Our Great Leader Is Not Leading Anybody Apparently

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

As far as a properly used tariff system. We are discussing tariffs are we not?

If you want to talk about quality of economic life fine. What is the economic and social cost to American society for unemployment, which arises from so-called free trade?

What unemployment? 4% right now. Natural unemployment.

The argument for tariffs is the argument for a bygone era that isn't coming back.

What net benefit do tariffs provide the average American?

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

there is no such animal as free trade.

But some animals are freer than others. Contrary to a lot of "common sense", the correct policy in dealing with a country like China is not to match their trade restrictions, but to have freer trade policies than they do.

Tariffs on imports such as Chinese steel or Canadian lumber benefit special interests in this country at the expense of the general public, the American consumer. The more that consumers must spend on Chinese steel or Canadian lumber, the less they have to spend on other products and services. The more that consumers must spend on American steel or lumber because of lack of foreign competition, the less they have to spend on other products and services.

Why shouldn't Americans buy those less expensive imports, leaving them with more disposal income to spend on other American products and services? More disposable income helps the American economy. Paying more for products, foreign or domestic, because of high tariffs hurts the economy.

[zico20]

Originally Posted by Clocker

But some animals are freer than others. Contrary to a lot of "common sense", the correct policy in dealing with a country like China is not to match their trade restrictions, but to have freer trade policies than they do.

Tariffs on imports such as Chinese steel or Canadian lumber benefit special interests in this country at the expense of the general public, the American consumer. The more that consumers must spend on Chinese steel or Canadian lumber, the less they have to spend on other products and services. The more that consumers must spend on American steel or lumber because of lack of foreign competition, the less they have to spend on other products and services.

Why shouldn't Americans buy those less expensive imports, leaving them with more disposal income to spend on other American products and services? More disposable income helps the American economy. Paying more for products, foreign or domestic, because of high tariffs hurts the economy.

The liberals on here are not going to be happy with you for that comment. Don't you know the way to prosperity is through taking as much money from the American people as possible, including the middle class. Don't believe me, Mostie will be along to set you straight.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Clocker

But some animals are freer than others. Contrary to a lot of "common sense", the correct policy in dealing with a country like China is not to match their trade restrictions, but to have freer trade policies than they do.

Tariffs on imports such as Chinese steel or Canadian lumber benefit special interests in this country at the expense of the general public, the American consumer. The more that consumers must spend on Chinese steel or Canadian lumber, the less they have to spend on other products and services. The more that consumers must spend on American steel or lumber because of lack of foreign competition, the less they have to spend on other products and services.

Why shouldn't Americans buy those less expensive imports, leaving them with more disposal income to spend on other American products and services? More disposable income helps the American economy. Paying more for products, foreign or domestic, because of high tariffs hurts the economy.

I have not made any argument about an economic policy responding to China's use of tariffs.

Again, elysiantraveller's cited article demonstrated the benefits of a properly applied tariff policy. China's tariff policy caused the foreign company/manufacturer to invest capital, create jobs and generate tax revenue for the tariff imposing country. As an aside the Chinese obtain new technologies, because the foreign investor/manufacturer must form a joint venture with China as a partner.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by zico20

The liberals on here are not going to be happy with you for that comment. Don't you know the way to prosperity is through taking as much money from the American people as possible, including the middle class. Don't believe me, Mostie will be along to set you straight.

Ah, yes, got to protect those union jobs in the steel mills.

The other side of that coin, not much discussed, is that the lower the cost of basic materials like steel or lumber, the more likely that American businesses that use those materials as inputs can keep their prices down and keep the demand for their products up. Let the market decide if we need more lumberjacks or more carpenters.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

What unemployment? 4% right now. Natural unemployment.

The argument for tariffs is the argument for a bygone era that isn't coming back.

What net benefit do tariffs provide the average American?

Can't deal with the actual facts that trump your theory about tariffs? I have to ask, as another poster observed, have you been correct about anything you opine?

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

As an aside the Chinese obtain new technologies, because the foreign investor/manufacturer must form a joint venture with China as a partner.

Yes, the cost of entry into a closed economy. How many of those joint venture folks on the Chinese side are highly connected in the party?

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Can't deal with the actual facts that trump your theory about tariffs? I have to ask, as another poster observed, have you been correct about anything you opine?

What facts?





The argument is that tariffs hurt consumers.

You haven't refuted that instead you point to China a proper use of tariffs. I fail to see the tangible benefit to the consumers. I see the benefit to the party and oligarchy.

Pick up your Adam Smith.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Yes, the cost of entry into a closed economy. How many of those joint venture folks on the Chinese side are highly connected in the party?

I am sure all of them, since the Chinese military is the real partner.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

What facts?

The argument is that tariffs hurt consumers.

You haven't refuted that instead you point to China a proper use of tariffs. I fail to see the tangible benefit to the consumers. I see the benefit to the party and oligarchy.

The Trump model and the Chinese model are not sustainable. Pick up your Adam Smith.

Times are vastly different than the 1700's. You are right there is no benefit to the consumers via capital investment, jobs and tax revenues.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Times are vastly different than the 1700's. You are right there is no benefit to the consumers via capital investment, jobs and tax revenues.

And you're wrong confusing trade policy with corporate investment in emerging markets.

Couldn't possibly be the natural resources on site, the extremely cheap labor, and a market of 1.2 Billion people.

Nope it's the tariffs.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

And you're wrong confusing trade policy with corporate investment in emerging markets.

Couldn't possibly be the natural resources on site, the extremely cheap labor, and a market of 1.2 Billion people.

Nope it's the tariffs.

Or it could be the exemption from high tariffs coupled with VAT and other taxes which would increase the product price by 50%.

BTW Hamilton who actually put our financial system together favored tariffs, protective tariffs..

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

If China wants to sell steel in America, it will move manufacturing here, as GM moved its manufacturing to China, creating capital investment, employment and tax revenues.

China is the example of the benefits of a properly constructed tariff policy.

As Toyota, Honda, Subaru and others have done - build factories here, creating jobs at the assembly plants, jobs at a vast number of US based suppliers, transportation, etc. Value added. When they build a car here, we get a lot more than a car in return. When they shop one here, we get a car.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

BTW Hamilton who actually put our financial system together favored tariffs, protective tariffs..

Hamilton was killed in a duel by Aaron Burr, a notorious free trader.

[Tom]

We needed tighter gun control laws!