Lutnick is a TRAITOR, he manipulated the system to benefit his company, at the expense of the National Security of the US, by investing in this Malaysian data center which in effect, allowed the Chinese military a source to run their code on Blackwells, and if he's not arrested for treason and a stop put to it, all the next generations of advanced Nvidia GPUs.
Lutnick most certainly wasn't acting alone. The truth of the matter is that The neo-liberal project that hollowed out American business/manufacturing, the supported ruinous offshoring is composed of traitors to the American people on both sides of the aisle. They should all be prosecuted as such.
One at a time. Or one infractional group at a time at least. Otherwise you have too many rabbits and catch none.
[−]helsinkiandrew · 2026-11-15 Sun 14:59 UTC ·
link
> The neo-liberal project that hollowed out American business/manufacturing, the supported ruinous offshoring is composed of traitors to the American people on both sides of the aisle. They should all be prosecuted as such.
Remember it was the American people that have been choosing the (cheaper) offshore manufactured products over the American made ones for decades. There are many products still made in America but in general people buy the cheaper ones made from abroad. And they buy more products - TVs, clothes, Barbie dolls because of it.
The American people purchase goods within the trade regime, they don't set the trade regime. The oligarchs and political "elite" set the trade regime for personal and politic benefit.
Clinton March 8th, 2000, Johns Hopkins SAIS
On manufacturing, after saying American companies would for the first time sell and distribute American-made products inside China, he adds that they could do it “without being forced to relocate manufacturing to China.”
On democracy, after noting that China is agreeing to more than buying American goods, he says “it is agreeing to import one of democracy’s most cherished values, economic freedom.”
The US didn’t need to support China joining the WTO and when it became clear that they were not being a good partner (keeping their domestic markets locked to outsiders, requiring tech and IP transfer, requiring domestic partners over 50%, violating international labor and environmental standards etc) they should have been expelled and their goods blocked from all markets that we could get to align.
That would have cut off a source of cheap production.
The lack of enforcement of the WTO agreement befuddles me. The result has been the polar opposite of these statements from President Clinton:
"Economically, this agreement is the equivalent of a one-way street. It requires China to open its markets—with a fifth of the world’s population, potentially the biggest markets in the world—to both our products and services in unprecedented new ways," said Clinton. In a speech in 2000, Clinton reiterated his hopes:
For the first time, our companies will be able to sell and distribute products in China made by workers here in America without being forced to relocate manufacturing to China, sell through the Chinese government, or transfer valuable technology—for the first time. We’ll be able to export products without exporting jobs."
It's all about cui bono, and always has been. If enforcing the law would disrichen the rich, it won't happen.
[−]cmrdporcupine · 2026-11-15 Sun 15:46 UTC ·
link
With the Trump regime there's been a rather explicit transition from a system of neo-liberal exploitation-with-rules to an out and out oligarchical / corrupt system more analogous to Putin's Russia than Clinton or Obama era US globalized capitalism.
It's .. yes ... worse. Before what you had was an unjust, exploitative, but relatively stable system of rules by which international capitalism operated and in which specific individuals were not allowed to dominate because there was a balancing act of corporate interests, sector by sector, corporation by corporation. If you (not you or I, but corporate entities etc) played by the rules, you might get a chance at the bat.
What's replaced it is outright graft. "Success" is determined by proximity to specific individuals. Success and growth of the overall system is no longer a goal. It's outright "might makes right" politics and what makes it far worse than what came before is not only is it unjust (just like before) for the little guys like you and me.. it is now inherently unstable and prone to collapse.
It's absolutely short termist and interested only in certain families and individuals and maybe sectors.
The people that should be prosecuted are the actual individuals involved.
Also, as a Canadian I'll just say... FUCK Lutnick in particular. Him and Bessent and the whole cabal have made explicit economic war against former "allies" in the name of their own enrichment. It is glorious that they have now have knives out for each other.
