Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: central_va

You will trigger a trade war, not a shooting war. Everyone will lose in a trade war. A trade war would bring much more power to labor cartels, trial lawyers, environmentalists, and the rat party. Instead of a trade war, I propose that we become more competitive eliminating excess regulations, taxes, and litigation. The rats are taking us the opposite direction. A trade war will make us less competitive. There is no escape from global competition.


15 posted on 12/25/2010 11:12:02 PM PST by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: businessprofessor
Everyone will lose in a trade war.

Silly MBA propaganda. It just shifts the winners back to our shores.

19 posted on 12/25/2010 11:30:33 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: businessprofessor
"Take a Barbie doll for example. China exports them for $2 each. But in the US, they are sold for $9.99 each. The Chinese company making it spends 65 cents on importing materials, $1 on transportation and management, and gets to keep 35 cents, including labor costs. But rules of origin make it seem that China gets $2 each for Barbie dolls."

Ok, so let's see, the Chinese spend say 30 cents on labor to make the doll that sells for 10 bucks. Lets say if you make the doll in Peoria, Ill. it costs a dollar per doll in labor. The shipping costs will by slightly lower but I will ignore that. So the Peoria doll costs a net 65 cents more. So if the USA charged a duty of on the imported doll at 10% and lowered the income tax rate accordingly, I'd say Barbie made in the USA would actually cost the same our cheaper.

All of this Free Trade is so Corps can save a few penny's on the dollar. It is totally ridiculous if you run the numbers.

21 posted on 12/25/2010 11:40:52 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: businessprofessor
"Instead of a trade war, I propose that we become more competitive eliminating excess regulations, taxes, and litigation."

How? By deposing the families currently in control over business, politics and academia? I've met the witches from corporate families, as they shut down attempts at domestic competition in commissioners' meetings (several locales).

"There is no escape from global competition."

In the near future, there will be no escape from the forced repudiations of the debts that were brought to us by pathological, left-leaning members of those families, and there's nothing truly conservative about them.


22 posted on 12/25/2010 11:41:12 PM PST by familyop (cbt. engr. (cbt), NG, '89-' 96, Duncan Hunter or no-vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: businessprofessor

Aw, c’mon, dude. Don’t you know that there are hundreds of little Willie Green-style economic illiterates here who think tariffs and idiotic trade wars are the only way to go?

As for the article, it’s largely meaningless. Our trade deficit with China is what it is and there is a capital flow surplus of precisely equal size. It’s about as significant as Georgia’s perpetual trade deficit with Florida in oranges.

Even if we were to account for trade based on the value-add, that would just redistribute chunks of our deficit to other countries. Which might be slightly useful as it would deemphasize our Chinese deficit (and maybe the rabid slaverings and gibberish of the protectionists,) but wouldn’t change reality at all. Not to mention that it would be offset to no small extent by a lower U.S. export number to China (and elsewhere) because not all of our export content is domestic value-add.

Our real problem is the ongoing desecration by the Narcissist-in-Chief and the rest of the socialists of the U.S. as a preferred investment destination. Without that, there won’t be any trade deficit for the protectionists to worry about.


24 posted on 12/25/2010 11:57:39 PM PST by AntiScumbag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: businessprofessor; central_va
You will trigger a trade war, not a shooting war. Everyone will lose in a trade war. 

UNTRUE! The countries dependant on exports lose. This would be China. We run huge trade deficits so we would win

A trade war would bring much more power to labor cartels, trial lawyers, environmentalists, and the rat party. Instead of a trade war, I propose that we become more competitive eliminating excess regulations, taxes, and litigation. 

Sure. Get rid of all that over regulation and the American worker will still not be competitive with a Chinese wage slave. And you know this. Tariffs will make it more equal.
You hate tariffs and call it a tax?
All that means is you will pay more and more taxes to support a growing army of the unemployed

A trade war will make us less competitive. There is no escape from global competition.

Untrue! You think China allows an American to build a factory in China? Only if he takes on a 50% Chinese partner even then the American technology will be stolen and the Chinese will build their own factory making that item
Many countries keep out select foreign goods with tariffs or absurd rules and inspections. Doesn't hurt them any

31 posted on 12/26/2010 1:54:49 AM PST by dennisw (- - - -He who does not economize will have to agonize - - - - - Confucius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: businessprofessor

You will trigger a trade war, not a shooting war. Everyone will lose in a trade war


We are already in a Trade War with Communist China. Our high trade deficit, and, the non-trade barriers placed on US goods by the Communist Chinese (Currency devaluation the big one)....and there is already a trade war with Communist China

You either fight, or become subjugated. The US needs to retaliate


36 posted on 12/26/2010 3:56:38 AM PST by UCFRoadWarrior (Whenever something is "Global"...it means its bad for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: businessprofessor
Trade war? What's to prevent Red China from ending Deng's economic reforms vis-a-vis Western corporations the same way the Soviets ended their NEP in the 1920s? Seize the property of the Western "useful idiots" and kick 'em out. Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Deng's version of Lenin's New Economic Policy (NEP) will not IMO permit foreigners to share the domestic market.

I hate to cite wiki graffiti but this comports well with what I believe to be true. Here. "The Soviet NEP (1921–29) was essentially a period of 'market socialism' similar to the Dengist reforms in Communist China after 1978 in that both foresaw a role for private entrepreneurs and limited markets based on trade and pricing rather than fully centralized planning. . . [Like Lenin, Deng knew that socialism could not build wealth, capitalism was needed. In the early 1980s] Deng Xiaoping and Armand Hammer, a U.S. industrialist and prominent investor in Lenin's Soviet Union, [repeatedly met and] Deng pressed Hammer for as much information on the NEP as possible."

IMO, the western corporations' days in Red China are numbered.. no way will the Chi-coms permit the useful idiots (Lenin's term for them) to profit from Red China's efforts to build a domestic market. But unlike the clumsy Soviet ideologues the Chi-coms will keep aspects of capitalism.

And no way BTW will the American taxpayers permit Washington to compensate U.S. corporations for their losses in Red China.

39 posted on 12/26/2010 4:54:19 AM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson