50 years ago during the Cold War the economic trajectory of the two wasn’t so different, and pakistan also included what would become Bangladesh. Nixon was opening relations with China after the sino Soviet split, and India probably wouldn’t agree to ally with someone who was in the process of economically integrating with a country that they were actively fighting a border war with (sino Indian border war 1962-present). Pre Iranian revolution Iran was also a major ally and shares a significant land border with Pakistan, and probably most importantly, Pakistan was an ideal country to serve as a funnel for military assistance to the mujahideen to help fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, which would arguably lead to the economic drain and political quagmire that was a primary factor in its collapse.

Of course the mujahideen would then evolve to become Al Qaeda which Pakistan would harbor, Iran would have its revolution, Bangladesh would gain independence, and the Pakistani military dictatorship would squander the potential of their country on a nuclear program and trying to maintain an army of equal strength to a country 10x their population. But the choice had a lot more geopolitical merit way back then, and once it had been made it is not so easy as forgive and forget or to counter the logistical inertia just because the circumstances change.

Not only has it already been done, but it happened for most android phones pretty much the model year or two after apple did it. Enough time to get all their snarky ads in, let apple take the heat, and adjust their plans to follow the business model exactly - push people away from included headphones and towards their own +$100 Bluetooth headphones.

And the thing is, I love Bluetooth headphones. I used to love wired but the convenience is just too hard to beat. But everyone is price gouging the shit out of them compared to what it costs to produce. Granted I run mine very hard at probably an average of 10-12 hours a day split between two pairs at work and home, and I got around 10,000 hours out of my AirPods 2 before they died so I definitely got my moneys worth. But I refuse to pay $100 when I can get a knock-off pair for $4 that sound 95% as good with surprisingly similar battery life.

I see that as offering services that people clearly use and value, and that the bills have to be paid somehow. So as long as proton can deliver the privacy and security features it promises, I personally don’t see anything wrong with providing an alternative when the only other options are built on monetizing your data.

Power, water, internet, healthcare, education, transit, there’s a lot of things that should be public utilities or at least with a convincing public option because of the clear conflict of interest between private corporations and social benefit, but aren’t, because money controls politics.

They can. They just need to pay a little more. We’re talking 25 pence per liter at most compared to no sugar tax. Higher sugar intake is correlated with obesity which means more health problems which is more expense for the NHS. It’s like a train ticket or gas taxes or taxes in general, some percentage of usage that causes the problem needs to pay for the thing that deals with the consequences or expenses that solve it.

It’s the companies who have decided that they would rather sell shit soda, and consumers who are probably unwilling to pay anything except the cheapest price possible - wealth inequality and poverty problems aside because that’s a different social policy that should not be addressed through a sugar tax.

NOBODY LOOK

To give you an idea of who is on the tesla board of directors, it includes Kimbal Musk, his brother, and James Murdoch, of the Murdoch family you’re probably thinking of. Musk himself owns something like 20% of the company, the board owns some, his cult members also have some share. The rest of the shareholders are either institutional or retail investors who are some combination of not willing to rock the boat, don’t have enough voting power, and/or just don’t care.

BYD was selling ICE vehicles up until March of 2022, and their current split is somewhere around 50/50 BEV/hybrid so they’re still not a full EV company. Their lineup is still being supported by their existing infrastructure, subsidized by the already established supply chains for ICE that they can incrementally cannibalize while building up the EV part of the company. It’s a good blueprint for legacy auto, but not for an EV startup. That is even before mentioning the very generous subsidies and incentives for electrification provided by the national, provincial, and city governments to producers and consumers. Not to say there is anything wrong with that, because I believe the US also needs that level of investment into electrification, but my point is that it’s not the same business model.

The large profit margin SUVs are necessary for a company to achieve scale to then be able to produce the smaller cheaper stuff. Fixed costs like the factory, tooling, training, designing, that all takes a lot of money up front before even selling a single vehicle, and the smaller and cheaper the vehicle coming out of that production pipeline is, the longer the payback period will be. And when we’re talking about billions of dollars in cost, it’s hard to remain solvent when interest payments on the debt grow exponentially over time.

