Posted on 09/19/2012 10:53:03 AM PDT by zeestephen
Edited on 09/19/2012 12:00:43 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
And drive the economy into a depression. Currently US Manufacturing relies heavily on imports of parts and raw materials. You would destroy the US economy with this plan. Rather then cling to emotion based dogma, people here should learn how their economy actually works.
http://freemktproject.com/?p=1221
Regulatory costs are $1.75 trillion. By comparison total US GDP is slightly less then $15 Trillion
Like I said, learn how your economy works before you start coming up with “solutions”.
Because we have outsourced all the parts manufacturing. Bring it back and we will have jobs. We've got 25% unemployed. We can put them to work building parts.
We are heavily dependent on Communist China at this point. I really really stupid place to have positioned ourselves.
What!? Where do you get that number?
What regulations you gonna cut anyway? Everyone's always saying cut regulations, but hardly ever actually say what regulations they would cut.
I'm not saying there aren't some that could be cut, but they don't amount to a hill of beans. Unless you get rid of all payroll taxes, businesses still have to have a payroll tax process.
Unless you get rid of all OSHA safety regulations, businesses are still going to have to comply. For most businesses, that means having a MSDA (Material Safety Data Sheet) sheet on all hazardous chemicals used. (Not a bad idea.) And a formal safety plan for any hazardous process. Again not a bad idea.
And I doubt seriously the public would like republicans much if we pulled the EPA smokestack regulations. So again what?
What regulations you gonna cut anyway? Everyone's always saying cut regulations, but hardly ever actually say what regulations they would cut.
I'm not saying there aren't some that could be cut, but they don't amount to a hill of beans. Unless you get rid of all payroll taxes, businesses still have to have a payroll tax process.
Unless you get rid of all OSHA safety regulations, businesses are still going to have to comply. For most businesses, that means having a MSDA (Material Safety Data Sheet) sheet on all hazardous chemicals used. (Not a bad idea.) And a formal safety plan for any hazardous process. Again not a bad idea.
And I doubt seriously the public would like republicans much if we pulled the EPA smokestack regulations. So again what?
I am sorry but the facts don’t fit your opinions.
Tariffs would raise revenue, reduce the deficit and promote on-shoring of manufacturing. Unlike Marx, I am in favor of it. It is an easy tax to avoid - buy AMERICAN! Actually the entire federal budget should be funded by tariffs like in the early 19th century.
Tariffs would raise revenue, reduce the deficit and promote on-shoring of manufacturing. Unlike Marx, I am in favor of it. It is an easy tax to avoid - buy AMERICAN! Actually the entire federal budget should be funded by tariffs like in the early 19th century.
THe Nazi in WWII built slave labor camps for their industries to exploit. Siemens, Volkswagen both used slave labor. How is that different than using slave labor camps in China to produce our durable and semi-durable goods?
Yes they do. It’s your opinions that are wrong.
We’ve got 25% unemployment and when you walk into Walmart everything is made in Communist China which won’t allow those funds to come back and purchase US goods except for more companies and U.S. debt. Those are the facts.
We could put people back to work real easy. We just have to restore the barriers our founding fathers put up.
amen
When the Nixon admin opened trade with China, it was hoped that trade would promote capitalism, capitalism would promote free expression and free expression would bring down communism. It's either failed or worked too slowly. Instead it's created a communist system with an industrial powerhouse.
What we know works is what Reagan did with the Soviet Union. Not trade with them. And out compete them.
Our China solution has helped keep a billion people in poverty under a communist system. And undermined our own economy.
But states benefit too if we put people back to work. They benefit from increased state revenues as well as fewer state benefits paid out.
So you still probably get a $2 trillion increase in total government revenues if you lowered unemployment form 25% to 5%. But only $1 trillion of that would be federal revenues. Then you'd have a reduction of federal benefits to add to that.
The Ryan approach is the GOP/Libertarian version of "Never waste a crisis". Instead of addressing the unemployment head on. They are using the crisis to try to cut entitlements and safety nets, saying that we can't afford them. What we can't afford is the continued unemployment or allowing it to get worse which will happen under more free trade agreements.
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.