[Cringing Negativism Network]

(1) Import tariffs targeted against countries running trade imbalances with America, proportional to those trade inbalances.

(2) Blanket import tariffs.

(3) A far more aggressive US trade policy.

— fact is we are losing jobs, because we are not keeping jobs in the United States.

[econjack]

This is harder than it seems. For example, if Japan can produce steel at half the cost of the US (after all, we bombed their capital stock into the Stone Age during WWII and then replaced it all with new capital in post-war Japan), should we level a 100% import quota? Personally, I say NO. Why? If the cheaper steel is used in everything from cars to nails, and cheap steel lowers the prices of goods by, say 10%, my guess is that US consumers are better off at the cost of lower wages for perhaps 5000 steel workers. This is nothing more than the market saying to the US steel industry: 1) Modernize or lose it (our capital stock is pre-1900 in steel), 2) workers: Tell your kids to look elsewhere for a job and start your retraining now.

As a rule, I don't like import quotas.

[ishmac]

At the very least we should completely overhaul our trade policies with China. They amount to a collosal regime of “rigged trade,” starting with the currency peg. These practices have become an economic albatross and a national security threat.