Posted on 02/18/2013 7:45:43 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network
You really need to read Bastiat "What is seen and what is not seen." link here
Yeah, that’s the one . . . unless you are telling me that George H.W. Bush served after Bill Clinton. /s
I am looking at the American experience WRT to imports.
And I am also looking at the American experience WRT to China.
We have done well with the import experience so far. But a big change is happening now which not very many are focused on yet:
China is growing FAST. China now exports more than we do, Our exports are likewise falling, while China’s are growing.
So China is the world leader. And getting bigger.
We are now number 2, and shrinking.
This is a very, different ballgame now.
No not really. Read Bastiat.
When an official spends for his own profit an extra hundred sous, it implies that a tax-payer spends for his profit a hundred sous less. But the expense of the official is seen, because the act is performed, while that of the tax-payer is not seen, because, alas! he is prevented from performing it....
There is one thing very certain, that when James B. counts out a hundred sous for the tax-gatherer, he receives nothing in return. Afterwards, when an official spends these hundred sous and returns them to James B., it is for an equal value of corn or labour. The final result is a loss to James B. of five francs.
...
For instance, I want to agree with a drainer to make a trench in my field for a hundred sous. Just as we have concluded our arrangement, the tax-gatherer comes, takes my hundred sous, and sends them to the Minister of the Interior; my bargain is at end, but
the Minister will have another dish added to his table.Michele 0 will have another lobster tail to suck down ... Dear me! how much trouble there is in proving that two and two make four; and if you succeed in proving it, it is said, "the thing is so plain it is quite tiresome," and they vote as if you had proved nothing at all.
We have a difference in opinion.
I believe China is different from any system Bastiat was familiar with.
I believe he wrote what he did in Europe a century and a half ago.
This is a new deal. China is growing and taking over our industry. Our industries. Our technology. Our jobs. And is communist. Likewise does not allow non-Chinese to immigrate.
So China seems diametrically opposed to America.
(as do some other countries, I am just picking on China because they are becoming most important to our economy currently)
When China was still behind America, that was one situation.
Now however, we have entered a new era. And in my opinion we need to start to bring back American power.
Not only that, but we need to hurry.
China is now bigger than us. Growing faster, and we are allowing them to do this without stopping.
In my opinion it is high time to change the rules.
Otherwise we will simply shrink, shrink, and then vanish.
Do not get me wrong. We are still big (now) and we are still the world’s superpower. Except at the same time, increasingly we are not. The more jobs we export, the weaker we become, and the stronger other countries grow.
Look at what is coming out of Washington. Look how our defense budget is shrinking.
China’s is growing.
Look how our unemployment rate is high.
China’s is low.
We have a challenge on our hands, because China’s costs are so much lower than our own, but we cannot continue to simply send all our jobs there.
Seriously. We need a new approach.
Soon.
Right, BUT... You want to raise China's costs (and ours as well) by imposing import duties, when the correct solution is to LOWER our costs by getting rid of excess government regulation and taxes here.
We certainly do have unions involved in manufacturing. Quoting a percentage of overall jobs that are non union is irrelevant. This vanity was in context of manufacturing.
I’m saying we need to change the rules.
How we do that exactly, I am entirely open to ideas.
But our current approach will mean eventual (perhaps rapid) collapse and defeat.
One simply does not move ones manufacturing to a foreign country.
It is silly. We need to bring back US manufacturing. How is not as important as the fact, we do.
I.6.12M. T. despatched a ship from Le Havre to the United States, with a cargo of French goods, chiefly those known as specialties of Parisian fashion, totaling 200,000 francs. This was the amount declared at the customhouse. When the cargo arrived at New Orleans, it had to pay a shipping charge of ten per cent and a tariff of thirty per cent, which brought the total to 280,000 francs. It was sold at a profit of twenty per cent, or 40,000 francs, for a total price of 320,000 francs, which the consignee converted into cotton. This cotton had to pay ten per cent more, for transportation, insurance, commissions, etc.; so that, when the new cargo arrived at Le Havre, its cost amounted to 352,000 francs, and that was the figure entered into the accounts of the customhouse. Finally, M. T. again realized, on this return trip, twenty per cent profit, or 70,400 francs; in other words, the cotton sold for 422,400 francs.
