“I’ll be watching to see if the price of Oreo’s or Carrier Air Conditioners goes down with eager anticipation.”
How does a “conservative” justify interring in the business decisions of a private enterprise? What if Carrier discovered a new manufacturing technology that resulted in similar output with less labor. Should the government ban that technology to save jobs? If it should not, then why not?
“How does a “conservative” justify interring in the business decisions of a private enterprise? What if Carrier discovered a new manufacturing technology that resulted in similar output with less labor. Should the government ban that technology to save jobs? If it should not, then why not?”
If the price doesn’t come down, then corps are pocketing the difference (which was my original point) and the consumer is no better off, be it by offshoring or automation. Unemployed consumers probably won’t care anyway. If corps want to continue exploiting lower costs countries with lax environmental laws, you’re right, how does a conservative justify interfering. Maybe we can’t. But hopefully we’ll figure something out by the time the entire country is an empty shell like Detroit.
The same way we justify banning the sale of crystal meth, weapons grade radioactive elements or dismembered babies.
The market is a mechanism. We judge what is a moral or practical use of that mechanism and what is not.
You just admitted that the consumer will see no benefit. Thanks
The taxpayer is now on the hook for laid off workers. Hopefully this is temporary for them.