[khelus]

... Even by your arguments, that high tariffs would bring back jobs from China, this would leave the Chinese workers unemployed, and starving to death. Whether or not higher tariffs here would prevent gross environmental damage in China is questionable. ...

Score one for the inroads of cultural marxism and redistribution of wealth! I was unaware that it was incumbent upon american workers to happily hand over their jobs and income so that Chinese workers don't starve.

... It's not a zero sum game. Just because there is a rising standard of living in China, or they produce more stuff doesn't mean that we have to produce less. ...

While it need not be a zero sum game, it's set up as one.

To repeat, even in the absence of onerous regulation, there is no way in the world any American worker can compete with neo-slaves in China who makes $.32 / hour, i.e. unless America's standard of living devolves to that of the third world.

You continue to siddle by Chinese trade practices which include under special WTO rules as regards tariffs and sundry other gimmicks to restrict imports.

[ALPAPilot]

You continue to siddle by Chinese trade practices which include under special WTO rules as regards tariffs and sundry other gimmicks to restrict imports.

Milton Friedman:

http://doc.cat-v.org/economics/milton_friedman/the_case_for_free_trade

A fourth argument, one that was made by Alexander Hamilton and continues to be repeated down to the present, is that free trade would be fine if all other countries practiced free trade but that, so long as they do not, the United States cannot afford to. This argument has no validity whatsoever, either in principle or in practice. Other countries that impose restrictions on international trade do hurt us. But they also hurt themselves. Aside from the three cases just considered, if we impose restrictions in turn, we simply add to the harm to ourselves and also harm them as well. Competition in masochism and sadism is hardly a prescription for sensible international economic policy! Far from leading to a reduction in restrictions by other countries, this kind of retaliatory action simply leads to further restrictions.

To repeat, even in the absence of onerous regulation, there is no way in the world any American worker can compete with neo-slaves in China who makes $.32 / hour, i.e. unless America's standard of living devolves to that of the third world.

To repeat, there wages are based on their productivity, our wages are based on our productivity.

China's GDP is around $7.3 Trillion or about $7,000 per person

The U.S. GDP is around $15 Trillion or about $50,000 per person

I was unaware that it was incumbent upon american workers to happily hand over their jobs and income so that Chinese workers don't starve.

I believe you were lamenting the lot of the chinese worker. I was just pointing out that tariffs would not help them.

Corporate leaders now define themselves as citizens of the world, not of the US. They chase maximum short term profits, using the cheapest labor in conditions that lack even minimal standards regarding safety, working conditions, or passing on the costs of production through gross environmental destruction.

Tariffs are harmful to us. Here is more Milton Friedman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0pl_FXt0eM

I've never heard these arguments successfully rebutted. I'll take the micro-economic argument over the macro-economic argument any day.