We’ve recently learned something interesting: There is very little stuff that you HAVE TO buy. When I dumped TV in 1997, it was for a lot of reasons, and I’ve enjoyed the fruit of that decision ever since. But there was one result that I didn’t see coming, and it was a VERY good one: My consumerism plummeted.
When you don’t get pummeled with advertisements designed by psychologists to convince you to want, or believe you need items, you can’t help but shift your thinking. Sure, you still want things, but usually things you really DO need, or maybe something you’ve seen and you’d like to have it because it suits your needs and you think it’s cool (that’s how I came to own a Scion FR-S).
But once you divorce yourself from the U.S. consumer culture, life becomes MUCH less expensive.
Just to amplify: TV commercials tell you of all the ways you will get sick to the point that you live in a bit of a state of fear and find yourself medicating or insuring yourself to death. This becomes really clear when I mention on FR that we have no health insurance and we are almost 63 (my wife and I). To those that watch TV and eat all the foods it advertises and buy all the fear about getting deathly ill, this sounds like madness. but for us, we know God created us in biological machines that are very self sufficient and, although it is possible that something could happen to it, the chances are much more rare than most TV viewers believe, especially if you are eating what you grow yourself or you pick up from the amish market. And if you break a leg or cut yourself badly, it’s still just a few hundred dollars to repair. Meanwhile, we’ve saved ~$41k after tax dollars since we abandoned health insurance at obamacare’s inception. Part of that is due to eliminating TV.
You sure are a one trick pony and completely uninterested in beating Hillary Rotten Criminal. Are you a Democrat by chance?
I could not read the entire column, it is nonsensical.
For one thing, trade is not just about the consumer buying stuff. Trade policy is about the larger picture.
I can use a grocer example, also.
Suppose your friendly local grocer sells from an inventory that consists of local goods. So the money you spend there is plowed right back into the local economy. You are supporting your local farmers, schools, restaurants, etc., because the money that grocer earns from selling local goes into local people’s pockets. The local economy depends on the activity of local people.
Now suppose that local people are getting bored with local carrots, apples, and peaches. They want variety. So the farmers and grocers get together and form a trade cooperative, and begin trading a portion of the local carrot, apple, and peach crop for oranges, bananas, and rice that are grown somewhere else. People now have more variety, and, even though there is trade, it is equitable on both sides, and the local economy stays healthy.
Next, suppose that the grocer discovers that he can stock his market with carrots, apples, and peaches grown overseas (cheaply with slave labor), and that, even with the cost of shipping, they cost 10% of what it used to cost to stock from local sources. Now the local farmers no longer compete with each other, but with cheap foreign farmers. They cannot stay in business trying to undercut the cheap foreign produce, because they have houses to maintain, clothes to buy, etc. So the source of local wealth—the production of local goods—disappears, and the economy tanks. Sure, everything is cheaper, but no one can afford it.
Tariffs are all about charging the foreign sources a fee for selling in the local market so that they cannot grossly undercut the local producers and put them out of business. Tariffs help to make trade equitable on both sides.
On the large scale, a country that produces nothing cannot trade forever, because there is no domestically produced wealth to give its money value.
How long do our politicians think the US economy can survive, when so many people are put out of work by unfair trade practices that cause manufacturers to go out of business? Conversely, how long until the foreign countries undercutting our local markets figure out that if the US is not a producing country, its money is basically just paper?
Small town in Maine, about 10 years ago. Has a small, local grocery store that's been there in one form or another for 100 years +. Next nearest grocery store is 30 miles away, give or take.
Then Wal-Mart moves into the area. It's still 30 miles away, but it's Wal-Mart. Good selection, good prices. Some real competition for this small-town grocery store. Especially, since the store is 100+ years old, and frankly, showing its age.
Owner of the small-town grocery store goes to the townspeople at the yearly town meeting. Says (approximately), "Look. I can't compete with Wal-Mart. Not on price, not on inventory. But I promise to invest some money into inventory and fixing the place up, and I promise to do my best on prices .... if you promise to keep shopping at my little small town grocery store."
The townspeople, most of whom had grown up with the owner, said, "Sure, We'll do that."
Store owner invests some money, spruces the place up, invests in inventory (place has great meat, he found a really good butcher). Town keeps shopping there. Everyone is happy.
Then ... gas prices go to $4.00+ a gallon. All of a sudden, driving 60 miles round trip to get a loaf of bread and a 6-pack, isn't real feasible. The townspeople are *especially* happy that they have a local place to shop.
Gas prices have come back down, thankfully. But the little store is still prospering. It's a good place, I was there when I visited this summer.
Moral of the story? When people do right by each other, without political coercion, things turn out OK.
Consider that you are also paying for subsidies made to US producers. For example that ethanol mandated to be in your gasoline is subsidized from the time the farmer plants the corn until it goes into your gas tank. There are government funded boondoggles in lots of industries especially in agriculture. Why does your soda contain corn syrup rather than sugar? Because the US government imposes a tariff on imported sugar to subsidize sugar beet farmers in North Dakota and subsidizes corn producers in the US.
I see the debate presumption starts at step 20 instead of 1.
“You work and get paid. To whom do your after-tax earnings belong?”.
Getting ‘paid’ = YOUR $$. After-tax earnings??
As we have a 5th and 13th A. to contend with in this discussion, just what % of the govt tax (fed, state, local) is ‘just’? Did those that claim the EITC ‘earn’ the $$ they never worked for? Do those that pay 0% tax ‘earn’ that right too; use as many services as one wishes without contributing to the same?
As for tariffs, those are VOLUNTARY, unlike the above.
IMO, we *should* be competitive to the foreign imports that under-cut our exports w/ slave labor and tariffs of their own.
Course, I realize the ‘trade deals’ made by those in D.C. put the U.S. at a disadvantage. The tax policies, regulations, rules, ‘laws’ and the like only further the hindrance.
And this guy is the department chair?
The university must have a really weak economics department.
Testing for ZOTS.
Are you still here?
[TARIFFS ARE DUMB]Tell that to the countries that impose them on our products in "free trade" agreements.
Some people are too stupid (you?) to understand the logic that the mere threat of tariffs on products from "free market" countries that impose tariffs on or even block our products will/can improve OUR export markets.
But I understand the concern from your selfish standpoint...or maybe it's really just more anti-Trump bullshit.
Back when our country was growing, the federal government was largely financed by tariffs and excise taxes. We did pretty well; but then came the income tax. Game over.
Who would you rather pay, the supermarket, or the IRS?
>>Donald J. Boudreaux is a professor of economics
The econmist’s mantra is ceteris paribus. There’s more to a nation than a disjointed economy that exists only to squeeze dollars out of consumers.
If America needed to suddenly build 2 new aircraft carriers and the 180 aircraft it needs, could the nation that worships global production do it in time?
What is good about a great globalist economy when half of our citizens receive government assistance?
A politicians answer to everything “give us more money, we’ll teach those b@$£@rds a lesson”