Posted on 02/28/2022 5:57:13 AM PST by Kaslin
That really begs the question: Are Conservatives somehow required to support free trade?
Other countries don't support free trade. It's not a level playing field if we avoid tariffs and have to embrace "free trade" while our trading partners use the power of their government to create favorable conditions for their local industry.
My view of Conservatism is that I support tariffs and I oppose free trade, given how the rest of the world behaves.
Conservatives do support tariffs, for countries other than America.
Tariffs have been around since America was a nation, why should opposing them be considered ‘conservative’?
Its the same with knee jerk support for unlimited immigration and for big corporations. Someone somewhere along the line convinced conservatives their unquestioned support was a prerequisite.
(I)n 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.That ought to answer at least one question about supporting free trade per se. Marx was proven right at least on that score, but within a certain scope.
— Karl Marx, 1848
President Trump needed to renegotiate a lot of pi$$ poor trade agreements. His use of tariffs was a brilliant way to move the negotiating starting point away from the status quo.
Contrary to all the pearl clutching “Free Trade at any Cost” types, used in this way tariffs DID work.
no
Americans live in the world, not under rocks.
If Americans wanted tariffs we would have them on a large scale
America does in fact have tariffs. For instance, the current tariff on sheep and goats is 15.1%
Doing away with tariffs? You can’t do it. The people who have the authority to do them are ignorant about economics. They have no clue. But if they did talk about them with any foreign entity, they would say “we’re gonna impose sanctions OK?”
Then laughing starts. It’s like VP invading his neighbor. We’re not going to do anything. Our president has been saying “we’re gonna do this, ok?” to bullies his whole life. He’s demanding with weak people whom taffies do not affect. He’s a bully.
But impose tariffs?
This is a make gelieve piece.
free trade penalizes that place with the highest cost of labor. Great for just about everywhere but the US.
It’s almost impossible to be this wrong.
Tariffs are ultimately a tax on the consumer. The foreign producer may end up exporting less but they don’t pay a penny of the tariff.
Tariffs are an attempt to use taxes to implement industrial policy and they’re a very inefficient tool.
Imposing tariffs?
Need coffee
You can’t do it. The people who have the authority to do them are ignorant about economics. They have no clue. But if they did talk about them with any foreign entity, they would say “we’re gonna impose sanctions OK?”
Then laughing starts. It’s like VP invading his neighbor. We’re not going to do anything. Our president has been saying “we’re gonna do this, ok?” to bullies his whole life. He’s demanding with weak people whom taffies do not affect. He’s a bully.
But impose tariffs?
This is a make believe piece.
Actually, most countries have had significant tariffs on American-made products this whole time. A 200% import tax is surprisingly common around the world.
Politics is the art of telling the big lies. "Free trade" is an economic unicorn that, like communism, has just never been tried by the right people.
2. There is no conservative case -- or ANY rational case -- to be made for tariffs as they are applied here in the U.S. today. If a tariff is adopted, it should apply to all products and commodities imported from any given country. The tariff law for Country X should read as follows: "All products and raw materials imported from Country X will be subject to a Y% tariff." That's it. It's ludicrous to have a situation today where tariff schedules are thousands of pages long because they have exemptions, varying rates for different types of imports, special treatment given to politically-connected industries, etc.
“The conservative argument against tariffs primarily relies on defending free trade.”
This is because the people allowed to make the “conservative” argument aren’t very bright. Your advice, to apply tariffs according to behavior, is something even the dummies should accept.
Why do we allow products made cheaply by slave labor to put Americans out of work? Why do we allow products made cheaply in hazardous working conditions to compete with our products that must be made in compliance with OSHA? Is it “conservative” to tolerate these conditions for others so we can kill US jobs? Not hardly.
Then there are our expensive environmental regulations that we impose to protect “Mother Earth,” which kill our jobs because we buy from places where they pollute the globe for everyone, but can sell their products so much more cheaply.
Seems to me like all those reasons make more sense than any concept of “free trade.” Free trade is an argument fir RINO chumps.
Does Ms. Alexander really not know what a tariff is?
Tariffs help build America so I hardly see how supporting them wouldn’t be considered conservative.
Tariffs come and go. Here is a little info
on existing tariffs. November 16, 2021.
https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/the-total-cost-of-tariffs/
Trump isn’t against free trade - he’s against unfair trade and getting ripped off.
(1) The economic benefits of free trade among nations are as clear as the economic benefits of free trade between our American states or municipalities. Trade reduces poverty.
(2) But economics isn’t everything. Trade may need to be restricted to preserve national independence and to avoid entanglements with totalitarian regimes like China.
There is support for both (1) and (2) in the conservative tent. The trick is to avoid going too far in either direction.
There are two basic economic forces that have been at play since the dawn of human civilization:
1. People and businesses want to pay as little as possible for what they buy.
2. People and businesses want to charge as much as possible for what they sell (and in the case of most people, what they "sell" on a daily basis is their labor).
Combine those two and you have the foundation for every principle of economics.
It's easy to see why slavery has been an institution for all of human history. It's one of those rare things that helps get around the intractable limitations of both these economic forces at the same time.
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.