[−]themaninthedark · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:26 UTC ·
link
Remember it was the American people who have been choosing to consume the (cheaper) food bathed in pesticides over the organic foods....
Remember it was the American people who have been choosing to use the (cheaper) gas with lead over the gas with out lead....
This take smacks of the 'learn to code' vibes that journalists were throwing around at blue collar workers only to cry about it being harassment when it was thrown at them.
Remember, the people who started buying cheap items from China were the same people who's jobs were being shipped to China. Kind of hard for you to afford the more expensive items when you don't have a job or you have switched from a good paying job to a low wage one.
not saying it’s necessarily a good thing but offshoring and financialization enabled American companies like Apple to retain a much larger chunk of profits and return more wealth to shareholders, who in turn recycled that money back into American assets, lowered cost of capital, raised valuations, funded startups that raised tech salaries and pulled global talent at the expense of other countries
In an alternate universe, keeping manufacturing industries and jobs onshore would likely have come at the expense of American dominance and high salaries in tech, and higher cost consumer goods - probably not a huge deal to most people
> but offshoring and financialization enabled American companies like Apple to retain a much larger chunk of profits and return more wealth to shareholders, who in turn recycled that money back into American assets, lowered cost of capital, raised valuations, funded startups that raised tech salaries and pulled global talent at the expense of other countries
So trickle down, but it only helps a small number of people in a handful of coastal cities? And imports people into the US to then take work from citizens?
And even that is no longer really happening (except for the importing people to take work from citizens), and hasn't for a few years now (not sure if you've seen the tech job market at the moment). Yes, there was a brief period of time that a few technologists were making 6 figures starting..
Apple has a 21% global smartphone market share. If the US has an unhealthy dependency on a single smartphone manufacturer, then perhaps something should be done about that?
If Apple truly has become a critical part of the nation's infrastructure and is "too big to fail", then why hasn't it been nationalized yet? The nation's safety depends on it!
[−]JumpCrisscross · 2026-11-15 Sun 19:16 UTC ·
link
> If Apple truly has become a critical part of the nation's infrastructure
It’s a beloved brand. Ban imports of Kewpie or Keurig and you’ll also get a fiasco, that doesn’t mean they’re critical.
IMHO the country was more stable when economic growth was more evenly distributed among the states. It is impossible to imagine Cupertino voting for a wreckless wildcard like Trump; this indicates how wide the disparity is.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump got a majority of the Cupertino vote in 2024. It’s heavily Chinese, and for some reason, he has a lot of support among the Chinese community. Maybe because he’s been funneling GPUs to the CCP?
Just as long as we don't give a pass to those who might loudly complain about this, while just flagrantly looting in different ways (eg Grump himself). At this point I think most people recognize the original decades-old problem even if we disagree on specifics. The real difficulty is that the political banner of opposition to neoliberalism has also been captured by that same class of shot-term anti-patriotic looter, merely running a different/newer con job.
Like in 2026, we don't really need to worry about domestic industries and production lines getting shipping to China. That has basically run its course, and while it would be great to work on rebuilding our industries, nobody really has a plan for doing that beyond hopium. The active attack we do need to worry about is further destruction of what still remains of the decentralized US economy, in favor of rolling up ever more activity into megacorps (through high prices on energy and raw goods, open political favoritism, continued regulatory capture, etc).
> The real difficulty is that the political banner of opposition to neoliberalism has also been captured by that same class of shot-term anti-patriotic looter, merely running a different/newer con job.
Agreed. They need to go as well.
> What we do need to worry about is further destruction of what still remains of the decentralized US economy, in favor of rolling up ever more activity into megacorps (through high prices on energy and raw goods, open political favoritism, continued regulatory capture, etc).
Sure, but we also need to do our own infrastructure buildup, offshoring hasn't run it's course, we still have places all over the country with no real economic prospects. There has to be something for that alongside bringing the megacorps to heel.
