Who really believes tariffs are good business

[mikewof]

I asked Raz'r here, but so far no comment ...

How many here who are opposed to these tariffs were also opposed to them when President Obama essentially did the same thing? I supported Obama's tariffs because they were necessary, including the reasons the Raz'r wrote above. Thus I support a tiny handful ofTrump's theoretical tariffs, since they are practically made with a piece of carbon paper from Obama's tariff typewriter, but with some different vocal flourishes when he pitched them.

I would like to think of us lefties as intelligent enough to parse good and bad policy regardless who proposes it. 

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

I support tariffs, but only in a very limited way.

I believe the US has agreed that a clean environment, and a safe workplace are important enough to implement laws, some of which increase the cost of production. 

I believe ANY import to be subject to the same laws, and if it isn't, should have a tariff that attempts to level the playing field.

The underlying assumption seems to be that all environmental and workplace safety laws on our books are necessary and good. Many are. Maybe even most. Not all.

The other assumption seems to be that politicians could (or would) adjust a tax to exactly compensate for the goodness of our laws vs theirs. No one has enough information to do it, even if politicians were pure as driven snow. They're not. Not even TeamD ones.

 

[mikewof]

The underlying assumption seems to be that all environmental and workplace safety laws on our books are necessary and good. Many are. Maybe even most. Not all.

The other assumption seems to be that politicians could (or would) adjust a tax to exactly compensate for the goodness of our laws vs theirs. No one has enough information to do it, even if politicians were pure as driven snow. They're not. Not even TeamD ones.

Nobody does it that way though. Rather, it's price driven. We have a pretty good idea how much it costs to mine and refine an ounce of Yttrium, using decent practices. So when someone is able to undercut that price significantly, our alarm bells ring a bit and we look for things like chemical dumping, prison labor and child labor. 

I guess it's possible that people can undercut our costs significantly by using vastly improved processes, but I haven't seen that too often, other than with Canadian sheet plastic. I'm sure there are examples in other industries though.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Can you define "decent practices" without reference to any of those underlying assumptions I mentioned?

 

[mikewof]

Can you define "decent practices" without reference to any of those underlying assumptions I mentioned?

Do you mean your "underlying assumption" that "all environmental and workplace safety laws on our books are necessary and good"?

Why would I need to do that? You wrote that most of them are probably good, but not all. What's the point of a LLSF (low level shit fight) when we already seem to agree on this? It ain't rocket surgery ... don't exploit children, pollute as little as possible, run a safe shop.

 

[SloopJonB]

Tariff's are taxes cliff.

If the government gets the money it's taxes.

 

[Steam Flyer]

The underlying assumption seems to be that all environmental and workplace safety laws on our books are necessary and good. Many are. Maybe even most. Not all.

....

Every safety law is written in blood. Every single one.

That doesn't mean I think they are all good & necessary. Many of the are a vain attempt to keep stupid impatient people from hurting themselves. Frankly I don't care who hurts themselves, I care about people hurting me or my co-workers. And laws/rules don't do that. Good training and paying attention to what the fuck you're doing, do that. But it's very difficult to codify

-DSK

 

[Raz'r]

The underlying assumption seems to be that all environmental and workplace safety laws on our books are necessary and good. Many are. Maybe even most. Not all.

The other assumption seems to be that politicians could (or would) adjust a tax to exactly compensate for the goodness of our laws vs theirs. No one has enough information to do it, even if politicians were pure as driven snow. They're not. Not even TeamD ones.

Imagine perfect being in the way of “good enough”

oh, yeah, it’s dogballs we’re talking about..:

 

[SloopJonB]

Every safety law is written in blood. Every single one.

That's the bottom line.

Right wingers are unable to think far enough to comprehend that simple fact.

To them regulations of all kinds are created by Libruls just to make work for themselves and piss off right wingers.

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

Every safety law is written in blood. Every single one.

Yeah but a lot of them are written to protect stupid people from the results of doing stupid things.

I'm not necessarily opposed to this, I might add - if they survive then they're a burden on the medical, taxation and social security systems.

I recall one time when I had to tell an OH&S committee it wasn't a good idea to remove heavy steel doors opening onto the weather deck after some idiot got their hand caught in one. In retrospect what *might* have been a good idea, though, was some sort of soft-close system for the last say 200mm of travel.

Anyway, the argument is basically whether foreign countries should be held to the same standards in the interest of comparing prices and levying tariffs to flatten the playing field. I'm sympathetic to that argument if there's a good way of doing the costing - which I doubt.

FKT

 

[Laker]

I have done a fair amount of Failure Effects Mode Analysis in my time.  It really is difficult to work out all the ways someone can screw up a piece of equipment.

