Posted on 05/15/2016 8:59:32 PM PDT by Jim W N
Cutting off the bottom rungs in ladder of success only makes things worse.
A blast from the past:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa107.html
Consider that the (Reagan) administration has done the following:
— Forced Japan to accept restraints on auto exports. The agreement set total Japanese auto exports at 1.68 million vehicles in 1981-82, 8 percent below 1980 exports. Two years later the level was permitted to rise to 1.85 million.
— Tightened up considerably the quotas on imported sugar. Imports fell from an annual average of 4.85 million tons in 1979-81 to an annual average of 2.86 million tons in 1982-86.
— Negotiated to increase restrictiveness of the Multifiber Arrangement and extended restrictions to previously unrestricted textiles. The administration unilaterally changed the rule of origin in order to restrict textile and apparel imports further and imposed a special ceiling on textiles from the People’s Republic of China.
-Required 18 countries—including Brazil, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Mexico, South Africa, Finland, and Australia, as well as the European Community—to accept “voluntary restraint agreements” to reduce steel imports, guaranteeing domestic producers a share of the American market. When 3 countries not included in the 18—Canada, Sweden, and Taiwan— increased steel exports to the United States, the administration demanded talks to check the increase. The administration also imposed tariffs and quotas on specialty steel.
— Imposed a five-year duty, beginning at 45 percent, on Japanese motorcycles for the benefit of Harley Davidson
— Raised tariffs on Canadian lumber and cedar shingles.
— Forced the Japanese into an agreement to control the price of computer memory-chip exports and increase Japanese purchases of American-made chips. When the agreement was allegedly broken, the administration imposed a 100 percent tariff on $300 million worth of electronics goods.
— Removed Third World countries from the duty-free import program for developing nations on several occasions.
— Pressed Japan to force its automakers to buy more American-made parts.
— Demanded that Taiwan, West Germany, Japan, and Switzerland restrain their exports of machine tools, with some market shares rolled back to 1981 levels. Other countries were warned not to increase their shares of the U.S. market.
— Accused the Japanese of dumping roller bearings, because the price did not rise to cover a fall in the value of the yen. The U.S. Customs Service was ordered to collect duties equal to the so-called dumping margins.
— Accused the Japanese of dumping forklift trucks and color picture tubes.
— Redefined “dumping” in order “to make it easier to bring charges of unfair trade practices against certain competitors.
— Extended quotas on imported clothespins.
There are too many Freepers who buy into socialism, an economic system ruled by the government, without even knowing it. My ping to JR was in good faith. A lot of FReepers need some serious economic remedial education. Why? Because most people in general including many here on FR have been educated under Leftist Keynesian economics or worse. It’s like getting stuck with a needle that is so sharp you don’t feel it.
State minimum wage, a result of the state representatives of the people of that state, is entirely different than federal minimum wage which is mandatory and patently unconstitutional.
Not that state minimum wage is not a problem. It is, but can be corrected by the informed, localized populace of that state.
“Conservative”, whatever that means, is not the gold standard my FRiend. “Conservative” which actually means “keeping the status quo” is our problem. The status quo, basically unconstitutional central government run amok, needs to be blown up.
I am advocating a free market economy by which America grew into the richest most powerful country on earth. How is it that people on this freedom-loving site think freedom, economic or otherwise, is a threat to our country. Freedom - individual, political, economic, personal - is what built our country.
“Simple modeling includes perfect competition. It also includes monopoly, oligopoly, monopolistic competition, and duopoly. “
That’s an odd comment because simple supply and demand models assume perfect competition. Any model adding imperfect competition is of necessity not simple
“You seem be arguing against economics generally.”
Two can play that game.
“Investopedia is no substitute for a classes in economics.”
I didn’t say it was. However that investopedia information is standard stuff given in introductory econ courses to warn students that theoretical models differ from empirical models.