> offshoring hasn't run it's course, we still have places all over the country with no real economic prospects
This doesn't follow. By "run its course", I mean that most labor-intensive-manufacturing has already been dismantled and shipped away, apart from a few strategic / protected industries (eg military industrial complex, vehicles). Like show me an industry that is still working to carry out offshoring plans in 2026.
> we also need to do our own infrastructure buildup ... we still have places all over the country with no real economic prospects
This does follow, and I agree. I'd say the best recent attempts were things like the Infrastructure and Jobs Act (direct spending on infrastructure), Inflation Reduction Act (subsidies creating jobs installing renewable energy), CHIPS act (direct subsidy to one quasi-strategic industry).
My criticism came from how the Grump "plan" is to simply keep turning up the economic pain until most of us are poor and desperate enough to compete with Chinese factory workers, and how this nonsense has now used up all the air in the room. Tariffs would have worked 30 years ago, at this point they're closing the barn door after the horse ran away, went to college, settled down, and had kids.
[−]thatsabadlook · 2026-11-15 Sun 14:17 UTC ·
link
The American people voted for a clown and got the circus.
Unwinding it all takes. at best, another 2 years.
I get it, these people are pretty terrible, but some reflection and soul-searching is needed. Why is such a large group so gullible/dumb/desperate and how has society/traditional republicans/democrats failed them? How did it come to this?
I would like to note, the clown is a convicted felon, and a convicted sex offender. Something known at the time of the second elections, by the millions who voted for him.
[−]austin-cheney · 2026-11-15 Sun 18:51 UTC ·
link
Media manipulation. Same reason Elon bought Twitter.
Most people vote for whom they are told whether by their social circle or the media they consume.
The abnormal people are those who do independent research and weigh the consequences with objective measure. This is called conscientiousness and all research on this suggests it’s highly negatively correlated to intelligence at about -0.27.
I think you've got the tail wagging the dog. People don't get brainwashed by the media, the consume the media that aligns with how they already feel. And the recent elections buck your theory anyway. Trump won the because voters felt they were being left behind, life was hard and getting harder. Now they've punished Trump for the exact same reasons.
unwinding cannot really start for another two years, is that what you meant?
For why America (and others) are entertaining authoritarian leaders, the best explaination I've heard is The Tyranny of Merit. Neoliberal economics failed from its own successes. It made excuses and workarounds instead of understanding what it did to the un-credentialed working class and passed on building an economy that works for all people. This lead to hubris, corruption, and control by a smaller and smaller elite as power and wealth has concentrated.
I am neither a US nor a Chinese citizen, so I have no stake in either side. But are you truly certain that blocking China’s access to the most advanced gpus is a sound long-term strategy? "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer." (Puzo/Coppola)
[−]O3marchnative · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:05 UTC ·
link
I think that in this case it's about the "rules for thee, but not for me" aspect. If the average U.S. citizen attempted to do what Lutnick allegedly did, the consequences would likely be unpleasant, at best.
And the average US citizen re-elected the poster child president for "rules for thee, but not for me." And IMO if he hadn't started the Iran War, imposed tariffs, and driven inflation through the roof, his approval rating would still be 47%+ like at the beginning of his second term.
He betrayed his coalition. Never do that.
[−]kevin_thibedeau · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:31 UTC ·
link
It was 32% of the voting eligible population. The knuckle-draggers are a minority.
Should we sell them F-35s to "keep them closer"? Sell them our most advanced defense technology to "keep them closer"?
[−]JumpCrisscross · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:44 UTC ·
link
> are you truly certain that blocking China’s access to the most advanced gpus is a sound long-term strategy?
There is a reasonable debate to be had around the level of limits. But I think it’s clear there need to be some. The idea that China won’t develop a local supplier if we sell to them is a ship that sailed a decade ago. And we’re still unclear on the AI’s future development curve—if it looks like what some proponents believe, it would make sense to preserve every advantage we have.
