Rafael Dominguez

Founder, sustainability, running, music and my family. Song writer “whales gotta eat”, “Axolotle Anthem - Remix”. Former MSFTy. Say hola!

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@StevenEKuhn @joerogan @patrickbetdavid @ShawnRyan762 Yeah a bunch Nazis running that place

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@Bluebearmonkey @J_MoAGoGo Wow went away for a few hours and missed this combo! Need summary 🤪

[Candace Owens @RealCandaceO]

You might be noticing that a lot of Zionists are obsessively smearing Russia.
Thankfully ClockTower X, (which is the project of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign affairs) explicitly notes in their FARA documents that a part of their propaganda program targeting Americans will teach that antisemitism comes from Russia. And that me and Tucker Carlson are therefore sourcing our talking points from Russia. (Note, these documents were filed before my family trip to Russia was even planned.)
Israel is behind trying to train Americans to be Russophobic.

I wonder why.

Also, you have to appreciate the irony of literal foreign agents using a technique to smear Americans as foreign agents.

[Blue Bear @Bluebearmonkey]

@J_MoAGoGo @somoscode China exporting consumer goods to US/EU is so last decade. 🙄

https://t.co/iwhROMxStN

[Dr.Fager @johnnys_dream]

16世紀のスペインは、明の圧倒的な絹や陶磁器の生産力を前に、新大陸から略奪した銀を吸い上げられるばかりで、まともに売る交易品がなかった。

19世紀の英国も同様に、茶の輸入で東インド会社が赤字に陥り、売るものがないからアヘンという禁断の毒物を密輸し、それを清が取り締まると自由貿易の侵害だと逆ギレして大砲を打ち込んだ。

そして現在、米国とEUは、EVや太陽光パネル、次世代インフラの生産力において、中国の圧倒的なサプライチェーンとコスト構造に完敗している。マーク・アンドリーセンらテック楽観主義者がシリコンバレーのイノベーションが世界を席巻するとリアリティ・ショーを演じていた裏で、西側のものづくりの基盤は完全に空洞化しているのだ。

自力で勝てない、売るものがない。だからこそ彼らは、ロイ・コーン流の鉄則

　「負けても絶対に認めず、ルールそのものを書き換えて相手を犯人に仕立て上げろ」

を発動し、過剰生産は世界の安寧を脅かす犯罪だという、喜劇のような超論理を国際法に組み込もうとしている。

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@J_MoAGoGo @Bluebearmonkey Beggar? It’s called trade dumdum 🤪

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@BetterCallMedhi The French voice over is super annoying so can’t listen to it 🤪

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@Bluebearmonkey @J_MoAGoGo Typical westoid brain: blame others for ur shortcomings. West was amazing when they can colonize other countries and plunder their resources. Now that they need to innovate and compete, oh no, these guys don’t play fair 🤦🏻‍♂️🤮

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@ElofsonJess @OwenBenjamin Wait what?

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@LionelMedia @ImGinnyRobinson @RealCandaceO Jane Fonda paid a heavy price though

[Pepe Escobar @RealPepeEscobar]

"Overcapacity" is a concept generated by pathetic EUro-mutts to disguise their intergalactic incapacity to do anything apart from vomiting neo-Orwellian bureaucracy.

https://t.co/QUPTCZMmhp

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

This is great! So glad China exists to bring down the hubris of these fking morons a couple of notches #China

[hello world @whiteTony99]

西方对中国最愤怒是中国把他们躺赚了几十年的暴利生意，一个个砸成了普通人都买得起的日用品。
这种愤怒已经刻进了很多西方人的骨子里，他们不是不理解，而是不愿意理解，不愿意接受自己再也不能躺着剥削全世界的事实。
二十年前，中国修地铁要用盾构机，全部从德国进口。一台盾构机德国卖3.5亿人民币，一分钱都不能少。买的时候还要签霸王条款，机器坏了只能找德国工程师来修。
德国工程师来中国一天的工资是3000欧元，换算成人民币当时是3万多。他们坐飞机必须坐头等舱，住必须是五星级酒店的总统套房。
维修的时候中国人不能在旁边看，必须全部离场，修完了直接开账单，换一个小小的密封圈就要10万人民币。
有时候机器出个小故障，要等德国工程师三个月才能来，整个工地几百人就只能闲着干等，每天损失几百万。
没有人觉得这有什么不对。全世界都默认，高科技就应该卖这么贵，德国人掌握了技术，他们就有资格赚这个钱。甚至放言给中国图纸也造不出盾构机。
但到2008年，中国第一台拥有自主知识产权的盾构机下线。当时德国人根本不在乎，他们觉得中国人造出来的肯定是垃圾，用不了几天就会坏。
结果中国盾构机不仅能用，而且价格直接开到了5000万一台。后来随着技术不断成熟，产量不断提高，现在一台国产盾构机只要2000多万人民币，价格只有原来德国的十七分之一。

