It was tried in early or mid 1900’s and did not work.
‘Kinda sorta’ like raising the minimum wage.
This is a bargaining tactic. We can not get product into China. Or if you do it takes years. The equation must change.
Higher tariffs probably make some sense in certain cases. Not so in others. But one thing is for sure, this country and its workers have been getting repeatedly rolled by “free trade” agreements for over thirty years now.
Tariffs, tariffs, tariffs. ILLEGALS, ILLEGALS, ILLEGALS. MUSLIMS, MUSLIMS, MUSLIMS.... which is worse? Really?
We don’t have “Free Trade” we have “Managed Trade”.
That was a viable position during the Cold War, it is anachronistic now. It time to quit clinging to the dogams of the past and re-examine trade policy
America is losing the international trade war. We are getting cheap products, but our buying power is decreasing. The full effects of this exporting of manufacturing jobs will take a full generation to feel full impact. By then, our middle class will be gone.
Politicians have enriched themselves by yielding to international lobbyist. Trump wont play that game.
Day after day after day the NR shows it’s pro establishment anti voter stripes!
Tariffs tend to not work when it is focused on a specific industry. A broad sweeping series of tariffs covering a broad array of industries, would be likely to be more effective.
Don’t call it a tariff. Call it a “security tax”. Use the money to upgrade our ports, railroads and other infrastructure.
The problem with the National Review is that they took an extreme turn into dementia lland!
NR is useless.
Trump has said repeatedly that he would never really have to impose a tariff on China. He said just announcing it would motivate them to stop manipulating their currency. Trump is not even elected yet and China and Mexico are already squawking.
Trump’s plan is to re-negotiate all of our trade deals so we get a better deal. Then he plans to couple that with lowering the coporate tax to 15% and letting all the offshore money come back for a one time 10% tax. If that does not get us going again nothing will.
The Japanese are the most homogeneous people on the planet, very fond of “consensus building” until you hit a nerve.
Then, instant change.
Trump should try this — “Hey Japan, for every car you ship to America, you first accept an equal number of American cars into Japan.” Pass a law requiring that every taxi cab must be an American car if you must.
Increased tariffs need to be combined with reduced regulation and taxation on American soil. The idea is not to punish other Countries, but to make it easier for these items to be manufactured on American soil, rather than abroad. The same can be said about taxes: Reducing taxes in itself does not bring prosperity. Reduced taxes must be combined with reduced spending.
This assumes a static, rather than dynamic, response to the tariffs.
National Review
Subject: Trump
Action: Round File
It does seem that a real lot of the "saved" money is going into someone else's pockets. Meanwhile, where it isn't going is the pockets of US workers.
Globalism is a race to the bottom for a very high percentage of world-wide population.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adeKc6dbsI0
Maybe if you heard it right from Trump, you might look at it from a different angle...
I am generally opposed to tariff’s; however, in a “tariff free paradise” we would have a sane, non-corrupt regulatory environment, we would not allow countries using slave labor, government subsidies and currency manipulation to bludgeon American workers into submission to the “cheap labor express”. Also, free trade does not require multi-thousand page trade agreements (NAFTA for example). We do not have free trade in any respect. We have managed trade stacked in favor of establishment clients. Lately, I haven’t heard any free traders objecting to tariff’s on cane sugar or sugar based ethanol imports. BTW, I have been an academic and industry economist for over 45 years, my opinion isn’t strictly based on emotion.
Make it here, hire Americans => NO TARIFF
The author sounds pro-foreign labor.