Posted on 03/09/2016 3:43:27 AM PST by expat_panama
...when making laws or economic decisions, it is imperative that we examine not only what is seen but also what is unseen. In other words, examine the whole picture...
...A concrete example was the Bush administration’s 8% to 30% tariffs in 2002 on several types of imported steel. They were levied in an effort to protect jobs in the ailing U.S. steel industry.
Those tariffs caused the domestic price for some steel products, such as hot-rolled steel, to rise by as much as 40%....
...there is no such thing as a free lunch...
...steel-users — such as the U.S. auto industry, its suppliers, heavy construction equipment manufacturers and others — were harmed by higher steel prices.
It is estimated that the steel tariffs caused at least 4,500 job losses in no fewer than 16 states, with more than 19,000 jobs lost in California, 16,000 in Texas and about 10,000 each in Ohio, Michigan and Illinois.
In other words, industries that use steel were forced to pay higher prices...
...back in 2002, the typical hourly wage of a steelworker ranged between $15 and $20, in addition to fringe benefits — so we might be talking about an annual wage package averaging $50,000 to $55,000 — how much sense did it make for American consumers to have to pay $800,000 in higher prices, not to mention lost employment in steel-using industries, to save each job?
It would have been cheaper to tax ourselves and give each of those 1,700 steelworkers a $100,000 annual check...
...When Congress creates a special privilege for some Americans, it must of necessity come at the expense of other Americans...
...Congress ought to get out of the miracle business and leave miracle-making up to God.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
We need to lower the 500,000,000,000 dollar a year trade deficit with China. Do you agree? It’s a problem. I was picking on China because they are the worst offender. I think tax and regulatory reform is also needed for companies back home. Eliminating the EPA sounds good. Bottom line, we need to have access to China’s markets, and other countries, like they have to ours. I don’t think that is happening right now.
That is the way it works. It works BOTH WAYS.
By now there should have been a populist revolt, a general upheaval, and Free Traitors™ should have all been sent to the gallows. But we are to “civilized” for that so we slowly fade off into history like the Roman Empire.
FedGov™, Hillary, the Cheap Labor Express and all the Establishment love fools like you. The gloBULList piss on you and you relish in stench.
Yeah riiiiight, the Revolutionary War was fought against British Mercantilism and all the founding fathers were protectionists. If you were alive then they'd spit in your face while they prepared the noose for your sorry butt.
Ok, where are the corporations lobbying for tariffs then? Hmm?
Your grasp of history is beyond pathetic. The Boston Tea Party was motivated by people tired of paying tariffs/taxes and being told what products they had to purchase. That you would try and use one of the most important events leading to the American revolution to promote tariffs and telling people what products they have to purchase is pretty damn funny. That you totally miss the irony is also comical.
You might note that the American patriots that dumped the tea into Boston Harbor called themselves the Sons of Liberty. I suppose we should call you theDictator of Dependence
Embargo? Is that your newest idea?
But every factory in the USA has excess capacity to some extent. In the auto industry there is a lot of excess capacity.
Maybe not anymore. That's why they lost so much before and during the crisis. Maybe 1rudeboy can discuss capacity?
So after the initial shock more shifts are added and domestic production increases and prices go down.
Yes, at some point the $10,000 car tariff would boost domestic production and maybe we'd end up with cars $5000-$8000 more expensive than before?
So even if you never bought a foreign car in your life, the tariff would still cost you money.
If traitorous King George III butt boys had had their way in 1776 we'd would have been a agrarian colony of GB well into the 19th century, or perhaps longer. The colonies would have missed the industrial revolution and Hitler would have won WWII.
So your solution is to cut imports. And if China retaliates in kind?
I think tax and regulatory reform is also needed for companies back home.
Tax reform in the form of taxing imports doesn't make a lot of sense. And what regulations are you planning on repealing?
Eliminating the EPA sounds good.
Is you goal to have air like Beijing and water like that in the Yangtze River?
Bottom line, we need to have access to China’s markets, and other countries, like they have to ours.
How will doing away with the EPA accomplish that?
You seem incapable of any kind of academic or theoretical discussion. You've done this before. Why are you like that? It is weird and makes discussion with you devolve into mud throwing contests.
