Posted on 03/25/2006 8:07:17 PM PST by ncountylee
The Durabrand 10-inch portable DVD player available at Wal-Mart retails for $199.94. A group of senators would like to raise the price to $254.67. The Creative Zen Nano Plus 512-megabyte MP3 player seems like a bargain at $89.72; less so at $114.39, the price the senators would prefer that you pay. The price hikes would be the result of a 27.5 percent tariff on goods imported from China, a proposal sponsored by Democrat Chuck Schumer of New York and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and is scheduled to come up for a vote in the Senate this week.
Schumer and Graham aren't crazy, of course—they know better than most that taking money out of voters' pockets is a sure way to be sent packing. In other words, that 27.5 percent price hike won't be coming to a retailer near you anytime soon. But as an attention-getter, it's pretty good, and attention is what the two senators, and a number of colleagues who support them, are after. The chief bogeyman they want to flog is China's communist government, which—according to Schumer and the rest—deliberately keeps its currency undervalued in order to sell more cheap imports to the United States and other countries. Reasonable economists differ on that question. The tariff, if you buy the argument, would bring prices on Chinese imports closer to their unsubsidized value, leveling the playing field for honest tradespeople in, say, New York and South Carolina, who can't possibly produce goods as cheaply as the Chinese and still earn enough wages to buy all the DVD and MP players that they need.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
GM is bleeding cash due to poor sales and enormous health insurance and retirement benefits for their employees. They can't sell assets fast enough. GMAC and ElectroMotive are sold off. They are trying to buy off 113,000 employees if they can. They are desperate. I don't see them surviving as a company. Too many overly generous deals cut with the unions.
So you think familes with both parents who work is a good thing? Frankly, I have no problem with married men with familes getting more pay. As for the 90% tax rate in the 50s, that applied to very few people, and most of them put money in tax shelters, so they paid no where near 90%.
As for the $60 a week in 1943, that would be equivlent to the pay of a job that pays $15+ an hr today when one takes inflation into account. Also the median housing to median income ratio was far more narrow then than it is today. The ratio of median family income to median priced housing was around 2.3 in the early 60s, it is over 4 today.
Take that ratio into account, plus higher medical costs and so on, the picture doesnt look so good.
How old are you?
So you want to invest in Red China? At times economics should take a back seat to morals, but I guess that doesnt matter to some people.
Anyways, your short sighted views will cost you in your wallet because at the rate things are going, with uncontrolled immigration and job outsourceing, my guess is there is going to be a huge shift in national politics, and you will be hit with higher taxes.
"You're absolutely right. Buying Chinese goods today is no different than buying Volkswagens would have been in 1942."
You're absolutely wrong. We are not at war with China. We were at war with Germany in 1942. I know you are just aching for war, but let's not forget reality and get ahead of ourselves.
I don't like the "working man" thing either, I used it in a mocking way. we are too fluid a society to have fixed groups like, the working man, the poor, the rich etc., in this country you can move in and out of those categories throughout your life.For instance you are probably headed for financial success.
"That detail aside, I won't buy either of the example products. In Robert Kiyosaki's "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" parlance, these things are non-essential "doo dads". A terrible way to invest your hard earned money. Raising the price higher just makes them more expensive "doo dads" that are less worthy of purchase. I'm happy to "do without" such items. I would rather invest that money into something that will pay me in the future.'
I worry when some Americans believe , we have to stop here,now, if we don't, our success as a nation will end. The Soviet Union is gone but Red China is still there, I would like to let them fight us on this new battle field of capitalism, we have experience on this battle field, and we have a good chance of profiting from this new war. Talk about drawing someone onto your own battlefield.
CDs, DVDs, ect are TOYs, disposable items, nothing more, nothig less, tyhey are not the core items(housing, medical, fuel, food) that people need. Not to mention the items you listed are items people purchase once every 5-10 years.
The middle class is far more squeezed now than it was in the 50s, 60s or even 70s and 80s.
As per your web page, I like my privacy.
Capitalism can work quite well under an authoritarian system, just look at Singapore for example(and South Korea well into the 80s could be considered authoritarian as well). There is no evidence that Capitalism will weaken Chinas govrenmnet, none what so ever, and in fact, it has made their hand quite a bit stronger.
