>our grandkids and their children will be able to benefit from having all that industry in the U.S. instead of China.
When those products were made here, it led to toxic chemical plumes and widespread soil contamination around the factories that produced semiconductors. [1]
>I'm sorry to my grandkids who are now living in a barren wasteland.
Trichloroethylene contamination produces heart defects, kidney and liver cancer. You are advocating to literally produce a toxic wasteland. [2]
So... your okay with Chinese kids with heart defects, kidney and liver cancer. The USA has more enforcement over these kind of things. If toxic pollution is your only concern, yes it is better to have those industries in USA.
>So... your okay with Chinese kids with heart defects, kidney and liver cancer.
Show me where I said that. Of course not. You seem to be ok with every country that hopes to participate in the technological economy having their own contaminated region.
Step back for a second. Think of the earth like a single-unit closed system. Would we rather have 195 regions contaminated with TCE or one/two?
Your petty nationalism would force those kids to stay in their country AND have them deal with the toxic waste of their protectionist government-subsidized industry because they'll have no other choice but to.
You're also making the argument that somehow we'd have the political will to both institute tariffs that protect the industry AND police those industries when they harm our environment. Guess what buddy, those are contradictory ideals. The USA isn't some magical place where we can defy these incentives.
Your assertion that we'd be better at managing waste here is especially fantastical considering the present EPA chairman. Scott Pruitt has undermined the protection of our environment at every opportunity. [1]
it seems like a logical implication, unless you're also entertaining the idea of production ending altogether.
> Would we rather have 195 regions contaminated with TCE or one/two?
i'm not sure, would 195 be better, or have some advantages? will all of these 'regions' be identical?
> Your petty nationalism would force those kids to stay in their country AND have them deal with the toxic waste of their protectionist government-subsidized industry because they'll have no other choice but to.
and you advocating that china be the location of choice for toxic waste will surely result in something different?
You’re shielding industrial chip manufacturers by using Chinese kids.
Petty nationalism will ruin this world. If every country needs its own silicon manufacturing facilities to participate in the tech economy either you’re advocating cutting most people off from the wealth it generates or your advocating for the propagation of toxic manufacturing to every state.
Both positions hurt kids. Hope you can sleep at night.
it seems to be that there's far too much packed into your statements for me to see a "think of the children" expression as anything but a baseless or perhaps even unethical rhetorical appeal to emotion.
from what i can discern of your position, i would estimate that your views are harmful. i can sleep fine not agreeing with you.
If you really cared about Chinese people you'd let them in when they asked to immigrate here. That's enough conflating the protection of toxic industry with humanitarian concern.
> If you really cared about Chinese people you'd let them in when they asked to immigrate here.
this seems to have an a lot packed in. it's not clear how advocating the departure of a minuscule amount of people from china is "helping chinese people" or otherwise demonstrating "care for chinese people".
It was the first of any American immigration laws to mention any nationality by name. The laws that replaced it subject countries like China to quotas that continue to unfairly restrict migration.
These restrictive laws have roots in the same petty nationalism that fuels protectionist subsudies.
These laws prevent kids - the kids that you claim to care about - from having a better future elsewhere.
When those products were made here, it led to toxic chemical plumes and widespread soil contamination around the factories that produced semiconductors. [1]
>I'm sorry to my grandkids who are now living in a barren wasteland.
Trichloroethylene contamination produces heart defects, kidney and liver cancer. You are advocating to literally produce a toxic wasteland. [2]
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/26/lens/the-superfund-sites-...
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichloroethylene#Physiologica...