For The Last Time, POLITICIANS DON'T CREATE JOBS
In fact, politicians don't properly create! The goal of a proper government is reactive, not proactive! This means we seek to end force and fraud perpetrated against citizens. All we "create" is a proper system by which courts, police, and military can properly practice and exercise objective law. As Rand said, "When I say 'capitalism,' I mean a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez-faire capitalism—with a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church."
In support of a recent post in the Gulch, the DT supporters now are speaking of tariffs as a necessary evil to protect against Chinese goods made on low wages and poor environmental controls. Wow. So now we are telling a communist nation that they are not controlled enough?? This is bad news.
In support of a recent post in the Gulch, the DT supporters now are speaking of tariffs as a necessary evil to protect against Chinese goods made on low wages and poor environmental controls. Wow. So now we are telling a communist nation that they are not controlled enough?? This is bad news.
The govt itself notes that 93% of all net new jobs are created through small business. A substantial percentage of those are based in technology.
There isnt much difference in the politicians after all. They ALL want more money for the government whether its done by direct taxes, or indirect taxes like import duties.
"necessary evil to protect against Chinese goods made on low wages "
Then we really need to protect against goods machines make for no wages.
Detroit.
Automation is our only answer if we intend to be a full partner in the the global economy. We will sink economically until everyone else improves their standard of living.
The second point- outsourcing. One day, my uncle Joe realizes that much of his effort, time and resources is dedicated to those frogs under government protection. He has lost much of his land, because building a larger warehouse would affect the frogs' natural habitat. He needs to constantly send his employees to sensitivity trading in case they say something offensive about, or God forbid, to the frogs. He needs to pay protection money to environmental groups so that they can give his company a green sticker. And he has to contribute to the frogs's retirement plan, to be managed by the environmental group. Or, my uncle Joe thinkesh, the hell with all that and I'll buy it from China. Of course, he is a greedy, selfish capitalist and the government needs to put a tariff on his imports and an extra 50% tax on his existence. That will make an even playing field, support the middle class, soak the rich and be the right step towards social justice.
A complete economics lesson in two paragraphs. Take from it what you want.
Second point first. If you actually read my post you would have seen the line: "...a domestic policy that taxes and regulates US businesses into the dirt it should be no mystery as to why businesses (jobs) are leaving the country..." Your cute story of Uncle Joe and the frog pond is more colorful but says the same thing.
Your first point illustration of you selling goods for half of what it takes to make them, presumably to drive the competition out of business after which you could charge any price you want, would lead to your economic demise unless you had a huge wealth reserve to keep you in business until the goal of crushing the competition is reached. In the real foreign trade economic world this is called dumping and has been successfully practiced, especially pioneered by the Japanese in virtually destroying American consumer electronics industry and steel. Neither industry has recovered on our shores. There are others, too, such as textiles and tool machinery, but no need to name them all (side note: the unemployment and welfare roles start to fill up with this activity causing a host of other problems). The wealth reserve is provided by the foreign government for a given industry to be targeted by their businesses.
Complete lessons in reading comprehension and real world economics in a few sentences. Take from it what you want.
Let me be clear here, as you should have been able to see from my posts in this thread, I'm only advocating protectionist policies as a countermeasure against countries that are not dealing honestly with us. In no way do I advocate protectionism so American workers can sit on their asses most of the day producing nothing and still expecting to keep their jobs.
"The price of opportunity lost, although difficult to measure, must be taken into account." Indeed, how does one really measure the loss or decimation of entire US industries due to idiotic trade policies that allowed foreign companies, in collusion with their governments, to get away with targeting those industries?
You're saying we cannot unilaterally disarm. We cannot allow our citizens to buy foreign goods tariff-free if they won't allow their citizens to buy American goods tariff-free. This would make sense if protectionism worked. I think it does not work. I think Americans will only willing give their money to foreigners (or anyone) if the other party provides something of more value to them. Foreign gov'ts aren't doing their people any favors by keeping them from buying goods and services from us.
The trade deficit is a real problem, but it's a symptom of the fiscal deficit. Treating the symptom won't help. The fiscal deficit is unsustainable. Only Gary Johnson has warned specifically that fiscal deficit could turn into a monetary crisis in the near future.
You're assuming the other side's weapon, in this case trade barriers, helps them. I'm saying the weapon backfires and actually hurts the side wielding it.
Add tariffs to imported items, and automation looks better and we move along that path. There is still no desire to actually create jobs for american workers.
Prevent the hiring of non-american workers and we look to actually move to Mexico. Make tariffs on goods made in mexico, and then we probably close the business and shrug.
That puts the 10 workers we do have now out on the street, along with their families.
Cut the corporate taxation and other "fees" that have been imposed, stop even talking about $15 an hour wages, or maternity leave, maybe even get rid of the current minimum wages to leave more money available to pay more highly trained american workers build the business faster.
What Trump could do is make government "get out of the way"
Businesses like the freedom to compete, but they hate the actual competitors- interesting paradox ! As competition comes in, prices drop, existing business has to work harder to innovate and be more efficient. As a consumer, I welcome competition always- I get more of what I want at a cheaper price.
A lot of the regulations are designed to stifle competition actually and protect business, which is bad for me the consumer.
Force and fraud. That covers it.
Reactive not proactive, that explains it.
To a rational person who understands the nature of a free society there really is nothing more that needs to be said about the government's basis. All the rest is merely the mechanics of implementation. Any implementation that contradicts those two statements is not to be considered.
Nothing could be clearer. Thanks.
