shaggybaxter

Who really believes tariffs are good business

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Produced by unions”????  How so?

yes - the labor market distortion that produced many of these higher paying secure jobs came from unions exercising power on behalf of their membership.

"fat lazy union slob" is another way to say well paid job secure worker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, garuda3 said:

Dow drops 600 points after China retaliates with tariff hikes

Wait, so the people actually concerned most about corporate profits don't like tariffs?  Weird. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

BS!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ture story... I was working in finance during those years.  I called it.  It wasn't hard to see coming.  I have extensive client notes from 2003-2005 where I would implore clients to not cash out all their equities for real estate.  I would bring up the amount of ARM's, what will happen when they come due, etc.  Yes, there were many economists who missed it.  But here were also quite a few who called it.  They just had a hard time convincing others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:
1 hour ago, Swimsailor said:
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:

economy.  Probably were even supporters of the idea.....

 Which ones "missed" it?  As I recall there were many people sounding the warning bell. 

BS!

Nah

Depends on who you listen to.

Finance-infotainment is a big business. If you work in this industry, and you're beating the drum about how great everything is, and buy these awesome investment products that will make you rich rich rich; then there's a crash...... of course you're going to say that nobody knew there was a crash coming.

OTOH there is also a certain corner of the finance-infotainment bidness that sells gloom-n-doom. The sky is ALWAYS falling! Hunker down, circle the wagons, buy gold (and guns) etc etc. A yuge crash is just around the corner!

Then there are people with fairly good credentials who not only try to give an honest picture, they admit when they're wrong.

Fuck that shit, nobody listens to weiner-heads like them.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Now you both are tap dancing.  The fact is everybody who counted - the Fed, the Bankers, the top economists, etc all missed it.  SS saying he called it (more BS) does not count.

the bolded is wrong. some of the bankers saw it coming and made good money on the collapse.

maybe the problem is you listen to shit news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Now you both are tap dancing.  The fact is everybody who counted - the Fed, the Bankers, the top economists, etc all missed it.  SS saying he called it (more BS) does not count.

So, how much gold did you buy?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Nah

Depends on who you listen to.

Finance-infotainment is a big business. If you work in this industry, and you're beating the drum about how great everything is, and buy these awesome investment products that will make you rich rich rich; then there's a crash...... of course you're going to say that nobody knew there was a crash coming.

OTOH there is also a certain corner of the finance-infotainment bidness that sells gloom-n-doom. The sky is ALWAYS falling! Hunker down, circle the wagons, buy gold (and guns) etc etc. A yuge crash is just around the corner!

Then there are people with fairly good credentials who not only try to give an honest picture, they admit when they're wrong.

Fuck that shit, nobody listens to weiner-heads like them.

-DSK

My impression is you are correct, if only because of random probability.  Every buyer has a seller.   Every trend has somebody on each side of the curve spending their convictions.   My contrarian view is every bubble shows that about half of the professionals in the industry were wrong each time.   I'm biased by memories of peers, doing significantly better then I was,  playing the fool up to the tech bubble when I graduated school.   "The old economic rules were outmoded.    This is the new world."   They were equally confident it would never recover after the fact.    Now computer trading (real estate, mortgage and stocks) is playing an increasing role.  Are the computers on the right or wrong side more often?   Or are they as inept as the humans?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems there are some folks around here who have not read Matt Taibbi, haven't seen "The Big Short" etc...

How come, on a tariff-oriented thread on a sailing site, no-one has commented on elimination of Canadian import duty on American-made boats?

"Rising tide of Canadian boaters save US economy in wake of Chinese trade retaliation."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Yeah, and those same economists completely missed the subprime meltdown and near collapse of the global economy.  Probably were even supporters of the idea.....

The subprime crisis per se, started in 2006 when housing prices fell causing defaults. I spent about 5 minutes searching this and I'm sure I could find more. Look at what those economists were saying at the time.

Here is Paul Krugman pointing out that the housing bubble was ending:

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/opinion/that-hissing-sound.html

This is the chief economist of the IMF warning about the coming crisis.

image.png.d0b034b680c7aac1f71d9c36004017fb.png

https://www.thebalance.com/subprime-mortgage-crisis-effect-and-timeline-3305745

I wouldn't try to conclude much from this because economists never agree. But back to tariffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who, without googling her, knows who Blythe Masters is, and her role in all this?  Lots of "causes", not the least of which being that her debt-derivative instruments made the systemic risk almost totally opaque.  Incentives matter, and we shouldn't fuck with 'skin in the game" if we want the right incentives in place.  Bankers seem to prefer skin-removal-from-game.  bacq2tariffs

[edit: previous thread on Blythe...]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happenned to you right wingers wanting a free market that only "pure" capitalism (no tarifs) can provide?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US industrial economy was built on tariffs and protection . . 

As was Japan's . .   as was China's 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-is-right-america-was-built-on-tariffs-2018-08-15

In fact, it could be argued (by me anyway), that Wall St. pushed the low tariff regime as part of 

its war on American workers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A contrarian viewpoint.

The economy is hot.  Inflation is low, but low end wages are creeping up.   Immigrant labor is discouraged.  Automation is escalating but will lag demand.   Mid range hourly wages are slow to change, but recruiting and retention are hard.   Medical benefits are cost prohibitive.   There isn't enough elasticity to raise prices sufficient to counter these problems, partially due to disruptive technologies.   Does anybody, especially a small business, have other experiences now?  This is good for the left behind, but is also an economic choke point affecting myself and many I know.   The house painter turned away my business in March because he was booked until 2020.   The tax 'reform' was pouring starter fluid into the carb of a revving engine.  It revs higher, until a rod flies through the valve cover. 