Keeping Chinese AI firms dependent on CUDA is good for NVDA, but not for USA. If these were toys for video games then this would be true. But these are strategic assets powering the most consequential technology development of all time. The second these machines started to have national security implications, the strategy changed. The CCP has a long history of aggressively blocking Western entrants to their market. This is maybe a bit heavy handed for taxis and search engines, but it is totally justified and highly advisable for defense tech. It would be foolish for the CCP to not develop their own domestic production for defense technology. Similarly the US would be foolish to not restrict their access to such technologies. Criticizing either side for acting in their obvious interests is a bit unfair, so hence we have the current stand off.
As someone who is frustrated by how ITAR keeps fancy toys away from my hands as a civ foreigner, no, export control is never the longterm solution, and it's stupid as Clipper Chips that US keeps trying to make it work, in turn corrupting its own industrial base, though at the same time to blatantly ignore it or its tactical usefulness is also not clever at all.
[−]onetimeusename · 2026-11-15 Sun 18:19 UTC ·
link
I am not sure if we have an answer to this. On one hand it gives China more capabilities. On the other, China could develop their own compute chips which would give them an even bigger capability, they have ways of getting the chips anyway and it's difficult to stop that meaningfully, and it benefits the US marginally to sell them. It benefits Nvidia a lot so Jensen's advocacy on this topic is self serving. But I don't think there's a correct answer here.
That said, easing restrictions happened earlier this year and was announced publicly and suddenly now everyone has become a China hawk.
If you want my personal opinion, Jensen might be right here.
[−]austin-cheney · 2026-11-15 Sun 18:45 UTC ·
link
It doesn’t matter. Soon China will have equivalent capabilities from their own chips.
Cantor & Fitzgerald is deep state associated and handles Tether's collateral after taking over from the CIA Deltec bank.
This could be approved operations to get Chinese companies to run their models in controlled data centers. The only hole in this theory is that the NYT would not print this if it were the case.
The disgust for the personality in other comments here is justified. But the broader picture is that Wexner, Lutnick and Epstein have always been deep state adjacent. In the early days Bears Stearns handle slush funds and laundering, then Cantor & Fitzgerald, now Bitcoing/Tether.
If you just focus on the personality there'll be another Lutnick soon.
Yup. He also took the $7B+ which was meant for Natcast and put it through the NIST CRDO solicitation, as a way to get information and equity from leap-ahead semico technology startups and companies. He is one of the most corrupt individuals in this government, which is abysmally low in this regard in the first place.
[−]onetimeusename · 2026-11-15 Sun 18:53 UTC ·
link
from the article:
>These dealings are just a tiny portion of Cantor’s business, which stretches from investment banking and trading to real estate. Other investment banks have similar partnerships, and there is no evidence that Cantor’s investments influenced Mr. Lutnick’s deliberations.
> no evidence that Cantor’s investments influenced Mr. Lutnick’s deliberations.
There's no evidence that Huang's infidelty lead to national security comprimises either, yet he's looking for a new job; why shouldn't Lutnick be updating his LinkedIn too?
Lutnick is a TRAITOR, he manipulated the system to benefit his company, at the expense of the National Security of the US, by investing in this Malaysian data center which in effect, allowed the Chinese military a source to run their code on Blackwells, and if he's not arrested for treason and a stop put to it, all the next generations of advanced Nvidia GPUs.
Remember it was the American people that have been choosing the (cheaper) offshore manufactured products over the American made ones for decades. There are many products still made in America but in general people buy the cheaper ones made from abroad. And they buy more products - TVs, clothes, Barbie dolls because of it.
Who exactly should be prosecuted?
Clinton March 8th, 2000, Johns Hopkins SAIS
On manufacturing, after saying American companies would for the first time sell and distribute American-made products inside China, he adds that they could do it “without being forced to relocate manufacturing to China.”
