Comments by "Stephen Jenkins" (@stephenjenkins7971) on "China’s ASML is Years and Years Behind" video.

@Renwoxing13 Your username makes your opinion on China kinda moot. It's also quite bigoted. Don't like Chinese bigotry? Don't do it yourself; be better.
13
@catonpillow I did as you asked, and only found that China was ahead in manufacturing solar panels, not that it was ahead in photovoltaics technology. Unless you can find a more specific source? Just name the website and I should find it.
12
China: bullies US allies US: stops trading certain tech China: "Wait, that's illegal"
10
@catonpillow Do you have any actual proof behind the claim that China has "not only caught up, but more often than not it actually got ahead of the US" or is this just typical propaganda? I have 100% heard that China has new homegrown technology growth, but nothing in leading.
6
@vladdx More like it'd be a stupid point. The US was already technologically dominant prior to Operation Paperclip, and the USSR of the era did the same exact thing. The German scientists were conquests of war in a fashion, and were useful for a boost in missile technology, but at their advancements had literally nothing to do with "establishing the US as the technological powerhouse of the last 80 years". Especially when Nazi Germany was only ahead a few years in certain tech, but behind the US in others; at most it helped the US get ahead like 5 years, not 80. In short, you just want propaganda, not the truth. But it doesn't fit your narrative, does it?
6
...Why would China be decades behind the Mars Rover? 30 years ago China was freely trading with other countries and thus had easy access to their tech. We don't need another Albert Einstein to re-discover nuclear fission in every country for them to get nukes, the knowledge is already out there. ASML isn't nervous outside of not getting the money they'd want. And the "competitor backed by the Chinese government" bit is precisely the issue there. I doubt the Chinese would appreciate it if US companies started going into China financially supported by the US and started cleaning house -that's literally what China did to the US and many other countries. China isn't really leading in many fields, atm. Also, while that saying is interesting, it's also deceptive in its use here; China isn't just a "poor young man", it's a sovereign state that has done many questionable things and has pissed off a lot of neutral states around it because of it.
4
@xblade11230 The act isn't a sanction, its an embargo; so while you were right that there is a US embargo from the 1940's to at least the 1950's. The last extension seems to have been at 1958, so after that getting US tech shouldn't be an issue, unless there is more I'm missing. That also doesn't stop other countries from trading with China good tech. I never said the US gave technology. My original argument was that trade across countries led to proliferation of technology, and nothing the US has done has prevented that; it just stopped specifically US tech from getting to China and the USSR from 1940's-1950's. Which, well, yeah, they were enemies of the US at the time. US can't force its allies to do anything. US allies continued to trade with Iran despite US sanctions; they only go so far with China recently because THEY perceive a threat from China as well. And this does come from a good place; nobody really likes China's actions in the South China Sea, I think. And it doesn't seem that specific act is in play any longer, btw.
3
@TsLeng If there was a rise in the EV supply chain, then it would be easily acknowledged in the international sphere. Everyone knew that China had a rise in the EV supply chain; it had nothing to begin with, after all. The issue is whether they're becoming a big player, which as far as I can tell they're not -though some Chinese assert as such for some reason. The US really doesn't care, it had literally subsidized China's growth for decades for a reason. As it turns out, the US tolerates a lot if it perceives the country to be aligned with it. The second China confirmed that it was not an ally, but a rival is when the issue churned up. Much of China's technological growth was left alone insofar that its not tightly woven into the CCP itself after that. That itself is the biggest issue, which I agree with the US on. Huawei would not be an issue if it was a company all on its own; and even if the US did attack it for geopolitical reasons, it would have much less ammunition to do so without this key fact.
3
@vladdx I mean, obviously it's stealing for the average joe; but just like there is a difference between murder and killing in a war -there is a difference between appropriation of military technology and stealing in a war. Again, this is a weird standard that you hold the US to. The state of Germany after the war made such scientists useless. Germany would be in no position to benefit from them for a good 2 decades. And the fact that it would even be rebuilt in that time is a testament to the Western Allies' generosity. The Marshall Plan tot his day is considered one of the greatest humanitarian actions in world history, ya know? You have an interesting perspective. I don't agree, but I can at least see where you're coming from now. Germans don't care though, so I don't either. Plus, you know, the Marshall Plan kinda destroys any argument of immorality since nobody has ever raised a former enemy back up before. I don't think you can find a more moral victory than the US'. Or maybe I'm wrong? Got any historical nuggets?
