Who really believes tariffs are good business

Laker

Super Anarchist
4,202
277
PNW
The good thing about tariffs are that they are taxes on consumption, not on production.

 

Lark

Supper Anarchist
9,489
1,699
Ohio
BillDBastard said:
Well it would seem regardless of any of that, the tariffs imposed have brought several to the table, no?

Was that not the desired effect?
And agree to the terms of the TPP.    A lot of pissed off democracies we used to call allies that made private arrangements without us.  A lot of smoke and mirrors without substance.    Meanwhile we can only buy Chinese made computers with prepackaged spyware.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Laker

Super Anarchist
4,202
277
PNW
The repeal of the Corn Laws was a high point on the journey to modern democracies.  It is a shame that we ignore that.  As for tariffs as protectionism, there are other ways.  

 

Mark K

Super Anarchist
47,621
1,860
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.  
"There will always be more jobs"...laissez faire capitalism...a classic! 

 
foto-3.jpg


 

Laker

Super Anarchist
4,202
277
PNW
BillDBastard said:
You really are that as well..... but the angry and misinformed really shines through in most of your diatribes.

Do you think folks who have endured long term unemployment due to years of sending jobs offshore are upset that Trump has tipped the scales back to some sort of trade parity?
I am, because that soon becomes a straw man if you travel that road much.  Jobs do not get "sent offshore".  Trump is really screwing up the economy.   How he is doing it is exactly in the same way that the Government of Great Britain screwed up just after WWII and it will have the same results.  The only difference is that he hasn't fought his war yet.

 

mikewof

mikewof
45,639
1,210
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.
Failure mode and error analysis is very cool stuff, probably one of my favorite physics classes of all time, because the results were both immediate to see and measure, but nebulous to predict. I remember the textbook we used had a photo of the famous Paris train overshoot ...

train_wreck.jpg


 

SloopJonB

Super Anarchist
68,809
12,424
Great Wet North
Failure mode and error analysis is very cool stuff, probably one of my favorite physics classes of all time, because the results were both immediate to see and measure, but nebulous to predict. I remember the textbook we used had a photo of the famous Paris train overshoot ...

train_wreck.jpg
Lets hope they never repeat that with a TGV. :eek:

 
G

Guest

Guest
I don't really have an issue with the concept of tariffs as a means of coercion to get bad actors to play nice.  What I have a problem with is cheetos ham-fisted, blunt object way of going about them.  He might be getting short term results, but long term relationships are going to be strained. 

I do however, think that it is past time we put our foot down and stop subsidizing the majority of the world's economy.  We have consistently, for decades, rolled over on trade and security issues always wanting to be the "nice guy".  We've put up with trade rule imbalances for far too long and it's been devastating to our middle class and blue collar workers.  In the rush to sign NAFTA and other trade deals, we never really paid much attention and only gave it lip service when it came to what happens to all those jobs that would inevitably get offshored.  In theory, its nice for the blue collar family to be able to buy a widget made in China at Walmart for a few cents cheaper than they could down at the mom & pop hardware store.  But that short term greed did nothing but devastate an entire section of our country.  One needs only look at the meth and opioid crisis in the blue collar swath of the US rust belt and such to see that the world has left them behind in our rush to globalization.  Globalization is not inherently evil or bad, but it can't be at the expense of your own people in order to save a few pennies on cheap plastic toys and Jeans from Asia.  

It will be interesting to see how whoever takes over for him handles the trade thing.  Does he or she continue the hard stance on trade but hopefully with a bit more nuanced approach?  Or do they capitulate and take us back to the days where everyone walked all over us?  I mostly suspect the later will happen as a knee-jerk response to il cheetolini's style.

 

Lark

Supper Anarchist
9,489
1,699
Ohio
I don't really have an issue with the concept of tariffs as a means of coercion to get bad actors to play nice.  What I have a problem with is cheetos ham-fisted, blunt object way of going about them.  He might be getting short term results, but long term relationships are going to be strained. 

I do however, think that it is past time we put our foot down and stop subsidizing the majority of the world's economy.  We have consistently, for decades, rolled over on trade and security issues always wanting to be the "nice guy".  We've put up with trade rule imbalances for far too long and it's been devastating to our middle class and blue collar workers.  In the rush to sign NAFTA and other trade deals, we never really paid much attention and only gave it lip service when it came to what happens to all those jobs that would inevitably get offshored.  In theory, its nice for the blue collar family to be able to buy a widget made in China at Walmart for a few cents cheaper than they could down at the mom & pop hardware store.  But that short term greed did nothing but devastate an entire section of our country.  One needs only look at the meth and opioid crisis in the blue collar swath of the US rust belt and such to see that the world has left them behind in our rush to globalization.  Globalization is not inherently evil or bad, but it can't be at the expense of your own people in order to save a few pennies on cheap plastic toys and Jeans from Asia.  

It will be interesting to see how whoever takes over for him handles the trade thing.  Does he or she continue the hard stance on trade but hopefully with a bit more nuanced approach?  Or do they capitulate and take us back to the days where everyone walked all over us?  I mostly suspect the later will happen as a knee-jerk response to il cheetolini's style.
I’ve lived around plenty of abandoned factories.   It had nothing to do with being “nice”.  The failures have everything to do with profits to be made by outsourcing and offshoring.  Robots would have been the alternative.  The left behind suffer not only from lack of opportunity and real estate traps.   They also show an inability to adapt due to small minds and poor education that has become increasingly religious.  

Too many read “Left Behind” and wait for the rapture when the work is outsourced.   Their children take the standard US  jobs program.   The Army pays them to live overseas supporting foreign economies while their grandparents take early social security and their parents disability.

I’ve lived in two towns where the baby boomers solution to empty buildings was to build a museum to Glory Days.  It’s not just the Midwest.   911 showed us to be a country more interested in building monuments then rebuilding.  






 

shaggybaxter

Super Anarchist
4,510
2,551
Australia
I still think some of us are looking at an effect, not the cause.

The cause is US business. A increasingly common trait with all the big US majors for the last decade or so has been an obsessive greed for more and more profit. They created the made in China model,  and I would bet my left nut that this alone has been the cause for the largest loss of manufacturing jobs in the US in the last decade or so.

An honest and frank assessment needs to be made to identify the root cause/s first. The US just bitching about a economic power bloc escaping the bonds created by the US to maximise the profit for US businesses?  

Methinks thou protesteth too much about the wrong thing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Laker

Super Anarchist
4,202
277
PNW
I still think some of us are looking at an effect, not the cause.

The cause is US business. A increasingly common trait with all the big US majors for the last decade or so has been an obsessive greed for more and more profit. They created the made in China model,  and I would bet my left nut that this alone has been the cause for the largest loss of manufacturing jobs in the US in the last decade or so.

An honest and frank assessment needs to be made to identify the root cause/s first. The US just bitching about a economic power bloc escaping the bonds created by the US to maximise the profit for US businesses?  

Methinks thou protesteth too much about the wrong thing.
+1 on that.  Just look at the predominance of capital in the capital/labour balance and how public policy has allowed it.  Tariffs are not even a good Band-Aid.

 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
44,384
9,663
Eastern NC
BillDBastard said:
You really are that as well..... but the angry and misinformed really shines through in most of your diatribes.

Do you think folks who have endured long term unemployment due to years of sending jobs offshore are upset that Trump has tipped the scales back to some sort of trade parity?
Do you think they enjoy lower wages, less workers' rights, lowered workplace safety standards, and far less consumer protection?

How many coal miners have gotten their jobs back?

Dumbass

-DSK

 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
44,384
9,663
Eastern NC
I still think some of us are looking at an effect, not the cause.

The cause is US business. A increasingly common trait with all the big US majors for the last decade or so has been an obsessive greed for more and more profit. They created the made in China model,  and I would bet my left nut that this alone has been the cause for the largest loss of manufacturing jobs in the US in the last decade or so.

An honest and frank assessment needs to be made to identify the root cause/s first. The US just bitching about a economic power bloc escaping the bonds created by the US to maximise the profit for US businesses?  

Methinks thou protesteth too much about the wrong thing.
+1 on that.  Just look at the predominance of capital in the capital/labour balance and how public policy has allowed it.  Tariffs are not even a good Band-Aid.
Some corporations..... hell, some smaller businesses...... have less consideration for their workers than you do for a used tissue. Antagonistic attitudes. This is often reflected in labor attitudes towards management (whereas the boardroom is the real enemy of both).

-DSK

 

Laker

Super Anarchist
4,202
277
PNW
Some corporations..... hell, some smaller businesses...... have less consideration for their workers than you do for a used tissue. Antagonistic attitudes. This is often reflected in labor attitudes towards management (whereas the boardroom is the real enemy of both).