Generally when things heat up and choke points emerge (housing, metal and fuel prices just before the great recession sticks in my mind) everybody thinks things are great until a couple months after they aren't.   Suddenly the problem was obvious and the financial talking heads find some model or statistic that proved it was inevitable.   By random probability a few with contrarian opinions can stand up as soothsayers.     

Once things are clearly not great nobody wants to rock the boat by correcting the fundamental problems, kind of like reefing after the wind blows up.   You know you need to, but damn if you can get off the rail.   

Corrections are inevitable in our cyclical economy.   Unless computers are wiser then people, another will happen.   Deregulation invites people to game the system as Enron and the mortgage crises demonstrated.  Irrational exuberance doesn't just happen to the stock market.  Maybe Trump's hijinks are a useful brake.  Maybe they will even achieve some sort of fundamental change in the Chinese model.   Granted its more like the skipper falling off the rail while still clinging to the mainsheet instead of deploying a sea anchor, but its still a little bit useful.   

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Lark said:

My impression is you are correct, if only because of random probability.  Every buyer has a seller.   Every trend has somebody on each side of the curve spending their convictions.   My contrarian view is every bubble shows that about half of the professionals in the industry were wrong each time.   I'm biased by memories of peers, doing significantly better then I was,  playing the fool up to the tech bubble when I graduated school.   "The old economic rules were outmoded.    This is the new world."   They were equally confident it would never recover after the fact.    Now computer trading (real estate, mortgage and stocks) is playing an increasing role.  Are the computers on the right or wrong side more often?   Or are they as inept as the humans?   

The thing about "experts" is for many of them there's no penalty for being wrong. Just look at Kudlow and Moore. They've made careers of parroting whatever the needed line of the day is which raises the question if they are just mouthpieces and not actually experts at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

The US industrial economy was built on tariffs and protection . . 

As was Japan's . .   as was China's 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-is-right-america-was-built-on-tariffs-2018-08-15

In fact, it could be argued (by me anyway), that Wall St. pushed the low tariff regime as part of 

its war on American workers. 

Then what was the effect of the repeal of the Corn Laws on the Industrial Revolution? It can be said that it enabled its second period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The subsidies will help our farmers bigly.  So we borrow money from China to pay our farmers not to grow crops to sell to China.  That must be a stroke of genius in some circles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Until you realize that a larger chunk of the remaining 96.4% is low paid, entry level service sector jobs rather than the solid middle class blue collar manufacturing jobs that got sucked out.  

Another swing and a miss by J’rzr. 

Got some data to show that that the ratio of mfg as % of total jobs is declining faster under nafta than before?

didnt think so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest and quite real complaints about China are:

  • their own protectionism
  • their rampant IP theft

As for globalism itself, that ship sailed quite awhile ago. The invention of container shipping changed everything. Who did that? We did that. We now have choice between hunkering down and protecting Wyoming coal jobs or competing. CA competes and rather well but Shitstain wants to hunker down.

I have to admire China in the same way I admire Daryl Morey (Houston GM) as a Warrior fan. They're consistent, objective and they have a plan. They're mercantilists. They laughed at us when we wasted treasure and blood (but mostly treasure) on stupid entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan. They suck Australia dry without even firing a shot.

Anyways, this idea that someone as stupid as Shitstain is going to win this is just stupid. If you want to win something like this you need someone smart who can build a coalition instead of a shattering one.

https://www.euronews.com/2019/04/18/how-might-eu-trade-sanctions-on-the-us-hit-consumers-euronews-answers

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Trump had come out and hit China for IP theft, I'd be 100% in support. 

While his negotiating team say that's what it's about, Trump, IIRC, has never made it a central theme for why he's on this path.

 

And if it IS the reason? Tariffs aren't the answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Olsonist said:

My biggest and quite real complaints about China are:

  • their own protectionism
  • their rampant IP theft

As for globalism itself, that ship sailed quite awhile ago. The invention of container shipping changed everything. Who did that? We did that. We now have choice between hunkering down and protecting Wyoming coal jobs or competing. CA competes and rather well but Shitstain wants to hunker down.

I have to admire China in the same way I admire Daryl Morey (Houston GM) as a Warrior fan. They're consistent, objective and they have a plan. They're mercantilists. They laughed at us when we wasted treasure and blood (but mostly treasure) on stupid entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan. They suck Australia dry without even firing a shot.

Anyways, this idea that someone as stupid as Shitstain is going to win this is just stupid. If you want to win something like this you need someone smart who can build a coalition instead of a shattering one.

https://www.euronews.com/2019/04/18/how-might-eu-trade-sanctions-on-the-us-hit-consumers-euronews-answers

No arguments.   My issues are details and regulation, not globalism itself.   Many of our problems are self inflicted.    

Examples.  

China encourages chemical engineers and other technical careers able to manufacturer drugs.  We encourage fields with less utility, and discourage education in general with escalating costs and lack of state investment.  China produces much of the drugs or raw ingredients used to make both prescription and illicit drugs.   US inspectors visit their facilities (for legal drugs) on a preapproved schedule.  We inspect our own on a random basis.   Of course we give China the advantage.   

The intellectual theft is another self inflicted problem, since we walk into the deals knowing we are going to be robbed.  Each country trading with China does the same.   As you point out, Trump destroys instead of builds coalitions to address this problem.    @Raz'r is right.   Trump and his team talk out of both sides of their mouths and it is impossible to know what their real goals are.  There is no reason to assume this is something they care much about.

Ecommerce, aided by fake reviews and subsidized shipping by the International Postal Union treaty (possibly we will walk out in October) allows Chinese companies to distribute junk products to consumers more inexpensively then their American competition.   Ecommerce, international games and corporate rules eliminate the long term penalty of selling junk, you just rebrand your website, walk away from any liability and peddle slightly different junk next month.   

