Posted on 03/13/2016 9:33:18 AM PDT by impimp
"But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade."
-- Karl Marx
Adolf Hitler was also known to be a major advocate for dental hygiene. Does that mean that people who brush their teeth are Nazis.
I agree with your post 100%. But the Free Traitors™ will deny it and say this is none of your business what and who gets the profit. The only way way are going to get rid of Free Traitors™ is to marginalize them and make sure that no political touches them again. They should form their own little fringe "Free Trade" party that all will ignore every election day. They really could throw in with the libertarians a lot of common kookiness there. Free Traitors™ are really a tiny sliver of society, but extremely dangerous. Douche bags all and have as much mental baggage as any stark raving Fascist from the 1930's.
I'm sure that makes sense....to you.
If you’re going to eliminate the income tax and the various intrusive regulatory regimes, a case can be made that the benefit from doing that would be so great that it would more than make up for the economic hindrance of a tariff. (And the government has to be funded somehow.) But Trump isn’t talking about eliminating the income tax.
As for history, in the early days of the US, the tariff was low (5-15%), and it was essentially the only source of Federal revenue for a very small central government (there were some excise taxes, but they totaled very little). Later on, in the 19th century, the tariff went up and down due to the same kinds of political disagreements that we are seeing today.
Needless to say, though, the world is more interconnected now than it was in the past, so the negative effect of a tariff is greater. And the tariff levels that Trump has been talking about are much higher than the 5-15% that the US had in place in the early days of the country.
In any case, protectionism is one type of central government control over what should be individually-made economic decisions. Centralized economic planning does not work.
If Trump or Sanders is elected and puts serious roadblocks in the way of economic activity, expect a recession or depression to ensue. This will hurt most the people you want to help, who are doing poorly already.
A 20% tariffs balance the budget tomorrow and it hastens repatriation of industry. It stops cold any more Carriers, Ford and Nabisco from off shoring to Asia. Unfortunately we are stuck we SHAFTA until President Trump finds a way to void it out.
When you buy something from overseas, you are paying in US dollars. Those US dollars have to come back to the US at some point, because US dollars can’t be used to make purchases in Mexico, China, or wherever.
If those US dollars are never repatriated, then we’ve gotten the imports for free. Of course, they will be repatriated at some point. So we’re essentially getting goods from foreign countries now on the promise of sending goods to those foreign countries at some time in the future. This is actually a good deal for the US.
Thank you for actually generating a thoughtful post. It has been a relatively rare thing lately here on good old FR.
But I must correct a couple of misconceptions that you have about my views:
1. I do not consider that Freepers are "Low Information Voters". That's simply not true. Dems, however, do qualify for that designation.
OTOH very few of us here at FR have a Doctorate in Economics. That certainly applies to me and I suspect you as well. So we are all making our arguments about tariffs and such to a large extent from the seat of our pants based on what we've read and our personal experience.
2. I agree with you about Free Trade and, at least in my case and I think yours, believe with certainty that it can never be achieved. Even if the U.S. allowed it some or most or even all of our trading partners won't. So it's a goal that is unachievable.
Back to the real subject of your Post: Trump. I'm expect to vote for Trump in November. I hope he beats Kasich tomorrow but I fear he won't. I would like to see Ted Cruz win the election in November but I really don't expect to.
But, as you know, I have a vastly different view of the trade economics espoused by Trump and, I believe, most Freepers. The two ideas that he has discussed many times while wildly popular here at FR are simply wrong headed. They just are.
Trump Idea 1: Stop Ford from building a factory in Mexico. Really? Sell fewer Fords to the Mexicans? Increase the cost of Fords to Americans? Do we really want to give the President of the United States the power to decide things like that? Particularly when we may have a President Schumer in our future. I think not. I think Ford management should make that decision.
Trump Idea 2: Add a 47% Federal Sales Tax to some or perhaps all imported Chinese goods. We call that a tariff but it's really just a sales tax. That is supposed to generate jobs in this country, make the Chinese start buying more of our stuff and improve the lifestyle and happiness of all Americans.
It wont.
If you have the time take a look at a couple of YouTube videos. Both include short comments about tariffs and the Balance of Trade by Milton Friedman. The first also includes comments in favor of tariffs by the well known Presidential Candidate: Donald Trump.
I'm a Milton Friedman fan. I think he understood trade and economics better than anyone over the period of my lifetime. He is worth studying. And the following short videos should help explain why.
Unless you are unemployed.
Well making them in Mexico and shipping them back to the USA certainly didn't make the cheaper. LOLOLOLOL.
All of you Free Traitors™ are in for a rude awakening. It is you that are the fringe lunatics.
Go Trump, go!
But even if that is not the case it is up to Ford to decide how to build cars and where to build them. They will always operate in a manner that strengtens Ford Motor Company. THAT IS A GOOD THING FOR YOU AND ME. We need GM and Ford to be strong and competitive in the world markets. They employ thousands of Amercans. Do you really want Washington D.C. making policy decisions for Ford? Really? Do you? Even Donald Trump? I don't think so.
What does that mean? That makes no sense? Gibberish. Can't read the rest....
Yes...I am an advocate for a protectionist trade policy. Most Freepers agree with me.
“This is actually a good deal for the US.”
By all means, you need to contact the 1400 people who were crying over losing their jobs at Carrier and explain to them that they are actually better off. Same with Ford, same with Nabisco, same with the millions of Americans whose jobs and factories have been moved outside the United States.
And you can explain that also to all those 50-plus people who have lost their jobs and will never get another one.
Hell, what is all the fuss about then?
Could it be theory colliding with reality?
Right and that’s us shooting ourselves in the foot because China shoots themselves in the foot. Pretty stupid.
This assumes that the level of imports stays the same (static accounting), which is nonsense. In fact, putting a tariff in place would cause the level of imports to drop (that's the whole point, isn't it?). With significantly lower import levels, you wouldn't generate anything close to the amount you'd need to balance the budget.
Business costs of course always include labor costs. That is why minimum wage is on the list of UNCONSTITUTIONAL federal interference that must go.
It would be smart to start at 5% and raise it 5% per year until 20% is reached.
PS: We are Free Trading ourselves in Communism, thanks to you and your ilk.
I am not a free trader. But I would like to point out that your Confederate ancestors were fanatical free traders.
My Puritan/Federalist/Whig/Republican ideological ancestors were supporting the protective tariff when Jeffersonian/Jacksonian Democrats (and the Cleveland and Bourbon Democrats who succeeded them) were screaming their heads off against it.
"Confederates" who support protectionism are not Confederates.
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.