-DSK
The Economist had an article recently about the successes of the German approach to business in an American context.  Union members on the board, full disclosure,..... that sort of thing.  Certainly the SullAir model has worked in the US.  SullAir  has its issues, but an "all for one" approach is not one of them.


 
Last edited by a moderator:

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
62,387
5,540
De Nile
I don't really have an issue with the concept of tariffs as a means of coercion to get bad actors to play nice.  What I have a problem with is cheetos ham-fisted, blunt object way of going about them.  He might be getting short term results, but long term relationships are going to be strained. 

I do however, think that it is past time we put our foot down and stop subsidizing the majority of the world's economy.  We have consistently, for decades, rolled over on trade and security issues always wanting to be the "nice guy".  We've put up with trade rule imbalances for far too long and it's been devastating to our middle class and blue collar workers.  In the rush to sign NAFTA and other trade deals, we never really paid much attention and only gave it lip service when it came to what happens to all those jobs that would inevitably get offshored.  In theory, its nice for the blue collar family to be able to buy a widget made in China at Walmart for a few cents cheaper than they could down at the mom & pop hardware store.  But that short term greed did nothing but devastate an entire section of our country.  One needs only look at the meth and opioid crisis in the blue collar swath of the US rust belt and such to see that the world has left them behind in our rush to globalization.  Globalization is not inherently evil or bad, but it can't be at the expense of your own people in order to save a few pennies on cheap plastic toys and Jeans from Asia.  

It will be interesting to see how whoever takes over for him handles the trade thing.  Does he or she continue the hard stance on trade but hopefully with a bit more nuanced approach?  Or do they capitulate and take us back to the days where everyone walked all over us?  I mostly suspect the later will happen as a knee-jerk response to il cheetolini's style.
Why aren’t you cheering? He’s burning the bitch down.

 

Mark K

Super Anarchist
47,621
1,860
I don't really have an issue with the concept of tariffs as a means of coercion to get bad actors to play nice.  What I have a problem with is cheetos ham-fisted, blunt object way of going about them.  He might be getting short term results, but long term relationships are going to be strained. 

I do however, think that it is past time we put our foot down and stop subsidizing the majority of the world's economy.  We have consistently, for decades, rolled over on trade and security issues always wanting to be the "nice guy".  We've put up with trade rule imbalances for far too long and it's been devastating to our middle class and blue collar workers.  In the rush to sign NAFTA and other trade deals, we never really paid much attention and only gave it lip service when it came to what happens to all those jobs that would inevitably get offshored.  In theory, its nice for the blue collar family to be able to buy a widget made in China at Walmart for a few cents cheaper than they could down at the mom & pop hardware store.  But that short term greed did nothing but devastate an entire section of our country.  One needs only look at the meth and opioid crisis in the blue collar swath of the US rust belt and such to see that the world has left them behind in our rush to globalization.  Globalization is not inherently evil or bad, but it can't be at the expense of your own people in order to save a few pennies on cheap plastic toys and Jeans from Asia.  

It will be interesting to see how whoever takes over for him handles the trade thing.  Does he or she continue the hard stance on trade but hopefully with a bit more nuanced approach?  Or do they capitulate and take us back to the days where everyone walked all over us?  I mostly suspect the later will happen as a knee-jerk response to il cheetolini's style.
NAFTA did not off shore the jobs, it was a reaction to the off-shoring of jobs...but in places where there was no shore. Most of the jobs went to India and China and NAFTA was about countries in this hemisphere. Blaming it is a very successful red herring though. 

 We faced a reality in the 80's, the rest of the world would eventually adopt Western industrial ways. The option of barrackading, or North Koreaning, the US was rejected, instead a policy of addressing what was viewed as the inevitable was adopted. These are the Free Traders, and I think they have set us on a path there is no backing out of. Watch what happens to Trump and Bannon's notions when the prices at Walmart triple. 

   It's full of goods made with labor that is cheaper than slave labor here. It would literally cost more to feed and house slaves here than what they pay the people on the assembly lines making our Samsung phones. We have become like the old south, taking that slave labor for granted. We deserve this "culture" (code for standard of living). 

  The end game of the Free Traders wasn't short sighted. It's highly predictable the Chinese and India would eventually realize that for real security they can't be utterly dependent of foreign markets, they have to develop their own domestic markets, and wages would have to rise. At some point there would be a re-balancing. It's what happened everywhere else. Eventually the People stand up and want coffee breaks and weekends and shit. The US, if it remains a center for high innovation stands a pretty fair shot at maintaining some dominance in a Free Trade world with semi-equals. Most of those bastards have governments even more rigid and self interested than ours. The Free Traders accurately predicted this, IMO, the Chinese are working hard to do just that and so are the Indians. The Chinese are going back to dictatorship to handle the "chaos". Eventually dictatorships wind up with bad dictators that can't be shuffled off to a golf course after a few years.  

 Win Win, as opposed to the Bannon/Trump view of Win Lose. The key was, I suppose, the ability to keep the US public educated on what was the plan, and lacking that, they were easily led to the Win Lose view. Change is painful, always. 

 It's so easy to view them as the bad guys who must be beat on...all while marveling at how cheap those bags of tube socks are...  

 
G

Guest

Guest
Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
ride that cushy expat job into the sunset brochacho.
Don't worry, brah.  I'm riding that pony for all she's worth.....   :lol:

 
G

Guest

Guest
NAFTA did not off shore the jobs, it was a reaction to the off-shoring of jobs...but in places where there was no shore. Most of the jobs went to India and China and NAFTA was about countries in this hemisphere. Blaming it is a very successful red herring though. 

 We faced a reality in the 80's, the rest of the world would eventually adopt Western industrial ways. The option of barrackading, or North Koreaning, the US was rejected, instead a policy of addressing what was viewed as the inevitable was adopted. These are the Free Traders, and I think they have set us on a path there is no backing out of. Watch what happens to Trump and Bannon's notions when the prices at Walmart triple. 

   It's full of goods made with labor that is cheaper than slave labor here. It would literally cost more to feed and house slaves here than what they pay the people on the assembly lines making our Samsung phones. We have become like the old south, taking that slave labor for granted. We deserve this "culture" (code for standard of living). 

  The end game of the Free Traders wasn't short sighted. It's highly predictable the Chinese and India would eventually realize that for real security they can't be utterly dependent of foreign markets, they have to develop their own domestic markets, and wages would have to rise. At some point there would be a re-balancing. It's what happened everywhere else. Eventually the People stand up and want coffee breaks and weekends and shit. The US, if it remains a center for high innovation stands a pretty fair shot at maintaining some dominance in a Free Trade world with semi-equals. Most of those bastards have governments even more rigid and self interested than ours. The Free Traders accurately predicted this, IMO, the Chinese are working hard to do just that and so are the Indians. The Chinese are going back to dictatorship to handle the "chaos". Eventually dictatorships wind up with bad dictators that can't be shuffled off to a golf course after a few years.  

 Win Win, as opposed to the Bannon/Trump view of Win Lose. The key was, I suppose, the ability to keep the US public educated on what was the plan, and lacking that, they were easily led to the Win Lose view. Change is painful, always. 

 It's so easy to view them as the bad guys who must be beat on...all while marveling at how cheap those bags of tube socks are...  
Whole lotta truth in that.  And I apologize, I didn't mean to imply that NAFTA alone was responsible for offshoring jobs.  But I think it did open pandora's box, the floodgates or whatever other cliche fits.  It was inevitable - globalization was going to happen and as you say it needed to happen.  Building a moat around the US wasn't the answer.

I'm simply saying that despite all the promises and lip service - we DID leave behind a significant chunk of the electorate with no real plan to get them into the innovation economy.  In fact we went one step worse than that:  I could see a decision being made to let that generation age out as not being "savable".  But we doomed their kids to worse by taking an education system that was once the envy of the world and turned it into a joke that puts people even deeper into poverty, except for the fortunate few who can afford to move where the schools are decent.  Had we made an investment in the kids of the lost manufacturing job parents, we could have given them a chance.  

I believe this ^^ issue of collectively shrugging our shoulders to several generations of the parents and kids in the midwest, the rustbelt and all the areas hard hit by loss of jobs to the global economy was DIRECTLY responsible for trump coming to power.  I think it had very little to do with Hillary and everything to do with rolling the dice on something different.  A different approach, a different style, something, anything.  These people - the deplorables - had and still have nothing to lose. Its why they doggedly still cling to him despite these YGBFSM moments when cheeto has his tourettes episodes.  Because NO ONE so far has shown them there is anything better.  

And I've said it before and I'll say it again..... if you continue to ignore these people and write them off as nothing but uneducated bumpkins.... you will end up with more Trumps.  And at the moment, our only saving grace is that trump is too stupid and narcissistic to STFU.  Imagine if we had someone as morally bereft as trump, but with actual intelligence and cunning not to be so fucking obvious about it???  Now THAT would be truly scary.  

 




Top