Nothing big government here. Big government is big spending. Big spending is what leads to big taxing. I would never have a tax increase without cutting another tax at least as much.
We know that trade surpluses are bad in the long term. It's inefficient; just look at Japan and Germany. We are now starting to admit the trade deficits have their problems, unemployment and wage erosion to name a couple. What I am suggesting is to find a happy medium with the advantages of both. Have a control system where the tariff rate floats in order to keep as close to possible to 0% trade deficit/surplus.
I don't get why it is natural for a rich country to import more (as a percentage). Can it not produce enough to supply itself? That would be a weird argument since we currently feed a large portion of the world.
A tariff consists of a tax on domestic consumers, by the way.
An indirect tax for most people. It's certainly a lot easier than paying the income tax, and a lot less frequent. Something has to be taxed, and tariffs are a lot easier to deal with.
Thanks for the article. I have read some Limbaugh, but he is much better on the topic of law, instead of policy. Here is where his argument broke down for me:
"Buyers of such products would have extra money to spend on other things. The demand for other items would go up, as would employment in enterprises producing those items. Of course, it would take time to absorb the now unemployed steelworkers. However, to balance that effect, workers in other industries who had been unemployed would find jobs available. There need be no net loss of employment, and there would be a gain in output because workers no longer needed to produce steel would be available to produce something else."
Up to this point he was talking facts, now he is injecting theory which sounds logical. But the reality is that steel workers did not become software engineers. Maybe a couple did, but their jobs just got shipped off to India, or a Chinese national was imported to do their job instead. I know you guys are supply siders, but what about demand? It is the other half of the equation. Where is demand when you have perpetual unemployent?