[DugwayDuke]

Then why did you support tarriffs to protect jobs? They are nothing more than a tool to increase prices to subsidize jobs.

The whole "fair trade" tarriff argument says that it is perfectly legitimate to increase the costs of foreign goods and services to the level of comparable domestic goods and services to switch consumer preferences to domestic supplies. Wealth transfer from one segment of the population to another is inherent to protective tarriffs. When you call for protective tarriffs you are calling for wealth transfer from one segment to another. Call this "job subsidies" or call it "welfare", it is what it is.

[samuel_adams_us]

Our forefathers were for tariffs in the right situation, and so am I, they founded this country, not you, nor I. Remember that.

[Sloth]

When you call for protective tarriffs you are calling for wealth transfer from one segment to another.

Isn't all commerce wealth transfer from one segment to another?

[StolarStorm]

I agree that in the short term, tariff or other trade barriers do indeed raise costs and subsidize an industry or profession. However, in the long run, allowing the destruction of an industry in your home country makes you dependent on others and will in the end cause costs to increase. When Walmart moves in to an area, their prices are incredible... once the local firms are out of business, the prices start to increase. Same thing will happen here.

Granted, that also means that our products will become competitive again... at least until we can ramp up.... and then the dumping will occur once more.