On democracy, after noting that China is agreeing to more than buying American goods, he says “it is agreeing to import one of democracy’s most cherished values, economic freedom.”
That would have cut off a source of cheap production.
"Economically, this agreement is the equivalent of a one-way street. It requires China to open its markets—with a fifth of the world’s population, potentially the biggest markets in the world—to both our products and services in unprecedented new ways," said Clinton. In a speech in 2000, Clinton reiterated his hopes:
For the first time, our companies will be able to sell and distribute products in China made by workers here in America without being forced to relocate manufacturing to China, sell through the Chinese government, or transfer valuable technology—for the first time. We’ll be able to export products without exporting jobs."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%93China_Re...
It's .. yes ... worse. Before what you had was an unjust, exploitative, but relatively stable system of rules by which international capitalism operated and in which specific individuals were not allowed to dominate because there was a balancing act of corporate interests, sector by sector, corporation by corporation. If you (not you or I, but corporate entities etc) played by the rules, you might get a chance at the bat.
What's replaced it is outright graft. "Success" is determined by proximity to specific individuals. Success and growth of the overall system is no longer a goal. It's outright "might makes right" politics and what makes it far worse than what came before is not only is it unjust (just like before) for the little guys like you and me.. it is now inherently unstable and prone to collapse.
It's absolutely short termist and interested only in certain families and individuals and maybe sectors.
The people that should be prosecuted are the actual individuals involved.
Also, as a Canadian I'll just say... FUCK Lutnick in particular. Him and Bessent and the whole cabal have made explicit economic war against former "allies" in the name of their own enrichment. It is glorious that they have now have knives out for each other.
Remember it was the American people who have been choosing to use the (cheaper) gas with lead over the gas with out lead....
This take smacks of the 'learn to code' vibes that journalists were throwing around at blue collar workers only to cry about it being harassment when it was thrown at them.
Remember, the people who started buying cheap items from China were the same people who's jobs were being shipped to China. Kind of hard for you to afford the more expensive items when you don't have a job or you have switched from a good paying job to a low wage one.
In an alternate universe, keeping manufacturing industries and jobs onshore would likely have come at the expense of American dominance and high salaries in tech, and higher cost consumer goods - probably not a huge deal to most people
So trickle down, but it only helps a small number of people in a handful of coastal cities? And imports people into the US to then take work from citizens?
And even that is no longer really happening (except for the importing people to take work from citizens), and hasn't for a few years now (not sure if you've seen the tech job market at the moment). Yes, there was a brief period of time that a few technologists were making 6 figures starting..
Ban iPhone imports for 6 months and see if it only helps a "small number of people in a handful of coastal cities"
If Apple truly has become a critical part of the nation's infrastructure and is "too big to fail", then why hasn't it been nationalized yet? The nation's safety depends on it!
It’s a beloved brand. Ban imports of Kewpie or Keurig and you’ll also get a fiasco, that doesn’t mean they’re critical.
Cupertino was +44 for Harris in 2024
https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/sov/2024-general/ssov/pres-...
Like in 2026, we don't really need to worry about domestic industries and production lines getting shipping to China. That has basically run its course, and while it would be great to work on rebuilding our industries, nobody really has a plan for doing that beyond hopium. The active attack we do need to worry about is further destruction of what still remains of the decentralized US economy, in favor of rolling up ever more activity into megacorps (through high prices on energy and raw goods, open political favoritism, continued regulatory capture, etc).
Agreed. They need to go as well.
> What we do need to worry about is further destruction of what still remains of the decentralized US economy, in favor of rolling up ever more activity into megacorps (through high prices on energy and raw goods, open political favoritism, continued regulatory capture, etc).
Sure, but we also need to do our own infrastructure buildup, offshoring hasn't run it's course, we still have places all over the country with no real economic prospects. There has to be something for that alongside bringing the megacorps to heel.
