[Gaffer]

This is rather a one-sided argument, frankly. One has a foreign support network of growers and workers who pay no US income taxes, or SS, Medicare or any of that other support structure taxing that goes hand in hand with say what the other’s supply structure looks like.

In other words it is an argument supporting the writer’s foregone conclusion with no real acknowledgement of the other side of the coin, IMO.

BTW, I am not pro tariff en masse. I personally think tariff impositions should be looked at on a case by case basis to decide whether outside governmental interests are manipulating the market conditions, and cost structure.

[dp0622]

I applaud both your responses to this WEAK, absurd article.

Can be torn apart by a college freshman in five minutes.

Pick and choose, anybody?

[Political Junkie Too]

Yes. Comparing a foreign country to a business across the street is a "no borders" argument. The supply chains and infrastructure costs are completely different, as well as labor and environmental regulations.

-PJ

[Former Proud Canadian]

In a world where free trade=fair trade the writer is correct. Unfortunately we do not live in that world. We live in a world where different living standards reflect different living costs and labor costs. We also live in a world of wildly divergent government tax policies, trade policies, and mercantile policies.

For example, steel producers outside China simply cannot compete with Chinese producers who enjoy low wage rates and government subsidies. A government like China can shift subsidies and trade policies to encourage any domestic industry and virtually destroy any foreign industry. Trump is right, AGAIN!

[Eric Pode of Croydon]

I personally think tariff impositions should be looked at on a case by case basis

Exactly wrong, provides the greatest protection from competition not where it is needed, but to those who have the most political clout.

If there must be tariffs, they should be across the board.

[Eric Pode of Croydon]

I personally think tariff impositions should be looked at on a case by case basis

Exactly wrong, provides the greatest protection from competition not where it is needed, but to those who have the most political clout.

If there must be tariffs, they should be across the board.

[expat_panama]

...tariff impositions should be looked at on a case by case basis to decide whether outside governmental interests are manipulating the market...

Let's be sure we're both talking about the same things here.  A tariff is a tax on a specific import and the goal is to change the market for that import.  All tariffs manipulate markets on behalf of outside interests.

[Mase]

I personally think tariff impositions should be looked at on a case by case basis to decide whether outside governmental interests are manipulating the market conditions, and cost structure.

Ah, the perfect environment for cronyism. But you're against cronyism, right?