 

[Mark K]

The goal of getting more jobs shipped back to the US isn't a bad one. I'm at a loss of a way to do that without tariffs myself. That said it's a tax on the working stiffs, the Walmartians, and they will be poorer. A change they most definitely will believe in. Nevertheless this new tax on the working stiffs should help cover the deficits created by the yuuuuge tax breaks to our fearless Job Creators. We must do something about all this spending. Sad it had to be this way, but has anybody checked out the greens fees at some of their clubs lately? Shit, no wonder they feel it imperative to get tax cuts.  

 Tariffs, if stuck to, could lead to more foreign companies to shift production to the US, or at least as significant part of it. Those are probably the guys we should be patronizing anyway.  

 

[SloopJonB]

Shit, no wonder they feel it imperative to get tax cuts. 

Really - the most collectible cars are closing in on $100,000,000 - it's getting harder and harder to be really rich.

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

stupid people think only stupid people do stupid things.

See the happy moron

He doesn't give a damn.

I wish I were a moron.

My God! Perhaps I am.....

FKT (after all I'm pretty happy with LTUAE on the whole - driveway upgrade to extract new boat excepted..... and I *did* build a boat if further evidence is needed)

 

[Guest]

To answer the OP thread title question -

"Tariffs sometimes can achieve the desired results" - Likely Justin Trudeau quote

 

[Lark]

I have done a fair amount of Failure Effects Mode Analysis in my time.  It really is difficult to work out all the ways someone can screw up a piece of equipment.

I am fairly good at technology, but have identified 8 discrete failure points with the coffee pot at work.   I have demonstrated each of them is critical to product production, and failure at most points creates a mess.   My own team has banned from operating the device without the benefit of coffee.     Interesting that their solution wasn’t just a long list of procedures for operation.   

 

[Lark]

I’m posting here as it relates to the trade war.   Anybody have thoughts on the Chinese spy chip in servers story?   I’ll presume we didn’t catch the first one or even second.   I asked an Air Force major about it a decade ago, he claimed all chips used by the military were checked but this story says otherwise.   

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies

 

[jzk]

The goal of getting more jobs shipped back to the US isn't a bad one. I'm at a loss of a way to do that without tariffs myself. That said it's a tax on the working stiffs, the Walmartians, and they will be poorer. A change they most definitely will believe in. Nevertheless this new tax on the working stiffs should help cover the deficits created by the yuuuuge tax breaks to our fearless Job Creators. We must do something about all this spending. Sad it had to be this way, but has anybody checked out the greens fees at some of their clubs lately? Shit, no wonder they feel it imperative to get tax cuts.  

 Tariffs, if stuck to, could lead to more foreign companies to shift production to the US, or at least as significant part of it. Those are probably the guys we should be patronizing anyway.  

There is no case for the tariffs, and the goal of "bringing jobs" back to the US is irrelevant.  If it is a better deal to trade abroad, then we should do it.  If not, then don't.  There will always be more jobs.  It would be like putting a tariff on farm machinery to "bring back" donkey plow jobs.  

 

[Steam Flyer]

Yeah but a lot of them are written to protect stupid people from the results of doing stupid things.

I'm not necessarily opposed to this, I might add - if they survive then they're a burden on the medical, taxation and social security systems.

I recall one time when I had to tell an OH&S committee it wasn't a good idea to remove heavy steel doors opening onto the weather deck after some idiot got their hand caught in one. In retrospect what *might* have been a good idea, though, was some sort of soft-close system for the last say 200mm of travel.

Anyway, the argument is basically whether foreign countries should be held to the same standards in the interest of comparing prices and levying tariffs to flatten the playing field. I'm sympathetic to that argument if there's a good way of doing the costing - which I doubt.

FKT

ISO standards go a pretty fair way on those lines. But it's going to be very difficult to come up with an impartial assessment of all factors. Just the "exporting pollution" issue raises so many hackles it makes one despair of human nature.

Heavy steel doors on a rolling ship can be problematic! And adding complex safety mechanisms that need more training and more maintenance are not a good answer IMHO. Make the doors carbon fiber? I dunno. I do know that I am lucky to have quick reflexes (or did) to avoid getting smashed by machinery access hatches a few times. It gets back to my pet theory about safety, that paying attention to what you're doing is the best safety rule. Easy to train, but impossible to codify.

I also have a favorite saying, "Safety is for pussies (or wimps, depending on who's present)!" Our Yacht Club is looking into forming a Safety Committee but recent local events (Hurricane Florence) are likely to put that on a back burner

-DSK

 

[SloopJonB]

To answer the OP thread title question -

"Tariffs sometimes can achieve the desired results" - Likely Justin Trudeau quote

Is he Joe's brother?