Smart globalism could easily solve these problems.   Its easy to blame NAFTA for all the factory closings that killed my prior town.  Since many of the jobs moved to Mexico, there was some reality.  They didn't necessarily stay in Mexico.  Many would have been lost as Korean or Chinese brands gained market share anyway.  Automation sometimes allows American manufacturing to complete.  It would work better if the carbon and pollution costs were calculated equally at all locations.   I would no more outlaw globalism then I would automation.

I also admit Trump is doing a couple things rrr ri   (I cannot say it, but he's not always wrong).   But he's undisciplined, lacks strategy, and any correct decisions are achieved by the shotgun theory of good governance.   If you shoot enough shotgun shells into a crowd of people, odds are some of the people you hit are criminals.    

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark cited a good book a few years back. It said (roughly from memory) that it's important to ask the right question, to solve the right problem. Answering the wrong question or addressing the wrong problem is a Really Bad Thing. It represents an opportunity cost in time and will. It reminds me of that scene in Apollo 13 where they're squabbling. Lovell steps in and says:

All right, we're not doing this, Gentlemen. We're not
gonna do this. We're not gonna go bouncing off the walls for
ten minutes. 'Cause we're just gonna end up right back here
with the same problems. Try to figure out how to stay alive!

Shitstain is anything but a Lovell. The elk could never admit it but this situation calls for a Hillary and we have a Shitstain instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

And if it IS the reason? Tariffs aren't the answer.

or least not all of the answer. Tariff's punish the private sector in China disproportionately - something like 90% of Chinese exports are from the private sector and these firms are feeling marginalized at the moment https://www.ft.com/content/fcb06530-680a-11e9-9adc-98bf1d35a056 While there have been many abuses in that sector over the years, the egregious behavior is more concentrated in the national champions that are generally state controlled like Huaweii & they are part of Xi's MIC2025 push. He won't back down on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Mark cited a good book a few years back. It said (roughly from memory) that it's important to ask the right question, to solve the right problem. Answering the wrong question or addressing the wrong problem is a Really Bad Thing. It represents an opportunity cost in time and will. It reminds me of that scene in Apollo 13 where they're squabbling. Lovell steps in and says:

Trump & the elks worldview* precludes the right question and so they've decided the answer is we are in an apocalyptic cultural clash with non-Western China. An answer that is both wrong in fact and wrong in tactics because it strengthens the enemys hand. To me the current clash with China is driven by an increasingly autocratic, racist, protectionist ruling party in China - internal to China there is plenty of conflict with the partys aims.

 

* as an aside one of the libertarians proclaimed the wonder of the internet being you could get a university education in a subject without politics, which I think is utter bollocks. Politics - or how you frame the problem - is what a university education is. Once you framed the problem correctly in Physics the solution was a matter of computation. It might take a page or two and a couple hours to solve, but why you got the answer wrong was a matter of incorrectly matching inputs to operations not computation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gawdam these fools.  So, paying $1000 a year in tariffs is my patriotic duty and I shouldn't fret because heck, think of the troops, right?  Suck it up butter cup, at least you aren't deployed in Afghanistan.  Fucking delusional.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/tom-cotton-says-sacrifice-of-americans-paying-tariffs-is-minimal/ar-AABitgD?ocid=spartanntp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Swimsailor said:

Ture story... I was working in finance during those years.  I called it.  It wasn't hard to see coming.  I have extensive client notes from 2003-2005 where I would implore clients to not cash out all their equities for real estate.  I would bring up the amount of ARM's, what will happen when they come due, etc.  Yes, there were many economists who missed it.  But here were also quite a few who called it.  They just had a hard time convincing others. 

I totally agree. We (and more than few people we knew) called it, and I was having the best year I ever had well into 2009 before we pulled the pin and went to greener pastures.  But there was even a problem with that -  the possibility of getting pulled down by the follies (it never works exactly like you think it will- it’s literally the Fog of War) around us was real, and, if you actually called the crash within the finance business, the problem was actually getting the money you were owed.  (Or worse, enduring $$ punishment for not playing out things exuberantly to the end.) The best public example I can give is ‘The Big Short’ (movie or book) Whether any of those guys actually could collect anything on their contracts was up in the air right until the end, and the pressures to go the other way were immense, all the way through.  Hell, even now, judging by some of the posts here.

For Gods sake, Keybank was offering 10% CD’s that were insured!  BUT, the adjunct panic there were some people who didn’t think the Government would honor covering Federally insured savings, so there were panic withdrawals, hence the 10%.  I can go on and on. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Swimsailor said:

Gawdam these fools.  So, paying $1000 a year in tariffs is my patriotic duty and I shouldn't fret because heck, think of the troops, right?  Suck it up butter cup, at least you aren't deployed in Afghanistan.  Fucking delusional.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/tom-cotton-says-sacrifice-of-americans-paying-tariffs-is-minimal/ar-AABitgD?ocid=spartanntp

Pay an extra thousand bucks a year to own the libs.  A bargain at any price!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Obviously no one bothered to read the links I posted. As evadent. 

I read them.  I was also WORKING and LIVING in the thick of all it.  I'm the first to admit anecdotes are not data, but I was on the front line, Jeff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

You have got to be kidding.  

Nope - he mean's it.

He's really that clueless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Obviously no one bothered to read the links I posted. As evadent. 

Actually I liked the Forbes page and comment on housing not being an investment by their economic definition.

  I’ll stick to my argument that since those investment vehicles at crazy prices had sellers,  bankers that felt  they were not worth the asking price and didn’t want to keep them.   They were opportunists but recognized the mess they had invented.   They just thought they could dump the next hot potato as well, before the music stopped.   https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118360072311457784

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

they trained Donnie dumbfuck QED.