I.6.13If M. Lestiboudois requires it, I shall send him some figures taken from the books of M. T. There he will see, in the credit column of the profit-and-loss account—that is to say, as profit—two entries, one for 40,000 francs and the other for 70,400 francs; and M. T. is fully satisfied that in this respect his accounting is not in error.
I.6.14And yet, what do the figures in the account books of the customhouse tell M. Lestiboudois regarding this transaction? They tell him that France has exported 200,000 francs, and that it has imported 352,000 francs; whence the honorable deputy concludes "that it has consumed and dissipated the proceeds of previous savings, that it has impoverished and is on the way to ruining itself, that it has given away 152,000 francs of its capital to foreigners."
I.6.15Some time afterward, M. T. despatched another ship with a similar cargo, worth 200,000 francs, of produces of our domestic industry. But the unfortunate vessel sank while leaving the harbor, and there was nothing else for M. T. to do but to inscribe in his books two brief entries phrased thus:
I.6.16Sundry goods due to X: 200,000 francs for the purchase of various commodities carried by ship N.
I.6.17Profits and losses due to sundry goods: 200,000 francs for ultimate total loss of the cargo.
I.6.18Meanwhile, the customhouse on its part was entering 200,000 francs into its export ledger; and as it will never have anything to enter into the opposite import ledger on this account, it follows that M. Lestiboudois and the Chamber will view this shipwreck as a clear net profit of 200,000 francs for France.
I.6.19There is still a further conclusion to be drawn from all this, namely, that, according to the theory of the balance of trade, France has a quite simple means of doubling her capital at any moment. It suffices merely to pass its products through the customhouse, and then throw them into the sea. In that case the exports will equal the amount of her capital; imports will be nonexistent and even impossible, and we shall gain all that the ocean has swallowed up.
I.6.20"You're just joking," the protectionists will say. "We couldn't possibly have been saying anything so absurd." Indeed you have, and, what is more, you are acting upon these absurd ideas and imposing them on your fellow citizens, at least as far as you can.
You know the Republicans don't listen to her (even though they should)
What burns my ass is that those very same naysayers are perfectly fine with Bob Dole, Jeb Bush, John McCain, the Romney's (hell with them its a generational thing) trying and trying again.
But with Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann etc etc it's "opps Sorry, you get one Shot and now bye bye"
No wonder the GOP is in the state its in, its because it's constituents are fine with recycling the GOP dysentery and loosing.
Since 1928 A Republican Ticket has not won the presidency unless a George Bush or Richard Nixon was on it.
I guess that's fine with the Republicans on this website, but it is not fine for me.
When we get rid of our 925347 Taxes and Bureau's that hound business to other countries, then we will have our Manufacturing base return.
I also liked Rick Santorum’s idea of eliminating the tax imposed on the simple act of manufacturing. To me its like a VAT tax.
Tax the ore, tax the refined metal, tax the machined screw, tax the part the screw goes into, then tax the completed machine. Stupidity.
No wonder why gas is so damn expensive.
Lets not forget inflation that devalues the worth of the dollar.
Do you see the irony of using Communist slaves to build our consumer products? Is that situation progressing freedom?
Are you just spouting off or do you have any references to back that up?
You are one to speak of “spouting off.” LOL
Well what would happen is the trade war thing again, I think. I don’t think it’d happen in Obama’s time (maybe) but the gov’t would put those tariff taxes on the same goods from overseas that we’d make in the US. That’s started the ball rolling back when ... just saying.
Surely you are not arguing unions don’t dominate manufacturing? Again - the stats you referenced on total jobs are irrelevant. This thread deals with manufacturing.
Clearly, you don't see the absurdity in arguing that slaves earn wages and can change jobs at any time they choose. I've never heard of a slave that got paid for his work and could leave the plantation to seek other employment at his choosing.
This thread reminds me that I need to go to Wal-Mart.
I cringe at the negativism on this network, doncha?!
What do you think is going to happen with your “idea”, whether it is good or bad? What? Concrete consequences, please!
It’s an inconsequential brain farts network, if you axe me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.