Posted on 05/22/2016 10:35:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
I agree with you on that. But I see no great wisdom in Tariffs and in fact they played a major role in causing the Civil War. Heck they played a role in the Revolutionary War.
Central_VA and I had a long one over this. If we are to have a tariff scheme then it should apply equally and to all. No cronyism, no tax breaks, no favored nation nonsense and the rate should be low.
But Im sure everyone here know of something that the tariff shouldn’t apply to.
But if anyone thinks a fairly applied system will restore manfacturing employment to its former glory will be disappointed. Manufacturing is doing well in this country but manufacturing employ,EMT is dropping like a rock.
All tariffs will do is reduce our standard of living and enable rent seeking unions, politicos, and their cronies. All of that and reduced industrial employment to boot.
Maybe it does. But the extra money the US steel mill gets from me is equal to the money someone else does not. I rearranges the economy but not in away that increases wealth.
When does taxing anything and giving the money to the government increase wealth?
Did you read the post I was responding to? Dumping is the concept that, for example, China will transfer their wealth to us by selling their excess steel to a privately owned company in the US.
“Creative destruction = road to socialism.”
Plz explain this leap of logic — when actually the reverse is true in the sense that I used the term to apply to our changing jobs & economy over time.
The reverse of “Creative Destruction” would be exemplified by entrenched socialist/bureaucrats who try to maintain the status quo and ignore ways to be competitive and change the job market.
Here is a piece on “Creative Destruction”
______________________________
What is ‘Creative Destruction’
Creative destruction is a term coined by Joseph Schumpeter in his work entitled “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy” (1942) to denote a “process of industrial mutation that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one.”
BREAKING DOWN ‘Creative Destruction’
Creative destruction occurs when something new kills something older. A great example of this is personal computers. The industry, led by Microsoft and Intel, destroyed many mainframe computer companies, but in doing so, entrepreneurs created one of the most important inventions of this century.
Schumpeter goes so far as to say that the “process of creative destruction is the essential fact about capitalism.” Unfortunately, while a great concept, this became one of the most overused buzzwords of the dotcom boom (and bust), with nearly every technology CEO talking about how creative destruction would replace the old economy with the new.
Read more: Creative Destruction Definition | Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/creativedestruction.asp#ixzz49RnWjLeQ
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook
NicePaco - I agree with you wholeheartedly.
The odd thing is there are people here who think of themselves as “Conservatives” but they’re whining that they need the Gov’t to step in and interfere with the market.
So much for LIBERTY...
Trump is a good negotiator. He wrote the book “The Art of the Deal.” Lets’ let him deal on our behalf, but I caution that having the gov’t interfere with trade is not a conservative position.
Are we not talking about “steel making”? How is this “ creative destruction”? China isn’t doing anything new,they’re just dumping below costs.
On the money.
Be they duties, quotas, tariffs, income taxes, levies, etc; they are costs that must be born along the production/service chain. As such they distort and impede free trade.
“Cheap goods for us are a boon to the economy”
Yea, the plastic powder in the baby formula and pet food was great. How about all that poisonous sheet rock,that was special,don’t have to leave home to get sick. Bad steel girders for bridges,we’ve been a little light on bridge collapses lately.
” But they’re whining that they need the Gov’t to step in and interfere with the market” You telling me the Gov doesn’t have it’s big grubby hands all over the market now? Dude, please.
—”You telling me the Gov doesn’t have it’s big grubby hands all over the market now? Dude, please.”
You don’t know how to debate. That’s a classic “moral relativism” debate used by fools and liberals.
EXAMPLE FOR THE UNINFORMED: I suppose you think that if burglaries are happening all over your city then it must be OK for you to burgle.
Or if Hillary Clinton is dishonest, it’s OK for all politicians to be dishonest?
Or, as you say, the government’s grubby hands are all over the place, so that justifies MORE gov’t interference... Wow.
Dude, pullleease.
Is it better to penalize someone for working over choosing to buy Chinese-made goods? Both provide taxes to the government. One encourages laziness, while the other encourages “Buy US.”
At least with a tariff you don’t have to tell the government if anyone in your family became blind or turned 65 in the last year.
It is matter of deciding for yourself how to spend your own money. Being forced to buy from a company of the governments chosing is fascism. If as a baker I chose cheap imported sugar over expensive domestic sugar i may very well creat more jobs. If on The other hand, if I am stuck paying inflated sugar prices I may have to cut jobs. The jobs lost in sugar using companies well exceeds those lost by sugar makers. This is a real world example in the confectionary industry.
Are we going to tax imported oil? Will we tax imported raw materials that are unavailable domestically? Are we going to tax Canada? If there is only one domestic manufacturer will we ne forced to ourchase from them? Do they get to claim any cost structure as unfair and can therefore pass on union inflated labor costs to all of us? All I hear around here is that taxing ourselves on purchases of items made in China (even things that we have decided to quit making or using like coal) will bring back manufacturing jobs.
I dont beleive China is the problem. And i dang sure dont believe added taxes and increased government intervention is the answer.
That is total hyperbolic BS. A tariff increases the cost of an item. That's it. Nothing fascist about that. If you think that is fascist then out country was fascist from day one.
I would expect a reduction in income taxes proportionate with the increase in excise tax. Why are you against citizens freely making and selling goods and services without penalty? We are all paying for 94 million people not working. Do you think it's best to let the unworking and working get subsidized foreign goods, or do you think it's better to incentivize individuals to find ways to “get ‘er done” with raw materials and labor from US citizens?
Really, I'm not seeing your position very clearly, except that you want to penalize work while incentivizing foreign good purchase.
Whiskey Rebellion.
Is this your argument: Raising the cost of an item is not the same as being forced to chose because you can always avoid the undesired choice by paying more. Or you can avoid the cost altogether by not buting it at all.
If raising the costs of imports by taxing them isnt a ploy to reduce imports than what is it?
So you dont mind Chines stuff coming into this country so long as it costs, say, 20% more?
No, not one bit.
Townhall/Salem Media
Always pimping open borders, whether it’s amnesty or ignoring the loss of American manufacturing.
But then Jeff Jacoby would never do a job that was dirty or boring. That’s for little people who don’t count and who probably plan to vote for Trump
Insightful post. Well said. It’s the Chinese variation of the export model that Japan successfully implemented.
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.