德国盾构机的垄断神话一夜之间破灭了。原来全世界只有德国、日本、美国少数几个国家能造盾构机，他们联合起来维持高价，想卖多少钱就卖多少钱。
现在中国加入了，他们的价格体系彻底崩溃了。现在德国盾构机想卖出去，价格也只能降到和中国差不多的水平，再也不能躺着赚暴利了。
而这样的事在各个领域都不断的上演，套用足球解说的一句话，留给西方垄断的时间不多了。

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@Mark4XX Marquito has a dry mouth problem and always needs water for some reason. I would love to see his reaction after getting this call... a sir. pls hold a second don't hang up. I need a gallon of water... LOL

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@RealPepeEscobar I gave it to them... Someone had to... LOL

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@RealPepeEscobar

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@angeloinchina China going out of their way to help people of Taiwan even when they may not appreciate it...

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@D162Michele haven't tried others aside from pad thaid but I doubt any of them come above Japanese food. I prefer it to Chinese or any other on the list. Don't like messy food and Chinese put too much stuff together... I'm a picky eater MF though :)

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@Bluebearmonkey @SkylarkAlouette france is fake and gay :)

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

@Bluebearmonkey it's such an unintelligent and flawed argument I am astonished it keeps being made by people who should know better. US gov gave Solindra 500M dollars and the freaking thing went bust anyway and the republicans kept winging for years about it to Obama/dems - need more than money

[Rafael Dominguez @somoscode]

I thought EU was better than US for consumer protection but looks like both govs work for corporations the same way not the public. #Europe

[Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand]

It always astonishes me how there is virtually ZERO public debate - or even public awareness - in Europe about the decisions that will most shape ordinary people's lives.

These days, the EU is drafting a new anti-China legal framework where - quite literally - the more affordable and competitive Chinese products are, the more illegal they'd become.

You'd think EU citizens would want to be informed about such things - as it couldn't be more consequential for their prosperity.

Yet I bet virtually no EU citizen is even aware of it, beyond a vague sense that there is some sort of trade dispute going on.

So what's going on exactly? It all centers around a new legal instrument the EU is drafting called the "overcapacity instrument" (https://t.co/mNpCMudYyS).

First of all, the very notion of "overcapacity" is pretty ridiculous to begin with, especially the way it's being defined by the EU, as it basically means being competitive enough to export.

By this definition of "overcapacity," pretty much every European industry that's ever run a trade surplus - German cars, French wine, Italian fashion - has been guilty of "overcapacity."

I'm not even exaggerating: if you read this study by the EU Parliament on "Industrial overcapacities, with a focus on China" (https://t.co/TcwEBoL8mD), they define "overcapacity" as building more capacity than your domestic market can absorb. So the moment you build capacity to export abroad, you're in "overcapacity."

Utterly ridiculous.

And what this "overcapacity instrument" is about is creating a permanent legal mechanism for the EU to block Chinese competition across whole sectors of the economy, if they happen to be in "overcapacity."

In effect, this means that if China is competitive globally in a given sector in such a way that it exports a lot, that's proof of overcapacity, and legally it'd mean that the entire sector can be restricted from the EU market.

Which means it really, factually, is a legal framework where the more affordable and competitive your products are, the more illegal they become.

Which is a CRAZY economic concept! 🤦‍♂️

Please note that it's different from the anti-subsidy legal instrument, which the EU has already put in place in 2023 (the "Foreign Subsidies Regulation": https://t.co/SvPKFyN0zo).

This "overcapacity instrument" would be above and beyond this: it wouldn't even matter if a particular sector was subsidized by the Chinese government or not, the mere fact of its competitiveness in exports would be grounds for restrictions in the EU.

It doesn't take a genius to understand how badly this could impact everyday people: this is European consumers being forced to pay more for worse products by law, so that uncompetitive European firms don't have to improve.

Politicians frame it as avoiding a "China shock 2.0" but really this is choosing an even steeper self-inflicted decline than is already the case, where EU citizens would subsidize mediocre EU companies that would have even less pressure to catch up. It's a hidden tax: subsidies for uncompetitive firms paid by consumers instead of governments, which in turn makes them less incentivized to become competitive.

The first "China shock" did de-industrialize Europe somewhat, but at least it made things cheaper for European consumers. If this becomes Europe's response to a second "China shock" not only it'd make everything more expensive but it'd do nothing for EU industry: you don't become competitive by banning the competition...

Look at China itself: the way it industrialized was NOT by banning Western firms but on the contrary by welcoming them strategically and learning from them. You learn to compete by... competing, duh!

What I find most shocking in all of this isn't even the policy itself - you can make arguments for and against protectionism, and reasonable people can disagree.

What's shocking is that virtually no European media outlet is explaining any of this to the public. This is unarguably one of the single most consequential economic decisions the EU will make this decade, affecting the price of everything, and it's being drafted in near-total silence.

No newspaper is running the headline "EU plans to make Chinese goods illegal if they're too affordable" - even though that's essentially what's happening.

But that's what you call a "democracy" with "freedom of expression" these days apparently...