That assumes that the orange idiot was capable of a class-length attention span and understanding what was being said.  

It is quite clear that no one "trains" the fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just in case anyone hasn't noticed..... Trump's not the sharpest knife in the drawer....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bus Driver said:
11 hours ago, Bus Driver said:
11 hours ago, jzk said:

Trump is no economist, but he is hardly a moron.  In fact, there is a case to be made that he is quite savvy.  He, after all, made it this far.  Tariffs are always bad, but the morons in the world think they are good and that Trump is fighting for them.  I hear the trade deficit is even higher than it was. (As if this were a bad thing anyway).  But people still think that Trump is fighting for them.

President Trump is "savvy" like others who operate tap-dancing on the line between legal/illegal and ethical/unethical. 

I believe he has no qualms about crossing that line when it suits him.

That is hardly the type of behavior we should tolerate from the POTUS.

As far as his history of settling lawsuits, paying fines, paying off complainants, stiffing contractors, breaking contracts, etc. - those are hardly the actions most would describe as "ethical" and "legal".

Of course, this letter, by folks who actually have practiced law, must not mean anything, right?

Go ahead and defend him.  I am done engaging with you.

 

Wait, did I miss non-Trump-supporter JZK saying that Trump is fighting for morons?

JZK seems to be a sailor but he's basically a semi-literate fascist hoping that if he cheerleads for a corrupt gov't enriching the 1%ers, some of it will eventually trickle down on him while he enjoys the misogyny and racism side benefits. The only reason to "engage"with him is for your own amusement.

-DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

 

Wait, did I miss non-Trump-supporter JZK saying that Trump is fighting for morons?

JZK seems to be a sailor but he's basically a semi-literate fascist hoping that if he cheerleads for a corrupt gov't enriching the 1%ers, some of it will eventually trickle down on him while he enjoys the misogyny and racism side benefits. The only reason to "engage"with him is for your own amusement.

-DSK

Did your pea brain have an argument to make about Trump's tariffs?  Or has it fallen back on the racist card?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

JZK seems to be a sailor but he's basically a semi-literate fascist hoping that if he cheerleads for a corrupt gov't enriching the 1%ers, some of it will eventually trickle down on him while he enjoys the misogyny and racism side benefits. The only reason to "engage"with him is for your own amusement.

he is the .1%. The only question is whether he believes the bullshit or if it's his lies but that's a distinction without much of a difference. He'll spew overly simplistic reductionist bullshit all day. And that's a reason to engage. He'll spew the dumb hateful shit on command.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Olsonist said:

The elk could never admit it but this situation calls for a Hillary and we have a Shitstain instead.

Actually, her agreement with Trump (and Bernie) on the TPP was a good reason to look elsewhere for a candidate, as readers of Koch-$pon$ored propaganda know.

 

15 hours ago, Importunate Tom said:

Doubling Down On Stupid
 

Quote

 

...

As for the decision to bail on the TPP, it may be a little unfair to lay that entirely at Trump's feet. Give the voters a share too. Trump was the loudest anti-TPP voice in the 2016 Republican primaries, and his success—along with the impact of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), another anti-TPP protectionist—in running against the trade deal was enough to convince Hillary Clinton to turn against the TPP during the 2016 campaign.

...

With apologies for more of my usual Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleading, of course.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're going to compete against China in the Pacific, you will need something like the TPP. If you piss off and on allies then they'll turn towards China who is if nothing else a consistent and reliable trade partner. Or you can trust your boy Shitstain. He seems like a completely stable genius. Or maybe this guy, or his son.

image.png.86dee1d96df1811ce835b64a5cf1ad8d.png .   image.png.c99e63d7bcaf67e41396c829b0fb11ac.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

oh, those jobs that were produced by unions? unions are bad, right jeffreaux the dumb?

Actually, the jobs were produced by companies. The only jobs the unions produced were those of their officials.

Do try to keep to the facts.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Olsonist said:

Mark cited a good book a few years back. It said (roughly from memory) that it's important to ask the right question, to solve the right problem. Answering the wrong question or addressing the wrong problem is a Really Bad Thing. It represents an opportunity cost in time and will. It reminds me of that scene in Apollo 13 where they're squabbling. Lovell steps in and says:


All right, we're not doing this, Gentlemen. We're not
gonna do this. We're not gonna go bouncing off the walls for
ten minutes. 'Cause we're just gonna end up right back here
with the same problems. Try to figure out how to stay alive!

Shitstain is anything but a Lovell. The elk could never admit it but this situation calls for a Hillary and we have a Shitstain instead.

Well, If we are doing the what if thing... She won, but it was close enough to rile the deplorable's, so the orange one got in and he has gummed up the works enough that sweeping changes are kind of squashed until 2020.  If she had squeaked by, in the elect college, there is no way the right would let it go and we would be up to our eyeballs in emails and indictments for anyone that worked for the Clintons in the last 20 years.  I bet we would still have a repub senate and house.  Any and all SCOTUS appointees would be getting stonewalled and we would still be at an impasse in congress.  Probably by this time, the impeachment bells would be ringing from every hilltop or she would already be in front of the senate defending Bengazi or an other shit they came up with.  We probably would  be better off as none of Obamas policies would have been rolled back, the judicial branch would still be intact, more good people would be alive and we would still have a semblance of etiquette in govt that would still prevail.  But I don't know if we would be better off, as we would be staring at everything republican again in 2020 The markets surely would have tanked at one point or another and a deep deep hatred to anything further left than centrist right would prevail.  Maybe this is the spoonful of shit we gotta eat to get this country back on track (I doubt it, but it sounds good right??).  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Olsonist said:

My biggest and quite real complaints about China are:

  • their own protectionism
  • their rampant IP theft

As for globalism itself, that ship sailed quite awhile ago. The invention of container shipping changed everything. Who did that? We did that. We now have choice between hunkering down and protecting Wyoming coal jobs or competing. CA competes and rather well but Shitstain wants to hunker down.

I have to admire China in the same way I admire Daryl Morey (Houston GM) as a Warrior fan. They're consistent, objective and they have a plan. They're mercantilists. They laughed at us when we wasted treasure and blood (but mostly treasure) on stupid entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan. They suck Australia dry without even firing a shot.

Anyways, this idea that someone as stupid as Shitstain is going to win this is just stupid. If you want to win something like this you need someone smart who can build a coalition instead of a shattering one.

https://www.euronews.com/2019/04/18/how-might-eu-trade-sanctions-on-the-us-hit-consumers-euronews-answers

I disagree with the 'suck Australia dry' part. They pay world prices for the stuff they buy.

Now if they buy the companies, send in their own workers and engage in blatant transfer pricing, I'd agree with you.

Fortunately we have the past behaviour of US mining companies as exemplars of what to watch out for.

FKT

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

I disagree with the 'suck Australia dry' part. They pay world prices for the stuff they buy.

Now if they buy the companies, send in their own workers and engage in blatant transfer pricing, I'd agree with you.

Fortunately we have the past behaviour of US mining companies as exemplars of what to watch out for.

FKT

Yes, China sucks Australia dry and they pay world prices for the stuff they buy. We invade Iraq to the tune of a couple of trillion and we pay world prices for the oil we buy. I'm a little confused but it seems like China came out ahead in that. Now I remember. I have to take American Exceptionalism into account and feel like I won. It's all so clear now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olsonist said:

Yes, China sucks Australia dry and they pay world prices for the stuff they buy. We invade Iraq to the tune of a couple of trillion and we pay world prices for the oil we buy. I'm a little confused but it seems like China came out ahead in that.

We have a lot of iron ore & coal to sell yet. In fact the environmental movement is a far greater threat to our exports than China is at this point in history.

China is also a growing purchaser of high quality foodstuffs from us. As they get richer, they're likely to buy more.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

We have a lot of iron ore & coal to sell yet. In fact the environmental movement is a far greater threat to our exports than China is at this point in history.

China is also a growing purchaser of high quality foodstuffs from us. As they get richer, they're likely to buy more.

FKT

We're agreeing. I'm saying (sarcastically, ironically, whatever) that you and China are acting like adults. We on the other hand are governed by idiots. Advantage Australia.

I'm a big fan of mercantilism. Neocon American Exceptionalism doesn't work. Shitstain isn't smart enough to be a Neocon but he is stupid enough to be an American Exceptionalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Olsonist said:

We're agreeing. I'm saying (sarcastically, ironically, whatever) that you and China are acting like adults. We on the other hand are governed by idiots. Advantage Australia.

Yeah I know.

I'm active on another forum top-heavy with manufacturing types in the USA. It's amazing what some of those people believe about tariffs.

Well, believed. At least a few have seen the light when the domestic manufacturers of steel, aluminium et al price-matched the new tariff increases. We told them that would happen but they didn't believe us. Nett result, less sales, end users/consumers take it in the arse and the Govt pockets the tariff money.

It's a win-win really. For someone.

I have the advantage of living through Australia's high tariff period and seeing what it did to us.

Still and all I have to say I approve of putting it to the Chinese because they *are* mercantilist bastards with no respect for IP or anything else they can get away with. Though they're also prepared to take a much smaller profit margin than USA companies are, it would seem, so they'd still eat your lunch in a lot of exported goods.

Our exports may take a hit in the short term if they have problems selling the stuff they make from it, but they really need to learn that playing 'heads I win tails you lose' has consequences.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tariffs are easy to believe in. They're the economic equivalent of Shitstain's wall and they're intended for the same audience.

I completely agree about China and IP. Funny thing is that SV law firms compliment the Chinese patent system. It could be that they just want the legal work.  I don't understand that right now but maybe eventually I will. I have noticed that a lot of big companies are exiting China as it's just not a level playing field.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tariffs can protect individual industries, and applied carefully targeted in order to not launch a trade war is the work of artists. 

 Trump is using them as a broad bludgeon, and he's probably making a mistake. 

 From the Chinese perspective they have a choice, fight like hell or knuckle under. The mistake Trump may be making is in viewing this in the same way he views negotiating with subs on a construction project. In the regular business world people regularly knuckle under IF they can still see a way to make a profit by doing so. It's a whole nuther games for political leaders. They regularly balk at losing face. 

 The Chinese will be strongly tempted to rationalize this as something that will undermine Trump's base. When the prices at Walmart jump 25% (and more) his lie that the Chinese are paying this tax will be exposed, and exposed to a key demographic of Trump's support. And Trump's position is already tenuous. 

How that demographic reacts is what they will be looking for. Trump is taking a huge gamble whether he knows it or not. His base forgives his lying because it irritates "liberals" and they have been conditioned into abject hatred of "liberals", so they actually like the lies. How they will react if they are faced with the fact that he's now lying to them? Imposing a tremendous tax increase on them while telling them he is cutting their taxes? The true cultists will certainly be able to ignore that, but how many of his supports have really drunk the Kool Aid? 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mark K said:

Tariffs can protect individual industries, and applied carefully targeted in order to not launch a trade war is the work of artists. 

 Trump is using them as a broad bludgeon, and he's probably making a mistake. 

 From the Chinese perspective they have a choice, fight like hell or knuckle under. The mistake Trump may be making is in viewing this in the same way he views negotiating with subs on a construction project. In the regular business world people regularly knuckle under IF they can still see a way to make a profit by doing so. It's a whole nuther games for political leaders. They regularly balk at losing face. 