3
@konaIII What braindead deflections. I didn't excuse either British or American actions; so none of this fits the term of "hypocrisy". Also, no one talked about colonization or "ravaging"; otherwise we'd be talking about all of China's history of economic imperialism, genocide, mass murder all the way from the Xia Dynasty all the way to the modern era. We can talk about that if you want, but that's not what I was talking about. So before you cry about random American or British injustices, try and stick to the subject, mmkay? After all, Chinese complaining about imperialism when their entire country's existence was born of imperialism is literally the definition of "shameless hypocrisy".
2
@xboxstudent Blood doesn't pay in technological growth, what is this weird emotional response? There is literally zero proof that China has ever surpassed the big countries in terms of technology that they've been blocked from. It's interconnectivity that creates technology, as seen all throughout history. Isolation blocks technological growth, not raises it.
2
@richardlumleysmith2843 Why is this the story of the collapse of the USA? The US is one of the leading countries in tech innovation still. I don't even think China breached the top 5 yet.
1
@xblade11230 News to me. I could be wrong. Can you point me to some info on this?
1
@davidt02 You realize there is a difference between backing companies so that a country doesn't lose critical manufacturing/industries lest the supply chain get smashed...and backing companies to specifically crush their foreign competitors? Boeing is definitely given subsidies, but the US doesn't give subsidies to the point that they crush other competitors. It's the difference between essential subsidies (farming, manufacturing, etc) and economic splurging...which is what China does. But I suspect you knew that, and were trying to deflect by making a disingenuous point.
1
@davidt02 Are you seriously asking why poor and undeveloped countries were unable to utilize technology easily gotten through free trade? Seriously? Do you not know why "under-developed" is used? Do I need to hold your hand? Apparently I do. Here is the very brief and VERY obvious reason why: it's because the infrastructure necessary to do even basic development not only barely exists, the capital to further create new and improved infrastructure is nowhere to be seen. It's risky to pour money onto a an under-developed country since issues of corruption, weak government, issues with non-government parties screwing things up and/or blowing apart infrastructure (think terrorists or paramilitary groups), and waaaaay more. You may as well ask why countries who had technology to make swords and shields for thousands of years don't have the capability to to conquer large empires like the big states of their eras have. The know-how is NOT the same as the ability to field new tech or build it. But you knew that, because I don't believe for a second that you're this incapable of thinking. And finally; your insane comment on the SCS. Like, really? Yeah, no crap other countries have stupid claims. Wanna know the difference between all the other countries and China? It's a VERY obvious difference. So obvious, that I can't help but think that you're only pretending to be ignorant in order to disingenuously argue. I'll give you a hint though; it has a lot to do with military forces, man-made islands, and the penchant for attacking ships from neighboring countries in order to bully them to accept their own ridiculous claims. Tell me; which country specifically in the South China Sea fits this criteria?
1
@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 While it's true that from what I've seen China has not at all been a leader in technology, it's very disingenuous to say that "the last Chinse invention was gunpowder". Seriously, look up Chinese patents, most are BS, but they ARE inventing things.
1
@charlielee1000100 US not liking government-backed companies like Huawei or ZTE is hardly "bullying". What you missed is the very reasonable reason on why nobody trusts Chinese companies. They're too interconnected to the CCP, leading to questions on why any big nation would allow them to build infrastructure in their countries. It'd be no different to asking the US Government to build phone lines in Beijing, to the US' perspective. You'd know that if you were not disengenious.
1
@xblade11230 China 50 years ago was because of the "defining characteristic" of obeying the government no matter what and taking whatever BS it gives you. And that same characteristic is turning the world against it; that's hardly laudable. No question Chinese handled a lot of BS, but the hole China dug for itself was self-made, and South Korea, Japan, and West Germany rose out of poverty much faster without the millions of dead that China had.
