Posted on 05/09/2009 12:47:21 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
Yesterday I happened upon a post by a fellow FReeper. In retrospect, I am sorry for responding rudely to their post - and I hope they happen upon this apology.
The post was presenting their heartfelt opinion that American industry and our system itself must be allowed to come apart so that something better can replace it.
It was a Rand-ian position. The system is becoming oppressive, therefore we must weaken it.
Again:
没有数字。
Come to think of it, what are the metrics for determining what the "average tariff" is for purposes of the question?
Their craven silence in the face of it. Feel free to break that silence.
I see. Well, he has stated that he doesn't have the number, which means he doesn't know the answer to the question. So what's the malfunction?
OK so you do not know the answer. Thus your claim that Reagan increased tariffs is suspect; thank you.
Silence? Then what the heck are we talking about?
Well, he keeps claiming that Reagan increased tariffs, but has yet been able to show that is the case! We see that Reagan apparently increased the number of tariffs, but that says nothing about the amount of tariffs.
If the Federal Government doubled the number of taxes it levied, but cut the rate of all taxes by 90%, I’d be a VERY happy person!
Please get me up to speed, here: so is the number we’re talking about, that we are not talking about, not the answer to the question, and the answer to the question not known? I think I’m getting a grasp on it . . . .
Rather like your claim that Reagan was the anti-Christ.
Moreover, this CNN number that we are not talking about, that we are talking about, that is not the answer to the question, also is not in dispute? By anyone?
Heh, no problem. Mojave and a lot of the anti-capitalist protectionists like to run circles to try to confuse you...
Essentially, Mojave is trying to bluster that Reagan used tariffs to increase protection of the US as a whole. That number he keeps bandying about relates to the total number of tariffs applied but NOT the amount of tariff funds collected!
Toddsterpatriot asked Mojave for the average tariff applied; the typical tariff tax rate.
Mojave - not knowing the answer, and apparently too insecure to state as much - answered a different question. He answered about the number of tariffs in effect. An entirely DIFFERENT question, and one that doesn’t bear any application to the question at hand.
Classic spin - when asked a question that you either do not know the answer for, or that such answer will destroy your position, you substitute an answer for a seemingly similar question that altogether is irrelevant.
It would be like me asking did you like your bacon and eggs at breakfast, and you reply “when I sat down and smelled the bacon and drank the juice, and had the pancakes it was great”.
Your answer did not address my question, and in fact says NOTHING about the bacon and eggs! But it sounds “close enough” that you can hope I will infer/conclude you actually did enjoy the bacon and eggs.
Great! So hypothetically if 12% of imported products had a 10% tariff on them, then 8 years later 12% of imported products had a 10% tariff on them and an additional 8% of imported products had a 5% tariff on them, have "average tariffs" risen or fallen?
“Of the $387 billion in goods the U.S. imported in 1986, more than 20% was protected by special tariffs, quotas, or other types of restraints, according to Gary C. Hufbauer, a Georgetown University professor. When Reagan took office, the figure was 12%.”
Citation or link, please. Or you can go ahead and admit this was hyperbole and apologize.
So now Reagan is an "anti-capitalist" protectionist?
As surely as a dog returns to its vomit, there you go....
Let’s say that, in 1980 the average tariff was 10%; in 1986 the average tariff was 5%. What was the effective tariff rate in 1986, given that the tariff rate was cut in half, but applied to 20% more products?
Citation and link, please. Please prove I stated that, or admit it was hyperbole and apologize.
Personal attacks are the realm of a small mind. I think you should read my tagline once again:
Right after you provide the link to my "suspect" claim "that Reagan increased tariffs."
Don't like the taste of your own medicine, eh?
How's it going, Tiny?
Total number of products with tariffs under A = 10.
Total number of products with tariffs under B = 15.
Someone please check my math, I don't have my calculator (and I don't bother with the internet ones).
I already asked you to explain your term.
Again:
...what are the metrics for determining what the "average tariff" is for purposes of the question?
Is it measured against all imported products or only those subjected to tariff.
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.