[central_va]

They would turn what industry America still has into another piece of the welfare state. There's simply no need to compete when you have a captive market. There's a reason why the Soviet car industry wasn't the wonder of the world.

What genius said this? You're a real economic Einstein.

[agere_contra]

They would turn what industry America still has into another piece of the welfare state. There's simply no need to compete when you have a captive market. There's a reason why the Soviet car industry wasn't the wonder of the world.

Oh that's your "big reveal". Well - unless you're the proud owner of a Soviet-era car - it looks like I was right about that too.

Post a link to the thread to show context if you think I've been inconsistent.

Tariffs reduce competition inside the tariff wall, leaving customers with a worse deal. Thinking back to the UK in the time of monopoly car-producer British Leyland, tariffs stopped BL from having to compete with those icky foreigners at all.

BL didn't get back on its feet. It stopped trying. The unions knew that the Government had their back.

In summary: when a country has a monopoly producer then tariffs do indeed destroy all competition.

In the meantime I can't help noticing that you continue to evade my question.

Why is Texas doing so well - and California badly - if it's not due to their difference in tax and regulation?

This is the third time of asking. Let readers of the thread see if you'll answer it this time.