Let this chuck of an author explain how China became an industrial powerhouse by doing exactly what he poo-poos.
It’s the ‘porridge conundrum’:
Too much or too little is harmful.
But when you get it right it’s terrific.
The author is making assumptions and is a fool.
Do you have a death wish, or just enjoy getting beatten up on FR threads ?
Oh, and BTW....this is yet another article that is bovine excrement.
The folks at Forbes also said Trump couldn’t win. Eff em.
Forbes is fake news.
It is Forbes who hates President trump.
Trump is moving towards a version of de Gaulle’s dirigiste economics, with strategic industries being declared “national champions.”
We’re not moving towards communism. We’re moving towards state capitalism.
Do these Free Traitors™ ever really think about what they are saying?
Sounds like Levin today. He’s so danged critical of Trump’s moves( which is okay) but also sounds bitter. Not an economist but not all Trump’s work will be positive. It’s the nature of the office. It all sounds like a big bad conundrum of hope to fail.
Our current economic approach has led to a wonderful 2% GDP growth using dummied up numbers.
Maybe it is time to change things up a bit.
How do you say “reciprocity” in Spanish.
Yes. Protectionism always causes an economic deadweight loss.
These morons don’t get it. Tariffs are just a negotiation tool. Example:
1- You tell China that if they don’t open up their markets you’ll slap tariffs on their products.
2- If they don’t comply: You slap tariffs on their products.
3- Chinese products become less competitive and they lose market share. Instead of buying products from China, consumers will buy from Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand..
4- Manufacturing plants will shift their production away from China.
5- Consumers in the US will not be affected.
The same goes for Mexico. The cars made in Mexico can also be made in Honduras. Mexico is in a very weak negotiating position. They have no choice but to open up their market.
Like I keep saying at some point a few of these Free Traitors™ will need to be burned at the stake to get the message across that the people are done with their religion.
Trade wars can lead to devastating results. History tells us that.
That said, if we are already IN trade wars (due to deceitful trade practices from other countries) then we are already losing if we do not fight back, at least in some respects.
Prudent and diplomatic protection of our economy (A)is warranted. Hyperbolic bellicosity (B)is not.
I think, and hope, that we can safely stay in the (A) zone, if we proceed aggressively, but with a measure of caution and diplomacy. I'm okay with Trump's approach, thus far.
too much protectionism could indeed backfire on us
but right now, DJT is getting some of our jobs back!!!!
and tons of new investment in America, too
for the present at least,
GO TRUMP!
Trump would be better off, Brookings said, by training American workers for new jobs in advanced manufacturing or the service sector,
...........................................................
or the service sector ........................like we need more”service people” instead of being able to build things like we used to do before we were stripped and sold out by the Globalists.GTH Forbes!
It figures you would post this.
You definitely do not understand Trump.
This is called “negotiation”.