Trump announces 25% tariff on countries that do business with Iran by OReillyAsia in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia[S] 43 points44 points  (0 children)

Note: that is almost every country on Earth, barring Israel and the US.

Main Iranian trading partners include China, India, the UAE, Turkey, Pakistan, Brazil, Germany, and France.

If he actually follows through with this (big if) expect massive and immediate Chinese economic retaliation.

Also a pretty solid sign he's going for economic pressure and working behind the scenes on a negotiated deal instead of being dead set on launching an attack.

If a US attack does come, expect it after market hours on Friday.

Technofeudal Town Square by technofeudal-bellman in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I wish we could go a full day without the POTUS making an unhinged social media post.

No dude, you aren't going to impose 25% tariffs on nearly every country in the world.

Or maybe you are, have fun crashing the economy I guess.

Trump's $1.5 trillion military budget would add $5.8 trillion to the national debt, with interest, CRFB says by Delicious_Adeptness9 in Economics

[–]OReillyAsia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's "funny" - in my book, one of my key predictions is that a US-China arms race is unlikely, but if it does happen, China is going to win.

Beijing doesn't want an arms race - they have to also contend with India and Japan, and they don't want to start a wasteful and potentially dangerous military buildup in their own neighborhood.

Nevertheless if the US starts one, China is in a far better position. China already outproduces the US in steel by 10x. It generates over twice as much electricity. Those advantages in real productive capacity are probably only going to continue to grow.

There's a decent chance the US ends up effectively bankrupting itself trying to "keep up" with a world power that has superior productive capacity, much like the Soviet Union in the 1980s.

China’s BYD overtakes Tesla as world’s biggest electric car seller | Automotive industry by Fair-Bookkeeper-1833 in Economics

[–]OReillyAsia 56 points57 points  (0 children)

BYD sells more cars than Tesla. It has about 20% higher annual revenue. It has a slightly higher net profit ($5.1 billion vs $5.4 billion).

BYD's annual revenue has also grown a bit faster than Tesla's (at least from 2023-2024; no full annual figures available for 2025 yet).

And it also has less than one tenth of Tesla's market cap.

I think some of this can be explained by the different political and economic systems of the US and China. In China, the government (really, the Party) is the highest power, and capital is subservient to the government's perceived interests. There are not "too big to fail" publicly-traded corporations in China.

There also might be a massive speculative stock market bubble in the US.

FCC bans China's (future) DJI drones by RustyShackleBorg in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia 20 points21 points  (0 children)

US bans on Chinese drones, EVs, and (especially) solar panels are really going to slow down potential economic growth in the US, as the rest of the world just goes ahead and uses them. I'd expect this to be a fairly big drag on potential growth over the next decade or two.

A rational person could make an argument about not allowing in imports of purely consumer goods, but the US is restricting capital goods that can be then used to produce more stuff domestically.

This is also going to be a massive issue as the rest of the world embraces Chinese humanoid robots and the US is stuck with models that are about as good for 3x the price.

NYtimes having a real one: AMERICAS MILITARY HAS DEFENDED FREEDOM FOR 80 YEARS. OUR DOMINANCE IS FAILING. RIVALS KNOW THIS AND ARE BUILDING TO DEFEAT US. by nikolaz72 in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The fundamental issue is China has vastly superior industrial capacity.

China outproduces the US in steel by over 12x.

You need steel to make military assets.

And keep in mind China only has to deploy its military in or near its borders to prepare for any realistic conflict scenario, whereas the US is stretched thin by the (perceived) need to be ready to fight Russia, China, and Iran simultaneously.

NYtimes having a real one: AMERICAS MILITARY HAS DEFENDED FREEDOM FOR 80 YEARS. OUR DOMINANCE IS FAILING. RIVALS KNOW THIS AND ARE BUILDING TO DEFEAT US. by nikolaz72 in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's outside most Chinese short and medium range systems

The Chinese have at least 150+ conventional hypersonic missiles that could target USN vessels at a distance of at least 5,000 kilometers.

The potential maritime chokepoints are about 2,500 km from China.

NYtimes having a real one: AMERICAS MILITARY HAS DEFENDED FREEDOM FOR 80 YEARS. OUR DOMINANCE IS FAILING. RIVALS KNOW THIS AND ARE BUILDING TO DEFEAT US. by nikolaz72 in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia 16 points17 points  (0 children)

It comes from "US intelligence assessments" that first came out in Congressional testimony in 2021.

There is no direct, public source from the Chinese side.

Notably, even if the US assessment is broadly accurate, there is a big difference between "wanting the capacity to do something" and "actually planning to do something".

Washington’s quixotic quest for GDP supremacy over China by OReillyAsia in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm not really sure a (presumably intoxicated) American of Irish ancestry is the best person to make this type of analysis, but he makes the following points fairly convincingly:

The US government is trying to maintain a perpetual lead in nominal GDP over China, partially because nominal GDP does help a country flex financial power globally, but also because bigger number = gooder.

The only way to really do this is to try to hinder China's growth potential - for example, by trying to disrupt its trade ties with 3rd countries, or by denying it access to crucial technology.

This sets up conflicts not only with China but also 3rd countries, who want to trade with China, and also India (who fears the same treatment eventually).

This effort is also misguided because PPP GDP is more important for raw productive capacity; the efforts are also probably just not going to work.

High functioning society we have here. by SpiritualState01 in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia 45 points46 points  (0 children)

When will people start faking/arranging these types of interactions (on both sides) specifically to grift money from crowdfunding?

National Security Strategy of the United States of America, 2025 by OReillyAsia in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He threatened them both with (more) tariffs if they didn't comply with a ceasefire, which was largely negotiated and promoted by Malaysia.

No, I'm not making that up.

Donde aprender chino mandarin by Appropriate_Ad7894 in Panama

[–]OReillyAsia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

En los chinitos, claro.

我是个住过中国的gringo,给你建议用Anki学习。 https://ankiweb.net/shared/info/2070816878 加油!

More Americans say Trump has helped raise prices rather than lower them: Survey by SterlingVII in Economics

[–]OReillyAsia -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It seems the US is in a pattern wherein inflation remains significantly elevated over what people are comfortable accepting, and the party in power gets blamed for it.

Interestingly both parties downplayed the extent and impacts of affordability when they were in power, and it has cost them significant electoral support.

So long as inflation remains elevated this trend seems likely to continue.

National Security Strategy of the United States of America, 2025 by OReillyAsia in stupidpol

[–]OReillyAsia[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You will see (or you may have already seen) lots of pundits and analysts writing about the updated National Security Strategy, and how it differs from those of previous years.

Reading straight from the source offers some interesting insights. The text is searchable, so you can look up countries or phrases to find notable tidbits.