Of course you can. There is a world of difference between political boundaries of a nation, required for its national sovereignty, and economic trade free of government interference across those same borders.
Absolute political philosophy, values and military might is involved in securing our borders, a constitutional requirement upon the federal government.
In contrast, no political philosophy or military might is required in the voluntary exchange of the supply and demand of goods in the free market.
Of course not. True national security and defense issues should curtail trade with the country involved, but that is an exception, not the rule.
Even when such trade threatens that very sovereignity?
Reagan, who I loved really, is nevertheless not the gold standard either. No man is. Reagan, as many here on FR, was clear about political freedom, but not as clear about economic freedom.
See post #108. True national security and defense trumps economic trade if necessary. But that is an exception, not the rule, and not relevant to the tariffs Trump advocates.
The ‘Arsenal of Democracy’ referred to America’s vast manufacturing base that was quickly converted to war production.
One of the key factors that led to allied victory in WWII, we had the ability to replace lost equipment almost immediately and crank out new equipment in staggering amounts.
But you have to have a manufacturing sector to do that.
And that’s what we’ve given up for the sake of globalization. We have given our enemies leverage over us. Imagine if we depended on the Japs for our planes and tanks.
There is a downward sloping demand curve with all those market structures. (Giffen goods, Veblen effects, etc. are largely inconsequential.). With some of those structures, at least, supply curves can also be derived. They are all simple theoretical models to me. Not one is “the real world” but insights obtained do apply to the real world.
I would no more argue that economics is simplistic because it differs from the real world, than argue that physics is simplistic because it can’t make the simple prediction of where a baseball when land when thrown across the plate towards a waiting batter. Economics holds, as much as physics. Sometimes, by no means always, application is a challenge.
One can certainly compare theory to empirical data. But what did you have in mind when you wrote of “empirical models?”
This book is about Ford’s conversion to war production. It was repeated all through the American manufacturing sector, with typewriter companies making machine guns and so forth.
The Arsenal of Democracy: FDR, Detroit, and an Epic Quest to Arm an America at War
As the United States entered World War II, the military was in desperate need of tanks, jeeps, and, most important, airplanes. Germany had been amassing weaponry and airplanes for five years—the United States for only months. So President Roosevelt turned to the American auto industry, specifically the Ford Motor Company, where Edsel Ford made the outrageous claim that he would construct the largest airplane factory in the world, a plant that could build a “bomber an hour.” And so began one of the most fascinating and overlooked chapters in American history.
Drawing on unique access to archival material and exhaustive research, A. J. Baime has crafted a riveting narrative that hopscotches from Detroit to Washington to Normandy, from the assembly lines to the frontlines, and from the depths of professional and personal failure to the heights that Ford Motor Company and the American military ultimately achieved in the sky.
“Wars are fought on many fronts, and A. J. Baime chronicles this little-known, but terrifically important battle to build America’s bomber force with narrative zest and delicious detail. Put simply, it’s a great read.”—Neal Bascomb, best-selling author of The Perfect Mile
From Booklist
Baime previously wrote on racing and the auto industry in Go Like Hell: Ford, Ferrari, and Their Battle for Speed and Glory at Le Mans (2009). Here he explores the role of Detroit and the Ford Motor Company in the mammoth effort to transform the auto industry into munitions factories that produced the thousands of planes, tanks, and artillery that would be the deciding factor in the effort to defeat Nazi and Japanese aggression in WWII. At the core was an epic battle between father and son, the cantankerous industrialist Henry Ford, who despised war, and his sensitive son, Edsel, who could never emerge from his father’s shadow. It’s hard to imagine the massive scale and scope of the Willow Run plant built by the Fords for the express purpose of putting out “a bomber a day” or the idea that government and industry could ever again come together with such singular intent and purpose. Yet the war effort at home was not accomplished without a great deal of conflict of will, adversity, and sacrifice, which Baime details with great care and empathy for his principal subjects. —David Siegfried
Review
“A.J. Baime’s prose is an amazing magic lantern shining through the flawed, frustrating and mesmerizing lives of an epic cast of characters; FDR; the anti-semitic Henry Ford; his gargoyle of a henchman Harry Bennett; the workers who would become America’s middle class; and, as well, Henry’s tragic son, Edsel, who lost his health and, ultimately, his life, trying to make good on his promise to deliver a “bomber an hour” during WWII. This is captivating history told at its most intimate level of detail; at the same time, Baime’s scope is grand and humane, even when he is bringing to life the most inhumane of people or moments. An engrossing, highly researched page-turner.”
—Doug Stanton, author of In Harm’s Way and Horse Soldiers
“When you talk the history of Detroit, it’s usually the stuff about beavers, the Model T, the ‘57 Chevy, the ‘67 riots and bankruptcy. But what A.J. Baime has done with a precise and entertaining pen is resurrect Detroit’s most important era - WWII - and the obscure and tortured man who may have saved the world.”
—Charlie LeDuff, author of Detroit: An American Autopsy
“Wars are fought on many fronts, and A.J. Baime chronicles this little known, but terrifically important battle to build America’s bomber force with narrative zest and delicious detail. Put simply, it’s a great read.”
—Neal Bascomb, bestselling author of Hunting Eichmann and The Perfect Mile
“Fast-moving and rich with detail, Baime’s book shows how the Fords worked a World War II miracle with rivets and steel. Engrossing.”
—Stephan Talty, author of Agent Garbo and Empire of Blue Water
“A.J. Baime has a great way of telling a story. We didn’t just win World War II because we had the best soldiers.We did it because we could build airplanes literally faster than the Germans could shoot them down. An exciting read.”
—Jay Leno
“[Edsel Ford] has deserved a better legacy, and A.J. Baime has given it to him . . . The Arsenal of Democracy is a touching and absorbing portrait of one of the forgotten heroes of World War II . . . A.J. Baime has given us a memorable portrait not just of an industry going to war but of a remarkable figure who helped to make victory possible.”
—Wall Street Journal
“Accessible, surprising history . . . Forthright and absorbing.”
—Publishers Weekly
“A.J. Baime has a gift for taking stories about cars and turning them into epic tales of man and his machine versus other man and his machine… The Arsenal of Democracy shows how capitalism and the American spirit really won WWII. You’ll never look at Detroit or our flag the same again.”
—Inked
“Because the minimum wage hike in California is the result of a vote by the California Assembly, not the Federal government.”
Excellent point. The states can ruin their own economies without help from the feds.
My standard of living has been (theoretically) lowered already because of socialism.
We’ve gone Galt to quit supporting the fascist beast, so this subject doesn’t really apply to me any more, other than theoretically.
Removing the feds will take a civil war. Period. No president is going to be able to do it. And I’m all for the CW starting ASAP.
But until then, the only solution is Trump’s (you can attribute it to Pelham if you like). Without it, Americans lose jobs and only get to buy junk - which certainly lowers people’s standard of living.
>>We probably do. The half-educated no-tariff camp needs to go back and find out why the term ‘ceteris paribus’ is always used in economic modeling.
Thanks for pointing that out. The economics experts always ignore that inconvenient fact.
Back when I was taking my ECON classes, the first thing they explained was ceteris paribus and then I learned why. It’s almost criminal to base anything on theories that explain the operation of a complex organism based on one change at a time.
There are certainly a lot of people claiming the conservative mantel these days. I’m with you on that. My definition, I assure you, is the correct one.
Free market economy is best at transferring dollars from the bottom of the top. The people at the top are free to leave enough dollars to circulate in the middle to to grab them all and suffer the consequences.
Capitalism is the best system but it is not perfect. It is better self regulated, but when that does not happen, other means do. Some of those other means can get very ugly. Ugly is where we are headed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.