Posted on 03/09/2016 6:41:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Claude Frederic Bastiat (1801-50) — a French classical liberal theorist, political economist and member of the French National Assembly — wrote an influential essay titled “That Which Is Seen and That Which Is Not Seen.”
He argued that when making laws or economic decisions, it is imperative that we examine not only what is seen but also what is unseen. In other words, examine the whole picture.
Americans who support tariffs on foreign goods could benefit immensely from Bastiat’s admonition. A concrete example was the Bush administration’s 8% to 30% tariffs in 2002 on several types of imported steel. They were levied in an effort to protect jobs in the ailing U.S. steel industry.
Those tariffs caused the domestic price for some steel products, such as hot-rolled steel, to rise by as much as 40%. The clear beneficiaries of the steel tariffs were steel industry executives and stockholders and the 1,700 or so steelworkers whose jobs were saved.
But there is no such thing as a free lunch or a something-for-nothing machine. Whenever there is a benefit of doing something, there is a guaranteed cost.
A study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, predicted that saving those 1,700 jobs in the steel industry would cost American consumers $800,000 per job, in the form of higher prices. That’s just the monetary side of the picture.
According to a study commissioned by the Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition, steel-users — such as the U.S. auto industry, its suppliers, heavy construction equipment manufacturers and others — were harmed by higher steel prices.
It is estimated that the steel tariffs caused at least 4,500 job losses in no fewer than 16 states, with more than 19,000 jobs lost in California, 16,000 in Texas and about 10,000 each in Ohio, Michigan and Illinois.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
I don’t think that anyone is unaware that the U.S. financed itself with tariffs prior to the income tax.
It is one thing to finance a limited government that way. Government is a cost to the people (not the other way around). But it is a whole different thing to impose tariffs as a means of creating jobs.
Even if you want to make what we call a cogent argument to the contrary, you still don’t need to resort to bitter sarcasm trashing one of the modern icons of conservative economics. I am not the one on a high horse because I think a little respect is in order for these people.
You are the one on the high horse because you think everyone who has any issues at all with Trump is a GOPe idiot. Funny thing, I am not the one who assumes that actual conservatives think the founders were leftist idiots.
You’re very concerned I might be denigrating Williams even though his argument undeniable denigrates our founding fathers.
I shouldn’t have to spell that out for you. And what in the Sam hell does this have to do with Trump or me being his supporter?
That first paragraph stands on it’s own.
“Great, then you’ve just confirmed that a shirt doesn’t cost more than $7 bucks or so to make.”
How so?
Of course. And the economics textbooks will all be re-written once the Dear Leader is fully in charge.
>> I wonder if the detractors even read the article <<
Never. It's against the rules to read anything other than the headline and the name of the author.
>> or if they are just reacting to an article that is critical of Trump? <<
You guessed it. Nothing to see here. Move along.
>> Williams is mostly right here in the danger of what Trump is proposing <<
Impossible. Anything that disagrees with Trump Thought is, by fiat, incorrect.
The sad things is that even though the vast majority of “economic science” has been debunked year after year, it is still taught as it is in colleges.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a team of.ten people can put out 50 shirts an hour.
That’s five shirts each, although one person doesn’t actually make one shirt by themself.
At $15 an hour, that’s $3 per shirt labor.
You said labor was 50% of cost.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if a team of.ten people can put out 50 shirts an hour.”
Do you have any evidence that this is true? If you think you can make a quality shirt in the US for $6 or even $10, I strongly urge you to go into the shirtmaking business. Add $10 in profit, $20 for marketing and distribution, and you could sell each shirt for $40. Good luck!
LoL
Are you having some sort of a problem?
I don’t really care to have a shirt business.
At least I got you to the point you seem to think a shirt can be made for $40.
That’s a start...
Mr. Williams, why has no conservative analyzed Cruz’s VAT tax?
A tariff is a tax on all. make it too big and you can cause problems as we are all intertwined in the global economy.
Tariffs were done during the 1930’s depression and only worsen it.
“At least I got you to the point you seem to think a shirt can be made for $40.”
Then you have missed my point. Neither you (nor anyone else) can make a good-quality cotton dress or sports shirt in the US for $40. You seem to think it is possible but the market says it is not. The least expensive ones I have seen are about $100. The problem for any potential US shirtmaker is that most people are unwilling to pay that much for a shirt (regardless of where it is made), so the vast majority of us pay $40-60 for an import.
Thank you for your additional comments.
Trump has a degree in Economics.
Most don’t know that.
The study was funded by Peterson Institute for International Economics.
It is often to examine their board to search for potential bias. Its certainly worth a look.....
http://www.iie.com/institute/board.cfm
this is how you vette “Expert Opinions” folks.
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.