It’s why before tesla there had not been an American auto company startup for like 70 years, Tesla almost went bankrupt, and Rivian is just starting to head in the right direction. Lucid is probably fucked and they’re mostly Saudi owned these days anyways, and the rest of the US EV startup space ranges from a joke to a scam.

What legacy automakers already have in staff and part of the production line established is actually kind of useless when they have to wait to establish their electric motor, battery, and chassis production, which probably just means a new factory anyways. Give it a few years and the cheaper smaller stuff will come, because right now AFAIK only tesla actually has the free cash flow to fund an EV economy car at scale. Everyone else is still sinking billions establishing any EV production at all, and interest rates aren’t helping the speed of their progress either.

You’re right. The consumer tech consequences of the chip ban is more important than the military implications will ever be. Huawei’s lost tax revenue cost the Chinese government billions, which itself does more damage to the Chinese military budget than semiconductor bans for systems which aren’t actually critical in a conventional war. Cruise missiles can work effectively with tech from the 70s, and you don’t need 5nm chips to guide a rocket into an aircraft carrier. And this was about Huawei specifically - look at Huawei’s global smartphone market share. Pre trade war they were on par with apple and samsung volumes, with margins and a lineup closer to apple. Then the 5G bans and a PR campaign crippled their international sales, and semiconductor bans cratered their overall production.

Other Chinese brands like Lenovo, xiaomi, and the BBK brands (oppo, vivo, one plus, realme) are doing fine though, because inside them is all snapdragon, Qualcomm, intel, nvidia, and AMD. They’re basically final assembly plants for component manufacturers ultimately based in the US, whereas Huawei were using their own kirin chips, were taking market share from apple, and were creating their own operating system called HarmonyOS to replace android. Basically every major consumer tech hardware company in the US stood to gain from Huawei being taken out, including the US government when the trump admin used it as the poster child of the trade war. Huawei’s PLA connections were a nice bonus to sell to the public, but this was first and foremost a state backed corporate hit job.

And the worst part is, because of the opaqueness of it all and combined with propaganda from every direction, it’s hard to get a handle on how justified any part of it actually was. Because you basically have to choose to either trust the trump admin, US government, and corporate America, or Huawei and the Chinese communist party, and I don’t trust any of them. Personally I’m going with, there was probably something to be concerned about, but probably at a similar level to buying US hardware which the us government has clearly signaled that they have back doors into, but the corporate power struggle for market share is the actual reason behind it all.

The difference between this and 08 though is that in 08, way too many people were allowed to buy houses that were already built, taking on debt they could not handle, and speculating to an insane degree on the health of those mortgages. A structural issue with no structural cure except to bail out individual homeowners who took on way too much debt which was never gonna happen. For evergrande (as I understand it) it’s just the property developer running out of cash to pay for the construction. The homes were already paid for, so at most the house buyers will just be either SOL or directly bailed out by the government for which there is a strong case to do so, and evergrande shareholders losing their investment is not really a big deal since they’ll probably be paid out in the bankruptcy. I feel like this whole thing is a really big parallel to Silicon Valley bank, for which all the doomers were out there peddling the impending collapse of the financial system which never happened.

If anything is gonna bring down China it will be their demographic collapse, and that is impossible to fix and already manifesting. There is of course the usual argument of a huge tax base suddenly becoming a budget liability with a significantly smaller population of people to financially support them. But the big thing that will hit the private sector is the lower population causing rising labor costs which is driving away manufacturing, and the bulk of their entire industrial infrastructure is now set up for something they will no longer be very competitive in, and for a sector which young educated urban people don’t really want to work in.

If they can get within artillery firing range of the train line that goes through Tokmak, they can disrupt all rail reinforcement going to anywhere west of tokmak, which then puts the only rail reinforcement to crimea and the Kherson oblast through the long way across the Crimean bridge. M777 maximum range is 24.7km, they are 29km away, and are making steady progress. Russia knows this and is reinforcing which is making the entire front line weaker, and if Ukraine can keep up the pressure then we hopefully might be able to see something like Kharkiv happen again.