Over 300 people lose their jobs so that buying power is lost and the "cost" of unemployment and retraining programs is added to the unemployment cost creating a large negative to the economy. Is it really made up by the surplus money by being able to buy cheaper leather goods? I don't see it. Perhaps it's a wash but I don't see a gain.
That's reasonable. In other words, even if I like import tax-cuts, it's wrong if it causes a greater loss elsewhere. I was convinced of the big net gain by seeing the lists of jobs that were created, the increases in pay, and amount that the economy expanded every time these taxes were cut. Please tell us what you'd be willing to accept as proof.
You're right. Government unemployment paychecks and retraining programs probably eat up part or all of the efficiency gain here due to government's inefficiency. I noticed the federal government's "help" when I originally read the post but I decided not to mention it since it only complicates a picture that is difficult enough to comprehend for some folks.
Not to mention that a significant factor making American business costly and inefficient in the first place is excessive government regulation.
Do you see the statistics on the productivity gains of 17% from 2000 to 2004? The stats that our unemployment rate is now back under 5%? they used to call that 'full employment'. The fact that 'outsourcing' is so complained about, yet it is occuring while our economy does VERY WELL ought to tell you something: It ought to tell you that perhaps it is not as harmful as some would have you believe.
Do you ever pay more than you need for a product? If you *did*, would it do the world any good? If someone is makine $20/hr making products that cost $20, why not instead spend $5 on it, let that $20/hr do something else and pay him $15/hr with the money you saved .... net result: You have a higher standard of living!!
"Over 300 people lose their jobs so that buying power is lost and the "cost" of unemployment and retraining programs is added to the unemployment cost creating a large negative to the economy." First, the total buying power is increased overall - the problem is that it is shifted. you talk of "lose their jobs" as if the people can only do one specific thing in life... Well, the steel tariffs were tried to avoid this problem for a bunch of steelworkers ... result? Every job 'saved' cost our economy $500,000. Moreover, the other companies - autos, appliances, etc. got hurt by this ... leading to more cars made in Canada and japan imported here, and lost jobs elsewhere.
Steel tariffs were a lose-lose deal.
Retraining is a temporary cost. Protectionism is a permanent handicap on the economy.