You have no vision. You are a binary thinker. The EPA can be replaced by an agency that is not trying to regulate the last part per million of CO2. It is out of control. So the choice is not between either an out of control fed bureaucracy run amok and absolutely no environmental controls. Jeez. Obviously, the absence of draconian regs will create a friendlier business environment and give businesses an incentive to stay here. Tax breaks that would be similar to what they might enjoy overseas may help as well. I am just spitballing here. You have to find out WHY they are leaving of course and try to make it easier and more attractive for them to stay. What’s so hard to understand? CHANGE things so they can stay and expand exports that includes negotiating better trade agreements. It is possible to get China to open its markets they obviously have a sweetheart trading relationship with us right now. We have to bring jobs back here. It’s killing us. The specifics of these changes will be written by experts in the field that know what is needed as always is the case with legislation. I sincerely believe that we have the worst trade deals out of any other western country.
Your comment was the first mention of an embargo.
Is that your new recommendation or not?
Are you going to stop claiming that a tariff only impacts people who buy the tariffed product, or have we cleared up that particular confusion?
Mud-throwing? On a free trade thread with you present? On my FR?
I can’t speak for excess capacity. But a plant making pickup trucks can’t just magically begin making compact cars.
Listen moron, we do not have free market trade...we have stupid trade...it is all one sided against our employers and workers. Trumps ideas are good strategy...to get us closer to real free trade which is the goal. But, it will take a multi-dimensional strategy that includes taxation for our businesses and regulatory relief as well. He will also allow money (trillions) to come back into the US as investment capital by removing the huge penalties associated with doing that now.
You limp minded one dimensional thinkers only think on one side of a multi-dimensional problem then simply cannot grasp what is counter to your limited knowledge.
The fact that you do not know the details just shows your lack of responsibility...you certainly argue against something you know nothing about, but take the time to do a little research? No, that is just too hard. Trump has been talking about his very problem for over 15 years...
Trumps ideas are good strategy...to get us closer to real free trade which is the goal.
Increasing tariffs, despite what he might or might not do otherwise, by 45% is what constitutes stupid trade. Maybe that's why he's been busy walking it back and has been unable to explain what he really wants or means. Increasing taxes, as you say, and providing regulatory relief is only half good. So, yeah, it's still stupid trade.
He will also allow money (trillions) to come back into the US as investment capital by removing the huge penalties associated with doing that now.
Only good idea I've heard from you yet.
You limp minded one dimensional thinkers only think on one side of a multi-dimensional problem then simply cannot grasp what is counter to your limited knowledge.
Again, if you or Trump could provide some real specifics about the plan we might be able to look at it from some other perspective than what the hell is he talking about?
The fact that you do not know the details just shows your lack of responsibility
What are you talking about? You're an economics maven but cannot explain to me in any detail what it is exactly Trump is going to do other than increase some taxes while lowering others and slapping 45% tariffs on imports of companies he thinks are screwing the country. From his comments he's also going to get tough with the Chinese by threatening a trade war with them. Yeah, they'll cave because he's The Donald. Just like the military is going to carry out illegal orders because he's a leader.
I've looked at Trumps trade strategy, such as it is, and it is a mess of constantly moving parts without any coherent plans based on what we know to be legitimate economic principles. Again, I was hoping you'd be the one to fill in the gaps, but you're as confused and ignorant as Trump when it comes to trade. Thanks for nothing.
Now, our little protectionist buddy from VA thinks the founders would have strung all of us “butt boys” up from the nearest tree.
That he misses the irony in what he says is truly comical.
What can you do with someone like that?
Seems to be the Dunning–Kruger effect at work. Maybe he’ll look it up but I doubt it’ll do any good.
You know, you really need to get out of the 1800s.
In FY2015, total US federal tax revenue from all sources was about 3.25 trillion.
How much of that was from tariffs-duties-customs charges?
About 35 billion.
That’s about 1% of total federal revenue. A hair over. 1.08%.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2017/assets/hist02z1.xls
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2017/assets/hist02z5.xls
Let’s go back to 1950. 407 million in tariffs. Out of 39.4 billion total revenue.
How about that? 1.03%
The more things change, the more they stay the same, eh? Those 1% or so numbers are headed slowly toward zero over the next 50-100 years whether you like it or not.
Yeah, they jiggle around a little from year to year, but they’re coming down from 5% in 1940. You know, the hangover from Smoot-Hawley.
Why? Everyone in the world understands that tariffs are counter-productive and make everyone worse off. Which is why tariff percentages have been in a relentless downtrend for 80 years.
Face it. You can blather on ad infinitum and ad nauseam but we’re not going back to a tariff-based tax collection system. We’ve gotten rid of 80+% of it and we’re working on the remnants.
Not to mention that we’re not dumb enough to kill world trade with idiotic tariffs that result in every economy taking a hit, perhaps 20% in our case, contrary to what you may think.
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.