 The Chinese will be strongly tempted to rationalize this as something that will undermine Trump's base. When the prices at Walmart jump 25% (and more) his lie that the Chinese are paying this tax will be exposed, and exposed to a key demographic of Trump's support. And Trump's position is already tenuous. 

How that demographic reacts is what they will be looking for. Trump is taking a huge gamble whether he knows it or not. His base forgives his lying because it irritates "liberals" and they have been conditioned into abject hatred of "liberals", so they actually like the lies. How they will react if they are faced with the fact that he's now lying to them? Imposing a tremendous tax increase on them while telling them he is cutting their taxes? The true cultists will certainly be able to ignore that, but how many of his supports have really drunk the Kool Aid? 

 

They might realize they are as expendable as everyone else.

Depressing stuff.........

Trumphausen by proxy.  :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shitstain is just using tariffs as an extension of his wall. This is purely for domestic political consumption. If you're rational and you're getting into a trade war with China, you need allies AND NOT A SECOND FRONT WITH EUROPE. There is no depth here. There are no layers of nuance. This is simply something he can watch on Fox News every night, knowing that his base is watching as well. And while we're at it, let's attack Iran!

Colbert had that term Truthiness, the quality of seeming or being felt to be true, even if not necessarily true. That we have a border and immigration issues gives the wall a certain truthiness. That we have trade problems with China gives tariffs a certain truthiness. But they're still monumentally stupid policies.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Olsonist said:

 I have noticed that a lot of big companies are exiting China as it's just not a level playing field.

 

It never was. The sad fact is, in a vast majority of cases, the Chinese didn't really steal the IP,  the US companies *gave* it to them in the pursuit of lower manufacturing costs there while holding their retail sale prices. Result, increased margin, greater profits.

In the short term.

Then the Chinese set up their own companies and used that IP to build competing products.

An idiot could have seen that coming, lots of people did, but you know, quarterly profits were great, bonuses were fantastic.

Too bad about things 5 years down the track.

Now they're finally wising up that the IP is worth a lot (and Chinese promises are worth zero), maybe they'll keep high tech manufacturing a lot more tightly held. At least then the Chinese will have to engage in bona fide industrial espionage instead of violating licensing agreements & patents WRT IP handed to them on a plate.

So yeah, one could make a case for tariffs, but the way Trump has gone about it is idiotic. Tariffing Canadian aluminium for example.

China has a list of US products lined up for increased tariffs now. Going to be interesting seeing Trump's next move. Could be a lot of cheap made in China stuff for sale for the rest of us.

FKT

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Olsonist said:

If you're going to compete against China in the Pacific, you will need something like the TPP. If you piss off and on allies then they'll turn towards China who is if nothing else a consistent and reliable trade partner. Or you can trust your boy Shitstain. He seems like a completely stable genius. Or maybe this guy, or his son.

image.png.86dee1d96df1811ce835b64a5cf1ad8d.png .   image.png.c99e63d7bcaf67e41396c829b0fb11ac.png

The bolded part is a pretty good summary of the Koch-$pon$ored propaganda that I posted. Naturally, I agree.

The rest is back to your normal pattern of abject cluelessness as a basis for gossip about me. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A regrettable answer to the topic question:

Both US Senators From Florida
 

Quote

 

...

Still, perhaps the best indicator of how bad trade policy is encouraging more of the same is the fact that farming lobbyists are now asking for more protection from foreign agricultural goods, even as the same industry is pushing the Trump administration to end the trade war with China.

"President Trump's drive to raise tariffs on imports has shifted money from the pockets of consumers to the profits of producers in the manufacturing sector—notably steel, aluminum, and autos," write Gary Clyde Hufbauer, and Euijin Jung, researchers at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a trade policy think tank. "These actions have now inspired farm state lawmakers, in alliance with local agricultural producers, to seek their own barriers, raising the price of tomatoes, bell peppers, blueberries, and other produce."

They point to two things. First, the Trump administration's decision last week to end a decades-long deal with Mexico that effectively raised tariffs on imported tomatoes. As I wrote last week, this means that the juicy red fruits coming across the southern border will now be subject to a 17.5 percent tariff. More than half of all tomatoes consumed by Americans come from Mexico, and the new tariffs could result in a price increase of as much as 85 percent, according to an analysis from Arizona State University. These changes will also jeopardize jobs in Arizona in order to protect farmers in Florida.

 

Second, there's a bipartisan proposal from Sens. Bill Nelson (D–Fla.) and Marco Rubio (R–Fla.) that would allow the executive branch to impose new import duties on Mexican-grown blueberries, bell peppers, and other produce if American growers complain about unfair competition.

"It would enable growers in a single region of, for example, Georgia or Florida, to raise national prices of bell peppers, blueberries, tomatoes, and other produce at a moment's notice," the PIIE analysts warn.

The rolling back of the free trade consensus in Washington is a sea change that goes well beyond the tariffs Trump has imposed on China, Europe, Canada, and elsewhere. Unfortunately, as this week has demonstrated, opposition to tariffs does not always translate into advocacy for free trade—but can easily morph into an argument for more protectionism, provided it's the right kind of protectionism.

There is no such thing, but as long as the president is determined to use trade policy to pick winners and losers, every industry has an incentive to try to be on the side of the winners.

 

That last sentence sums up why protectionist policy is a crony capitalists delight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the dumbest thing ever the other night.  The MSNBC panel called the tariffs a hidden tax on consumers. The expert's reasoning was that the manufacturer, exporter and reseller will all just pass the tariff along to the customer.  His exact words were "The chinese won't be paying the tariff, we will."

On the same network in a later segment they opined that the economy was not benefiting workers. The evil corporations were making too  much money and should pay higher salaries and tax. 

Predictably , this time no one said "The corporations won't be paying the wage or tax increase, we will"

liberals are hypocrites and stupid. I rest my case.

 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I saw the dumbest thing ever the other night....liberals are hypocrites and stupid. I rest my case.

I just saw something really stupid, too!  Dude, you don't seem to be thinking clearly.  Nothing is provable about "liberals" nor "conservatives".  Blah blah blah.  You have ~aptly named yourself.  More apt would be "Spouting Divisive Malarkey"

31 minutes ago, Importunate Tom said:

That last sentence sums up why protectionist policy is a crony capitalists delight.

Attaboy, Tom.  No shit.  The thread title doesn't capture it all.  Good business for whom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2019 at 12:38 AM, Fah Kiew Tu said:

It never was. The sad fact is, in a vast majority of cases, the Chinese didn't really steal the IP,  the US companies *gave* it to them in the pursuit of lower manufacturing costs there while holding their retail sale prices. Result, increased margin, greater profits.

Sort of. I know of - because I worked for or with them - multiple corps where the Chinese illegally acquired information including US government funded research data. They'd have a local production requirement and steal the info when nobody was looking. They'd have someone who knew what he was doing go to work for a corp and steal all the info. They'd hack computer systems.Now - a bunch of this was because US management rubes assumed everyone played fair, and that the enemy was domestic. But the narrative that a majority gave them willingly is false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I saw the dumbest thing ever the other night.  The MSNBC panel called the tariffs a hidden tax on consumers. The expert's reasoning was that the manufacturer, exporter and reseller will all just pass the tariff along to the customer.  His exact words were "The chinese won't be paying the tariff, we will."

What's dumb about the truth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Sort of. I know of - because I worked for or with them - multiple corps where the Chinese illegally acquired information including US government funded research data. They'd have a local production requirement and steal the info when nobody was looking. They'd have someone who knew what he was doing go to work for a corp and steal all the info. They'd hack computer systems.Now - a bunch of this was because US management rubes assumed everyone played fair, and that the enemy was domestic. But the narrative that a majority gave them willingly is false.

Agreed - the corporations probably didn't expect to get ripped off as they did, and no argument the Chinese have engaged in industrial espionage on a huge scale.

Tariffing their products incorporating stolen IP or products based on factories producing knock-off copies is quite justifiable IMO. Let them scream. If US importers scream too, great, but they won't, they'll just pass the price increase on to the consumers.

Tariffing basic raw materials like aluminium is stupid. Especially if it comes from another First World country. That's just an attempt to gain a concession somewhere else (Canada) or protect domestic producers from their own inefficiency.

FKT

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Agreed - the corporations probably didn't expect to get ripped off as they did, and no argument the Chinese have engaged in industrial espionage on a huge scale.

Tariffing their products incorporating stolen IP or products based on factories producing knock-off copies is quite justifiable IMO. Let them scream. If US importers scream too, great, but they won't, they'll just pass the price increase on to the consumers.

Tariffing basic raw materials like aluminium is stupid. Especially if it comes from another First World country. That's just an attempt to gain a concession somewhere else (Canada) or protect domestic producers from their own inefficiency.

FKT

Yep. Hit them hard for IP. Stick them with a tariff for shitty enviro standards and even shittier labor laws. 

Doing it because you think the other party pays it, and it’s free money? Height of stupidity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I saw the dumbest thing ever the other night.  The MSNBC panel called the tariffs a hidden tax on consumers. The expert's reasoning was that the manufacturer, exporter and reseller will all just pass the tariff along to the customer.  His exact words were "The chinese won't be paying the tariff, we will."

On the same network in a later segment they opined that the economy was not benefiting workers. The evil corporations were making too  much money and should pay higher salaries and tax. 

Predictably , this time no one said "The corporations won't be paying the wage or tax increase, we will"

liberals are hypocrites and stupid. I rest my case.

 

The Chinese don't pay the tariff regardless.  It is paid by the importer.  Then, of course, it is passed on to the consumer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese have done very well over the past 30 years with tariffs....as has Wall Street and the US elected leaders that sold this country down the drain allowing the current state to exist

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a totally selfish look at tariffs, Canada has dropped its 10% tariff on US-made boats. Works for me because we bought a boat in upstate  last fall just before all this nonsense started - yes tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum were for national security reasons. The tariff drop will save me the equivalent of US$6500. Yay!

You won't be hearing from me for six weeks or so. Heading to Antigua tomorrow with the admiral to help friends take their Jeanneau 40 to the Azores and Portugal. After that back to the GWN to bring my own into Canada.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

You won't be hearing from me for six weeks or so. Heading to Antigua tomorrow with the admiral to help friends take their Jeanneau 40 to the Azores and Portugal.

Actors say "break a leg" so is "break a keel" an appropriate sendoff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 10:07 PM, Olsonist said:

Shitstain is just using tariffs as an extension of his wall. This is purely for domestic political consumption. If you're rational and you're getting into a trade war with China, you need allies AND NOT A SECOND FRONT WITH EUROPE. There is no depth here. There are no layers of nuance. This is simply something he can watch on Fox News every night, knowing that his base is watching as well. And while we're at it, let's attack Iran!

Colbert had that term Truthiness, the quality of seeming or being felt to be true, even if not necessarily true. That we have a border and immigration issues gives the wall a certain truthiness. That we have trade problems with China gives tariffs a certain truthiness. But they're still monumentally stupid policies.

I think he believes the Chinese can be beaten into submission as easily as a drywaller at a large project. 

 What the Chinese believe? Most likely that they can not afford to lose face. It's a culture thing...and especially not to a baboon, and a baboon who is likely to be gone in two years. They can also rationally believe a temporary loss of exports carries a benefit. China is aware if a need to boost their domestic markets, being overly dependent on exports is a vulnerability, and a temporary glut will drop prices in China. They can also believe price increases in the US will lessen the chance Trump will survive the next election. 

 I'm at a loss as to how the Chinese could come to believe that they would wish to help Trump by handing him a victory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

 What the Chinese believe? Most likely that they can not afford to lose face. It's a culture thing...and especially not to a baboon, and a baboon who is likely to be gone in two years. They can also rationally believe a temporary loss of exports carries a benefit. China is aware if a need to boost their domestic markets, being overly dependent on exports is a vulnerability, and a temporary glut will drop prices in China. They can also believe price increases in the US will lessen the chance Trump will survive the next election. 

For Chinese leadership it is an existential fight. Somewhat viewed that way in the public - there references comparing the recent escalation of the trade war to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Triangle_Hill a bloody chinese victory where they were willing to absorb more losses than the US/UN could stomach. For the broader public at large and the broader relation with the west there's a whole bunch of nationalism and revisiting ~200 years of history. The Opium War looms large as a source of gross humiliation to China, it's no surprise that it's popped up again and again in this trade dispute, including recently where rumors were circulating that the latest round of talks stopped because of an "unequal treaty".

 

Even without the tradewar US soy farmers would likely be fucked - Asian Swine Flu is decimating Chinese hog production. Official statistics have it down ~20% with 800k pigs alone being "disposed of" a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know much about it.  I have not been to China.  My son and my ex have spent substantial time there.

I know a few facts.  They have more millionaires than exist in the USA.  They also have a lot of poverty and an aging population.

I believe it was brilliant for Tricky Dick to let them into the world of nations.

Perhaps if they gave little don a little sumpin sumptin ...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasher said:

I don't know much about it.  I have not been to China.  My son and my ex have spent substantial time there.

I know a few facts.  They have more millionaires than exist in the USA.  They also have a lot of poverty and an aging population.

I believe it was brilliant for Tricky Dick to let them into the world of nations.

Perhaps if they gave little don a little sumpin sumptin ...  

They have more English speakers than the US as well. They have more top 10% students than the US has students. Etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasher said:

I don't know much about it.  I have not been to China.  My son and my ex have spent substantial time there.

ime it's like India. You could spend a lifetime there, or a lifetime reading it's history, and still not get the whole of it. They are both also, imo, places where you can travel on business (especially China) and miss out on much. Part of the US v. China dynamic at the moment is the US business/politic community is waking up to their 1990s-early 2010s experiences of China being a lie at worst, or a full press distortionary courting at best. Like all fools who get screwed they get angry they were a mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Raz'r said:

They have more English speakers than the US as well. They have more top 10% students than the US has students. Etc

They have more cute girls than we have people . . . nearly 

Around 50 million of them study calligraphy 

Most of them are fine folks . . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Costs of the Trade War

Quote

In dollar terms, the cost of the trade war is easy enough to calculate: The U.S. Treasury has collected about $18 billion in revenue from the tariffs Trump has imposed since June 1 of last year.

Heh. Calling tax revenue a "cost" will no doubt trigger a few people.

Other answers include businesses that took years to build and...
 

Quote

 

What have we lost in the trade war? Trust.

Between the heads of nonprofits that otherwise share a common goal of improving the lives of poor mothers and babies, but now wonder who is scamming whom. Between long-time allies like the U.S. and Canada. Between soybean buyers in China and farmers in the United States—people who never met each other and never will, but who trusted in the almost magical power of supply and demand to ensure both got what they needed, when they needed it, even on the opposite side of the world.

The president cannot be trusted not to lie about the most basic reality of his trade policy. Even after signing a trade deal with Mexico, Trump betrayed that trust with more tariffs. Why should China trust him? And what happens when a global superpower and a rising rival can't trust each other?

 

(With apologies for more Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleading, of course.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spent 2 hours out of 4 today making price increase changes.

The old guy that rides his bicycle to the store and who is very price conscious (poor) asked why the prices were higher.  Per the boss I had to lie to him (Don't discuss politics/tariffs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those R senators have it rough, almost an entire lunch!

 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters the party spent “almost our entire lunch” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Those R senators have it rough, almost an entire lunch!

 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters the party spent “almost our entire lunch” 

To be fair, their average lunch lasts about eight hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ishmael said:

To be fair, their average lunch lasts about eight hours.

excellent point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sean said:

Governing by National Emergency declarations again. 

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/447374-trump-plans-to-declare-new-national-emergency-to-impose-tariffs

Trump plans to declare new national emergency to impose tariffs

Sounds kinda Imperial.  Didn't we used to have a bunch of principled folks who objected to such things when President Obama acted like an Emperor?

Where'd they go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where they went but expect a tweetstorm, Marketplace is starting to refer to them as, wait for it, “taxes.” Doh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Larry Kudlow, 2016 -

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/06/06/politics/kudlow-trade-incalculable-damage-economy/index.html

“Lower tariffs equals lower taxes equals growth. In the 1930s high tariffs, Smoot-Hawley tariffs, equals high taxes, equals depression. It’s that simple. Too many Republicans on the campaign trail are flirting with protectionism. Trump is the worst, but he’s not the only one.”

He wants to stop trading with China. He wants to stop trading with Mexico. Lord knows who else he wants to stop trading with. These are huge trading partners of ours. There are political issues that need to be resolved, but you never cut off your nose to spite your face, do you? That’s what Trump is doing. Too many Republicans are flirting with protectionism. Protectionism is anti-growth, protectionism, protectionism led to the depression of the 1930s.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites