Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Buy America, weaken America
usnews ^ | 3/25/06 | Richard J. Newman

Posted on 03/25/2006 8:07:17 PM PST by ncountylee

The Durabrand 10-inch portable DVD player available at Wal-Mart retails for $199.94. A group of senators would like to raise the price to $254.67. The Creative Zen Nano Plus 512-megabyte MP3 player seems like a bargain at $89.72; less so at $114.39, the price the senators would prefer that you pay. The price hikes would be the result of a 27.5 percent tariff on goods imported from China, a proposal sponsored by Democrat Chuck Schumer of New York and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and is scheduled to come up for a vote in the Senate this week.

Schumer and Graham aren't crazy, of course—they know better than most that taking money out of voters' pockets is a sure way to be sent packing. In other words, that 27.5 percent price hike won't be coming to a retailer near you anytime soon. But as an attention-getter, it's pretty good, and attention is what the two senators, and a number of colleagues who support them, are after. The chief bogeyman they want to flog is China's communist government, which—according to Schumer and the rest—deliberately keeps its currency undervalued in order to sell more cheap imports to the United States and other countries. Reasonable economists differ on that question. The tariff, if you buy the argument, would bring prices on Chinese imports closer to their unsubsidized value, leveling the playing field for honest tradespeople in, say, New York and South Carolina, who can't possibly produce goods as cheaply as the Chinese and still earn enough wages to buy all the DVD and MP players that they need.

(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; china; economics; globalization; trade
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 321-322 next last
To: JABBERBONK
By the way the Chinese middle class is now over 300 million. Larger than the population of the US. In addition I wonder what all the US stockholders would think about shutting down US industry in China. Many retirement funds would take a hit. Hardly Davidson just opened in China.
141 posted on 03/25/2006 10:23:51 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

GM is bleeding cash due to poor sales and enormous health insurance and retirement benefits for their employees. They can't sell assets fast enough. GMAC and ElectroMotive are sold off. They are trying to buy off 113,000 employees if they can. They are desperate. I don't see them surviving as a company. Too many overly generous deals cut with the unions.


142 posted on 03/25/2006 10:31:09 PM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RFT1
"a 25% surcharge would work out to 3 cents a day, big whoop."

First, spell checker is a friend. Now will the government allow me to pay their "surcharge" (read TAX) over five years or all at once when I buy the item?

Using your reasoning my Fed income tax is only a $20 a day and just look at all the services I get from the government... not!

Japanese electronics started out cheaper too. Now they are often the more expensive item you can choose. Our manufacturing is in decline because of poor business practices (mostly management) and shoddy workmanship.

U.S. companies think for the quarterly report and plan business accordingly. The Japanese thought and think on decades long business plans. They gained market share with often MORE expensive products that were built better.

Lastly... who will get the "surcharge" (TAX) profits? Is it going to be paid back to the citizens in the form of lower income taxes? Will it go to my heating bill? You know it will NOT.

It will be absorbed by government to be SPENT by government. Even if that is to give a "loan" to an already failing business that is producing products of lower quality and poor design.

Any way you look at it it will be used to try to buy votes. That's it and that is why Chucky and friends are right in there.
143 posted on 03/25/2006 10:40:32 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jec41

So you think familes with both parents who work is a good thing? Frankly, I have no problem with married men with familes getting more pay. As for the 90% tax rate in the 50s, that applied to very few people, and most of them put money in tax shelters, so they paid no where near 90%.

As for the $60 a week in 1943, that would be equivlent to the pay of a job that pays $15+ an hr today when one takes inflation into account. Also the median housing to median income ratio was far more narrow then than it is today. The ratio of median family income to median priced housing was around 2.3 in the early 60s, it is over 4 today.

Take that ratio into account, plus higher medical costs and so on, the picture doesnt look so good.


144 posted on 03/25/2006 10:43:09 PM PST by RFT1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: jec41
People don't realize that the standard of living is far higher today than it was in the 50's and 60's. If you were to take the average "poor" family today with all their possessions and pop them back into the 50's they'd be considered middle class if not wealthy.

Most people today would refuse to live the way most everyone lived back then.

There is a cost though. It takes more working time to support it.

If one was really willing to live like those in the 50's I think they could do it pretty easily today with only the husband working. No eating out, no cable, no satellite, no VCR's, no DVD's, no CD's, no cell phones, no TV, no air conditioning, one car (if any), no dishwasher, no cloths dryer (back to the clothesline), no many of the things we take for granted today... Things that we demand to have today... And have to pay for...
145 posted on 03/25/2006 10:44:15 PM PST by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: RFT1

How old are you?


146 posted on 03/25/2006 10:44:59 PM PST by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: jec41

So you want to invest in Red China? At times economics should take a back seat to morals, but I guess that doesnt matter to some people.

Anyways, your short sighted views will cost you in your wallet because at the rate things are going, with uncontrolled immigration and job outsourceing, my guess is there is going to be a huge shift in national politics, and you will be hit with higher taxes.


147 posted on 03/25/2006 10:45:38 PM PST by RFT1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Old_Mil

"You're absolutely right. Buying Chinese goods today is no different than buying Volkswagens would have been in 1942."

You're absolutely wrong. We are not at war with China. We were at war with Germany in 1942. I know you are just aching for war, but let's not forget reality and get ahead of ourselves.


148 posted on 03/25/2006 10:47:05 PM PST by buglemanster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

I don't like the "working man" thing either, I used it in a mocking way. we are too fluid a society to have fixed groups like, the working man, the poor, the rich etc., in this country you can move in and out of those categories throughout your life.For instance you are probably headed for financial success.

"That detail aside, I won't buy either of the example products. In Robert Kiyosaki's "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" parlance, these things are non-essential "doo dads". A terrible way to invest your hard earned money. Raising the price higher just makes them more expensive "doo dads" that are less worthy of purchase. I'm happy to "do without" such items. I would rather invest that money into something that will pay me in the future.'


I worry when some Americans believe , we have to stop here,now, if we don't, our success as a nation will end. The Soviet Union is gone but Red China is still there, I would like to let them fight us on this new battle field of capitalism, we have experience on this battle field, and we have a good chance of profiting from this new war. Talk about drawing someone onto your own battlefield.


149 posted on 03/25/2006 10:48:13 PM PST by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: DB

CDs, DVDs, ect are TOYs, disposable items, nothing more, nothig less, tyhey are not the core items(housing, medical, fuel, food) that people need. Not to mention the items you listed are items people purchase once every 5-10 years.

The middle class is far more squeezed now than it was in the 50s, 60s or even 70s and 80s.


150 posted on 03/25/2006 10:49:50 PM PST by RFT1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: DB

As per your web page, I like my privacy.


151 posted on 03/25/2006 10:50:31 PM PST by RFT1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Capitalism can work quite well under an authoritarian system, just look at Singapore for example(and South Korea well into the 80s could be considered authoritarian as well). There is no evidence that Capitalism will weaken Chinas govrenmnet, none what so ever, and in fact, it has made their hand quite a bit stronger.


152 posted on 03/25/2006 10:53:17 PM PST by RFT1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: jec41
If we want to stay prosperous we are going to have to improve education.

You can start by firing all the Indian and Chinese engineers and re-hiring the US citizens who were forced to train their own replacements...on the grounds that there was a "severe shortage" of qualified technically competent people.

If the Americans were so under qualified, why were THEY the ones who had to train in the H1-B's?

Executives lie through their teeth every chance they get.

153 posted on 03/25/2006 10:58:01 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
"When we have lost all capacity to manufacture anything anymore, will we design our armed forces on Lenovo computers?"

Our business problems are not the fault of anyone other than our short sighted companies. A good business will succeed as long as it make the right decisions and continually plans and operates to be the best.

Just low prices will NOT sell you to success. Japanese cars in virtually every segment are and have been the most expensive. Japanese and Taiwanese electronics are often the most expensive in their category. They gain market share on quality not just price.

We can not legislate good business practices. Taxes will just go to grow more government to buy more votes. Surcharges are taxes. Our business problems are not the doing of outsiders but reside within failed business plans and practices internally.

Surcharges (TAXES!) will not fix that. Taxes have NEVER fixed any business problem. NEVER.
154 posted on 03/25/2006 11:01:20 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RFT1


"
Capitalism can work quite well under an authoritarian system, just look at Singapore for example(and South Korea well into the 80s could be considered authoritarian as well). There is no evidence that Capitalism will weaken Chinas govrenmnet, none what so ever, and in fact, it has made their hand quite a bit stronger."


None of that has anything to do with my post of course.


155 posted on 03/25/2006 11:05:03 PM PST by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: 4rcane

The myth that the Smoot Hawley tariffs caused the great depression. This country should raise its revenue from tariffs on imports, that would reduce the price of American goods because cost would be lower without taxes on individuals and companies. Manufacturing would flow back to this country, in order to take advantage of lower cost of doing business. It would make American products on par with those who use slaves to make their goods. Of course, we could just allow more slaves into this country to pick our cotton (er I mean lettuce) cheaply.


156 posted on 03/25/2006 11:07:32 PM PST by jeremiah (How much did we get for that rope?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Number57
>>The Durabrand 10-inch portable DVD player available at Wal-Mart retails for $199.94. A group of senators would like to raise the price to $254.67.

>I wholly agree with the tariffs. We need to keep American products competitive

Pray tell, exactly where can I purchase a DVD player made in the U.S.? There are no U.S DVD-player factories to protect.

157 posted on 03/25/2006 11:08:40 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Pray tell, exactly where can I purchase a DVD player made in the U.S.

My point EXACTLY.
158 posted on 03/25/2006 11:10:38 PM PST by Number57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Shawnlaw

"Isn't Korea taking over some of these electronics manufacturing from China (who got it from Japan)?"

Yes and it is part of the normal business cycle. Japanese cars and Taiwanese electronics items are now often the most expensive on the shelves. They sell better than U.S. brands because of better quality and design.

Price DOES NOT equal long term sales success! You can not try to make American companies better by taxing their competitors.

They actually get weaker because they now take any resultant income out of the business sooner. If folks want to legislate anything it should be a reinvestment law because the U.S. companies have been too short sighted.

When they stop business planning by the quarter, and start planning by the decade or half century their products they offer the consumer will regain the market.

Not before.


159 posted on 03/25/2006 11:13:36 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Number57

Home >> Business
UPDATED: 13:14, February 24, 2005
China makes efforts to balance international payments



China's foreign exchange regulator has tightened controls on local importers' trade financing that lead to foreign liabilities.

In the latest move to balance its international payments, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) issued a circular on Tuesday, requiring importers to report deals exceeding US$500,000 that are dated before March 1, but with the payment scheduled 90 days later.

The importers must report to the local bureau of the SAFE before the end of April, and submit the required documents including customs clearance certificates and contracts.

For such import deals with a delivery date after March 1, the importers need to report to SAFE 60 days after the delivery date.

Postponed import payments constitute virtual foreign debts, which need tighter supervision as they fall into the category of capital account, the administration says.

The Chinese currency, the renminbi, is convertible under the current account, which typically covers trade, but only partially convertible under the capital account.

"The implementation of the circular will help prevent import payment funds under the current account from becoming short-term foreign debt under the capital account, and is an important step to promote balanced international payments," SAFE said in a statement.

Growing numbers of postponed import payments and export advances in recent years have already caused a rapid rise in China's short-term debts, a trend SAFE has vowed to closely monitor.

Chinese importers increasingly opted for late payments while exporters found advance payments more desirable, largely as a result of expectations that the renminbi will appreciate, and interest rate differentials between local and foreign currency deposits.

Market speculation about an appreciation in the renminbi remains unabated this year, as China's trading partners continue to push for revaluation.

China's outstanding foreign debts reversed a downward trend since 1999 in the first half of 2003, and the proportion of short-term liabilities rose rapidly. Regulators attributed the trend to statistical adjustments that included trade-related credit and foreign liabilities of foreign financial institutions operating in China as part of foreign debt.

A policy-triggered borrowing craze by foreign banks operating in China further pushed up growth in the nation's short-term foreign debts last year.

China's new foreign debts in the first three quarters of last year surged 71.27 per cent to US$124.1 billion, slowing from a frenzied 97.80 per cent increase recorded for the first half of the year, SAFE statistics indicated.

The nation's total outstanding foreign debts were US$223.4 billion at the end of September last year, up 15.31 per cent year-on-year, it said.

Chinese regulators insist the increases in foreign debts pose no threat to the nation's financial security, thanks to its massive foreign exchange reserves, which stood at US$609.9 billion at the end of last year.

But the rapid increases in forex reserves, partly due to speculation-driven capital inflows, have also complicated the Chinese monetary authorities' efforts to contain the growth of bank credit.


160 posted on 03/25/2006 11:15:01 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 321-322 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson