture iPhones, but China would be able to absorb some of the
redirected demand in the form of handsets from Oppo, Vivo, Huawei, Xiaomi,
etc. Samsung would pick up a lot too.

If Boeing (which contrary to your zero-leverage thesis was strong-armed into
opening a finishing plant in China) shuts down sales to Asia Pacific tomorrow,
China will be able to take up demand in the form of aircraft sold by Comac.
Even if not, a moratorium on Boeing purchases in China would tilt the Airbus-
Boeing duopoly toward Airbus.

Apple generated $260B in revenue last year, and Boeing generated $77B. China's
GDP was $27T (PPP). See the difference? Our companies need them, but they
don't _need_ our companies.

Even if the manufacturing sector were to disappear tomorrow, China would be a
huge consumer market. Their buying power is a form of leverage. When you make
them the world's factory on top of their substantial consumer activity, that
gives them immense power to shape the economic behavior of foreign governments
and corporations.

Why do you think that Apple acquiesces to China's government despite claiming
to be pro-democracy and pro-privacy back in the States? It's not because China
lacks leverage, that's for sure.

The first step to disempowering China is to accept reality; American
consumption of Chinese goods has basically subsidized the growth of that
country. Once we have accepted the problem, we can take steps to solve it.

~~~
mlindner
Comac aircraft are barely even functional. They're death traps and which is
why they're only sold in China to state-owned airline companies.

China has leverage over US companies, but that's not without consequences.
China doesn't have leverage over the US though. US would be okay with some US
companies losing out in China and using that as a tool to drive it's own
companies out of China.

------
_JamesA_
They almost immediately started burning documents[1].

> "All I know, it's illegal to have open burning in the city of Houston like
> that," Houston Fire Chief Samuel Peña said.

[1]: [https://www.chron.com/houston/article/U-S-orders-Chinese-
Con...](https://www.chron.com/houston/article/U-S-orders-Chinese-Consulate-in-
Houston-to-15425646.php?cmpid=hpctp)

~~~
kediz
It might be a common practice for consulate to do that: Russian consulate in
SF did it in 2017 in response for an eviction related to "Russian gate" [1]

The U.S used shredder to destroy document in Iran in 70s but Iranians were
able to piece back the document to get intel from it so I guess the
intelligence community learned a lesson there.

[1]: [https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/why-was-the-russian-
consu...](https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/why-was-the-russian-consulate-in-
san-francisco-burning-1038018627906)

~~~
fermienrico
Shredding is absolutely fine. The modulating factor is the size of the pieces
and total number of pieces that are shuffled. The problem scales with N^2 (?).

If the shredder shreds with 1mm particles, it will be pretty much impossible
to piece it together and it will depend on how each page mixes with other
particles. Even if the particle size is 100mm, if you throw those pieces in a
pile of 500 tons of paper, and _shuffle_ it sufficiently, then it will be
impossible to piece together the original source.

~~~
grugagag
Fire does it better

~~~
fermienrico
Agreed.

------
iask
Hey you! Look over there...woot! Won the election.

Didn’t Mr. Bolton said that China was asked to help with re-election? If
that’s the case then this is just another political distraction.

J