This doesn't follow. By "run its course", I mean that most labor-intensive-manufacturing has already been dismantled and shipped away, apart from a few strategic / protected industries (eg military industrial complex, vehicles). Like show me an industry that is still working to carry out offshoring plans in 2026.
> we also need to do our own infrastructure buildup ... we still have places all over the country with no real economic prospects
This does follow, and I agree. I'd say the best recent attempts were things like the Infrastructure and Jobs Act (direct spending on infrastructure), Inflation Reduction Act (subsidies creating jobs installing renewable energy), CHIPS act (direct subsidy to one quasi-strategic industry).
My criticism came from how the Grump "plan" is to simply keep turning up the economic pain until most of us are poor and desperate enough to compete with Chinese factory workers, and how this nonsense has now used up all the air in the room. Tariffs would have worked 30 years ago, at this point they're closing the barn door after the horse ran away, went to college, settled down, and had kids.
The US system is built such that powerful or well connected people don’t experience any consequences.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy7jm7k7pxzo
Unwinding it all takes. at best, another 2 years.
I get it, these people are pretty terrible, but some reflection and soul-searching is needed. Why is such a large group so gullible/dumb/desperate and how has society/traditional republicans/democrats failed them? How did it come to this?
If other countries go back to trusting anything the U.S. says in just 2 years, I’d be gobsmacked.
I would like to note, the clown is a convicted felon, and a convicted sex offender. Something known at the time of the second elections, by the millions who voted for him.
Most people vote for whom they are told whether by their social circle or the media they consume.
The abnormal people are those who do independent research and weigh the consequences with objective measure. This is called conscientiousness and all research on this suggests it’s highly negatively correlated to intelligence at about -0.27.
Top issues this cycle were affordability (consistent) and corruption (new)
For why America (and others) are entertaining authoritarian leaders, the best explaination I've heard is The Tyranny of Merit. Neoliberal economics failed from its own successes. It made excuses and workarounds instead of understanding what it did to the un-credentialed working class and passed on building an economy that works for all people. This lead to hubris, corruption, and control by a smaller and smaller elite as power and wealth has concentrated.
https://youtu.be/Vp5qsEuUOWo?is=0GXcY4mSCA1zH_aU
He betrayed his coalition. Never do that.
There is a reasonable debate to be had around the level of limits. But I think it’s clear there need to be some. The idea that China won’t develop a local supplier if we sell to them is a ship that sailed a decade ago. And we’re still unclear on the AI’s future development curve—if it looks like what some proponents believe, it would make sense to preserve every advantage we have.
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2026-...
Rethinking Export Controls as a Tool in Modern Technology Competition, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Why not just give them everything that gets invented?
That said, easing restrictions happened earlier this year and was announced publicly and suddenly now everyone has become a China hawk.
If you want my personal opinion, Jensen might be right here.
This could be approved operations to get Chinese companies to run their models in controlled data centers. The only hole in this theory is that the NYT would not print this if it were the case.
The disgust for the personality in other comments here is justified. But the broader picture is that Wexner, Lutnick and Epstein have always been deep state adjacent. In the early days Bears Stearns handle slush funds and laundering, then Cantor & Fitzgerald, now Bitcoing/Tether.
If you just focus on the personality there'll be another Lutnick soon.
Lutnick is surely on a different level, being part of the government and a core member of the Epstein ring.
And while we're at it, same for Musk (wrt. to the Star Shield throttling).
Both these guys have decided they have unilateral veto power over US foreign policy. Their freedom ought to be taken away, for good.
>These dealings are just a tiny portion of Cantor’s business, which stretches from investment banking and trading to real estate. Other investment banks have similar partnerships, and there is no evidence that Cantor’s investments influenced Mr. Lutnick’s deliberations.
There's no evidence that Huang's infidelty lead to national security comprimises either, yet he's looking for a new job; why shouldn't Lutnick be updating his LinkedIn too?