Posted on 05/08/2016 5:49:19 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Why a conservative economist says Trump could make America ‘the North Korea of economics’
By Jim Tankersley May 6
In his run for the White House, Donald Trump has threatened to slap tariffs on imports from China, in almost-certain violation of international rules. He has threatened to confiscate money that immigrants from Mexico wire home to their families, in order to force the Mexican government to pay for a border wall. This week, he suggested that, in an economic crisis, the government might repay only some of the money it owes to certain holders of its debt.
Those threats reflect an economic philosophy that is at odds with the traditional economic belief that markets cannot function well outside the rule of law. America has built 200 years of prosperity on a foundation of people agreeing to rules in business transactions, and then sticking to them. Trump appears willing to break those rules in the name of cutting better "deals" for American workers.
Trump's pledge to take extraordinary steps to help left-behind American workers has powered his campaign and made him the presumptive Republican nominee. But he has worried many economists, on the right and the left, who warn that breaking laws and commitments could undermine America's credibility with trading partners, raise its borrowing costs and potentially spark global financial panic.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I'm pushing Austrian Economics. I can't control the nonsense that flowed from Marx and Engels. And if Jim Robinson thinks that I'm out of line quoting Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises then he can kick me off this forum anytime he likes.
What you are saying is that only one opinion is allowed here on what is supposed to be a DISCUSSION FORUM.
Trump and Bernie Sander are wrong about Tariffs and Trade. That needs to be communicated to Freepers. People who disagree should stop yelling and present their rational arguments in favor of adding a new tax on the American people as both Trump and Sanders want to do.
Then why are you a Free Traitor™?
Don’t you just love the oracles of the internet that offer to share their wisdom with the rest of little people.
“[Trump] terrible when it comes to free trade”
So I guess that means you get a warm, glowing feeling when you go to the large box stores, and see everything manufactured overseas.
As an old economist once said, when you buy something foreign made, the money and the job goes overseas (and now Mexico).
Here are 9 benefits of protectionism, refute them one at a time.
" He is saying he will push for changes to allow his policies. Really. "
Agreed. I didn't mean to imply he will do anything illegal.
I like Trump. And I hope he understands more about this issue than he's letting on when he tries to change the law.
I could care less about quid pro quo. I could care less if there are asymetrical trade details that are ostensibly stacked against us. I could care less about fair trade.
I want free trade. And I don’t care how many Americans lose their jobs as a result.
Why do I say such things? Because I know that the jobs won’t be lost but they will be shifted to finance and technology. Because I know our GDP per capita will go up and we will have a stronger military.
The nationalist quest for “fair trade” ultimately leads to a weaker military.
Make sure while you are "educating" freepers about the 'evils' of protectionism you make sure to tell them all the founding fathers, including George Washington, were 'evil' protectionist too.
Nice list. So why not apply this philosophy in spades by simply banning all imports. That would seem to maximize all the benefits you list except for the elimination of the Federal Balanced Budget item.
8 out of 9 is not bad.
You need to explain why this wouldn't work.
Read Adam Smith. Or Bastait. Different countries have different relative advantages. Columbia can produce better coffee cheaper than America can. China produces a wide range of consumer goods cheaper than America.
There are national security implications of losing all industrial capacity and becoming a service economy, with our only exports software and Hollywood and real estate, and we should address them *honestly* and *unemotionally*.
I think, on balance, Wal*Mart is good for the majority of consumers and Chinese apparel is a good deal. Where we are giving away the store is admitting third world freeloaders, who put enormous strain on public services and welfare programs, which depressing domestic wages and supporting public officials who advance these idiotic policies.
You've brought that up. Tariffs funded the early U.S. Government. Now we do that with Income Taxes. Tariffs were not favored due to their benefits but simply as a revenue source.
China produces a wide range of consumer goods cheaper than America.
And who benefits? the corporate bottom line benefits. For instance Carrier Corp moved production to Mexico. Do you think they will reduce the retail price or pocket the difference in reduced production costs? Hmmm?
That is bull crap. In the preamble to the Tariff act of 1789 it states it's propose quite clearly.
"Whereas it is necessary for that support of government, for the discharge of the debts of the United States, and the encouragement and protection of manufactures, that duties be laid on goods, wares and merchandise:"
More tariffs and less income taxes.
Face it you are supporting 2 Marxist agenda items the income taxes and free trade. Two red check marks against you comrade.
Because what we’ve been doing has worked so well?
What do the conservative economists say about Reagans use of tariffs?
Suddenly lots of faux “conservatives” are coming out of the woodwork. It reminds me of all the times leftist radical Democrats would speak before a camera and start by saying, “As a lifelong Republican, I...”
Truthfully, I don’t think they really cared that a day or two later, someone would identify them as Democrat precinct chairmen or something. Because they knew the media would tout their soundbite, and ignore the truth later.
But in the long run, it needs to be noted that both the leftists and the RINOs realize that conservatives really are the majority, which is why that have to pretend to be one of them.
They knew that if they started out their speech by saying, “I am an internationalist socialist”, or “I am an internationalist corporatist”, that nobody would want to hear anything they said, because most of the public know that both groups are anti-American scum.
What does your post mean? “free-fall trade”
Bye bye.
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.