You can start by firing all the Indian and Chinese engineers and re-hiring the US citizens who were forced to train their own replacements...on the grounds that there was a "severe shortage" of qualified technically competent people.
If the Americans were so under qualified, why were THEY the ones who had to train in the H1-B's?
Executives lie through their teeth every chance they get.
"
Capitalism can work quite well under an authoritarian system, just look at Singapore for example(and South Korea well into the 80s could be considered authoritarian as well). There is no evidence that Capitalism will weaken Chinas govrenmnet, none what so ever, and in fact, it has made their hand quite a bit stronger."
None of that has anything to do with my post of course.
The myth that the Smoot Hawley tariffs caused the great depression. This country should raise its revenue from tariffs on imports, that would reduce the price of American goods because cost would be lower without taxes on individuals and companies. Manufacturing would flow back to this country, in order to take advantage of lower cost of doing business. It would make American products on par with those who use slaves to make their goods. Of course, we could just allow more slaves into this country to pick our cotton (er I mean lettuce) cheaply.
>I wholly agree with the tariffs. We need to keep American products competitive
Pray tell, exactly where can I purchase a DVD player made in the U.S.? There are no U.S DVD-player factories to protect.
"Isn't Korea taking over some of these electronics manufacturing from China (who got it from Japan)?"
Yes and it is part of the normal business cycle. Japanese cars and Taiwanese electronics items are now often the most expensive on the shelves. They sell better than U.S. brands because of better quality and design.
Price DOES NOT equal long term sales success! You can not try to make American companies better by taxing their competitors.
They actually get weaker because they now take any resultant income out of the business sooner. If folks want to legislate anything it should be a reinvestment law because the U.S. companies have been too short sighted.
When they stop business planning by the quarter, and start planning by the decade or half century their products they offer the consumer will regain the market.
Not before.
Home >> Business
UPDATED: 13:14, February 24, 2005
China makes efforts to balance international payments
China's foreign exchange regulator has tightened controls on local importers' trade financing that lead to foreign liabilities.
In the latest move to balance its international payments, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) issued a circular on Tuesday, requiring importers to report deals exceeding US$500,000 that are dated before March 1, but with the payment scheduled 90 days later.
The importers must report to the local bureau of the SAFE before the end of April, and submit the required documents including customs clearance certificates and contracts.
For such import deals with a delivery date after March 1, the importers need to report to SAFE 60 days after the delivery date.
Postponed import payments constitute virtual foreign debts, which need tighter supervision as they fall into the category of capital account, the administration says.
The Chinese currency, the renminbi, is convertible under the current account, which typically covers trade, but only partially convertible under the capital account.
"The implementation of the circular will help prevent import payment funds under the current account from becoming short-term foreign debt under the capital account, and is an important step to promote balanced international payments," SAFE said in a statement.
Growing numbers of postponed import payments and export advances in recent years have already caused a rapid rise in China's short-term debts, a trend SAFE has vowed to closely monitor.
Chinese importers increasingly opted for late payments while exporters found advance payments more desirable, largely as a result of expectations that the renminbi will appreciate, and interest rate differentials between local and foreign currency deposits.
Market speculation about an appreciation in the renminbi remains unabated this year, as China's trading partners continue to push for revaluation.
China's outstanding foreign debts reversed a downward trend since 1999 in the first half of 2003, and the proportion of short-term liabilities rose rapidly. Regulators attributed the trend to statistical adjustments that included trade-related credit and foreign liabilities of foreign financial institutions operating in China as part of foreign debt.
A policy-triggered borrowing craze by foreign banks operating in China further pushed up growth in the nation's short-term foreign debts last year.
China's new foreign debts in the first three quarters of last year surged 71.27 per cent to US$124.1 billion, slowing from a frenzied 97.80 per cent increase recorded for the first half of the year, SAFE statistics indicated.
The nation's total outstanding foreign debts were US$223.4 billion at the end of September last year, up 15.31 per cent year-on-year, it said.
Chinese regulators insist the increases in foreign debts pose no threat to the nation's financial security, thanks to its massive foreign exchange reserves, which stood at US$609.9 billion at the end of last year.
But the rapid increases in forex reserves, partly due to speculation-driven capital inflows, have also complicated the Chinese monetary authorities' efforts to contain the growth of bank credit.
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.