1
@xblade11230 Germany and Japan were burning husks. Most of Japan's cities were made of flammable material, and thus when US fire bombed their cities very few cities remained. Ditto with Germany. Though they were industrialized, sure; so was Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico. Just because a nation industrialized doesn't mean they leave poverty. "South korea and Taiwan literally had everything handed to them for free to make them look good compared to their communist counterparts " You obviously never studied these countries and their histories. Taiwan got literally nothing. South Korea received some US aid, but it paled to the amount of aid given to North Korea by the USSR and China. South Korea industrialized only relatively recently in the 80's after the dictatorship fell, and while US protection helped a lot with the transfer of power, the leaving of poverty was almost entirely done by South Korean hands. US barely gave either country anything outside of a promise to protect it. I'm pretty sure Philips is a Dutch company, so unless you're making the argument that other Western countries went out of their way to help Taiwan get prosperous, that's a rather dull accusation. By your logic, the West has been helping China for the past half a century too; the West has allowed China to keep high tariffs on their goods while keeping little to no tariffs on Chinese goods since at least the 80's. By your own logic, China "got everything for free". Okay, hold up, Honda most certainly got technology transfers from the US, but they were hardly "for free"; that was a natural consequence of technology sharing through trade. C'mon now. Again, this is how most technology growth occurs; someone discovers something, nations trade, the ideas spread. Japan merely improved upon the Ford model and ran away with it. Germany did too. I mean, it's rather kind of you to forget the billions spent in aid to China's government and the trillions given to China's economy by keeping tariffs low on Chinse goods while Chinese economy thrived from artificially "beating" US competition with high tariffs and CCP financial support. But sure, yeah, the US never did anything for China. Nope. Never.
1
@TsLeng It's not about underestimating; it's about getting actual information from a state that has a habit of exaggerating its boons and hiding its flaws and discerning the truth from that. I can believe that China leads in something, but I don't see actual cited proof behind it from a decent source.
1
@red-baitingswine8816 Being asleep is better than following Party lines, I think.
1
@red-baitingswine8816 There...is no R/D Party line. They don't even have a party line in this regard, bruh. And the only thing I've said in regards to the political relationships with Chinese businesses is that the CCP is tightly interwoven with it...which is literally true. High ranking CCP members are literally the wealthiest members of Chinese society. What exactly is there to misconstrue here? Stay blind if you wish, but you need to have some serious spinning of logic to claim what I said wasn't true.
1
@red-baitingswine8816 "Lies" What lie did I tell? Because the fact is that I didn't say that China 100% didn't have that, I just said it was unlikely by nothing there was no actual proof besides hearsay. The fact that you're so emotionally invested in this kinda spells out how blinded you are by state propaganda. Again, nothing in the US, let alone anywhere else, has disputed this -this is my own observation. So whose party lines am I following here? And yes, every country has the wealthy holding powerful influence, but only in literal corporatist countries do the wealthy LITERALLY be a part of government. Which is effectively what the CCP is. "The Chinese govt regulates and plans the Chinese economy" can easily be "The Chinese wealthy regulates and plans the Chinese economy". Which I find extremely problematic at best. The idea that the 1% which are in the CCP have the best interest in the economy and the Chinse people is a sick joke. Like seriously, do you like Feudal monarchs or something? You do realize that China's HDI tells everyone a different story, right? Don't cry about propaganda when you say something so braindead.
1
@red-baitingswine8816 "the difference is that US corporations and oligarchs own our government and run it in their own narrow interests, unlike China which regulates its economy in the interest of China and its people." Imagine saying this unironically. Like seriously, do you wanna talk about the absolute lack of support there is for those in poverty in China? Maybe talk about the utter lack of human rights guaranteed in China? How about the lack of minority representation? Or the massive issues of human trafficking and "indentured servitude"? Maybe women's rights? Look, China isn't evil, but you're sick in the head if you think that China of all places handles things to the interest of the people. The US has a LOT of issues of which we can talk about; but China's issues are a longer list and more problematic. And you'll be hearing more of them as China becomes more prominent. That's what it means to get more spotlight; more of your issues become easier to point out. Get used to it. Though you should be used to it, as an "American".
1
@vladdx Not really. Germany was a defeated power, and the last thing anyone at the time wanted was for Germany to have these scientists of war around. It's basic bitch spoils of war, except kinda nice since the US didn't force them to pay indemnities. There is no "stealing" from a defeated country in a war. Never has been. Why are you placing this ludicrous standard SPECIFICALLY on the US? A standard that literally nobody follows?
1