I don't care if people outside the US eat, have access to medicines and are self sustaining - that their own peoples/nations responsibility.
If anyone wishes to buy what they need from us I'm all for it. But the US, because of our standard of living, cannot be competitive in a global economy where autoworkers in BFE get $10 week without benefits. Automation is the solution but and automation costs jobs.
Lower wages? Higher cost of living? More on subsidized living (welfare)?
Pick your poison.
The only way to settle all this is to let the market operate freely. A truly free society finds a way to balance the needs of the population with the work that the people can do. No politician will ever figure that out.
“The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.”
― Frédéric Bastiat
The truth is that the state (government) employs the worst offenders and purveyors of this philosophy.
Respectfully,
O.A.
One proposal is: We have a credit rating for nations, and yet we have no quantifiable risk (at least in public) of that nation's likelihood to inflict damage on US civilians, their liberty, or their property. Perhaps a market-based rating of a nation's respect of man's rights could assist in developing a plan as to how to approach trade with that nation. Just thinking aloud.
Example: Australia might get a 5% tariff (the lowest available - whatever it might be) for having the most conforming national interests. Saudi Arabia would have the 5% tariff, then an additional 3% for having a non-representative government and maybe another 2% for a repressive economy (1% for being repressive to women and another 1% for cronyism) for a total tariff of 10%. China would be very similar or even more heavily tariffed. Apply ad nauseum to the rest of the world.
Governments who adopted representative government would automatically qualify for re-evaluation, as would those which adopt more egalitarian policies. Tariffs would also be used as punitive measures as a precursor to sanctions: we could hit Cuba with a 50% tariff, and Syria with a 100% tariff. States which engaged in open hostilities or hostile actions against US forces would trigger automatic provisions with higher tariffs, say 50% in the event of a surveillance plane being forced down and its crew held hostage for six weeks.
There would be very little need for posturing and diplomacy would be pretty prescribed, with words being downplayed and actions being the key indicators.
One proposal is: We have a credit rating for nations, and yet we have no quantifiable risk (at least in public) of that nation's likelihood to inflict damage on US civilians, their liberty, or their property. Perhaps a market-based rating of a nation's respect of man's rights could assist in developing a plan as to how to approach trade with that nation. Just thinking aloud.
This ain't telling a communist country what to do save for paying a tariff.
There is a reason why I worked in a prison a few miles from Birmingham with lots of laid-off steel workers.
I'm sure all the eco-nazis are happy that the ghostly looking chimneys I can see all over the west side of Birmingham can no longer belch smoke like they did back during the 70s.
The Chinese don't mind being the ones to instead belch that said smoke--and then some!
Hip, hip, hooray, the planet's saved from fires gone out with lots of jobs in Birmingham!
As for steel workers loathe to boss convicted felons, there's always O the Great and Powerful's smoke and mirrors shovel-ready jobs he later joked about not being so shovel-ready.
Oh, that was so funny as long as the joker has dark skin and a D beside his name.
Yeah, me dino watched how folks just laughed along with O on my TV screen.
So funny! So funny!
Incredible regulations and employee restrictions are the cause of a flight to china. Get rid of minimum wages, give work permits to the illegals, get USA entitled workers to understand there is cheap competition out there, and stop these employee giveaways and "entitlements" if you want to see jobs come back here.
Why would I want to hire women if they are going to have babies and I am forced to pay them maternity leave ?? Why hire blacks or other minorities when it means an increased possibility of one of them filing some sort of discrimmination lawsuit against me?? In fact, why hire ANY humans if a robotic or automation solution is possible and practical??
China is still a totalitarian regime, but its economic system has been becoming more free market (yes capitalistic) over the the past several decades. They know socialism/communism doesn't work and are getting out from under it as the US is getting deeper into it. That's the first reason their economy is growing and ours is not. The next reason is, as DT pointed out, is the currency exchange is being manipulated by the Chinese. Lets say they peg their currency as 8 Yuan per Dollar at their border. That means every dollar coming into China becomes 8 Yuan and every Yuan leaving China becomes 12.5 cents (US). In many cases (like European countries) that would be a big "so what" because the commodity costs balance out in the currency reasonably close. Not so with China because the commodity cost to the consumer between the two countries has a wide gap when you compare the artificial currency exchange. For example, when I lived in China a loaf of bread cost about 2 Yuan and a loaf of bread about the same size in the US cost about 2 dollars. That is a worker in China paid 20 Yuan an hour can buy 10 loaves of made in China bread and a worker in the US can buy 10 loaves of made in US bread. OK, fine, now the countries trade bread. When China ships a 2 Yuan loaf of bread to the US it costs the US consumer 25 cents US after currency exchange, when the US ships a 2 dollar loaf of bread to China it costs the Chinese consumer 16 Yuan! Why on earth would a Chinese worker pay 16 Yuan for a loaf of bread made in the USA when they can buy the same thing made in China for 2 Yuan. The ONLY difference is the artificially manipulated currency exchange by the Chinese government. Right now the US government does nothing about this and DT wants to end this crap!
The main reason, IMHO, DT wants tariffs is two fold: 1) force countries that manipulate their currencies into balance and 2) even the field with countries that straight out tariff our goods but we do not do the same. Some countries, like China, do both! I'll leave you with this to think about (I've mentioned this in the Gulch before, but it's worth saying again): When I was in Beijing I discovered a Harley Davidson that sold for $16k (US) in Upstate New York sold for $40k (US) in Beijing. Do you think the difference in cost was shipping?
I think the root what what China gets away with is the lack of a gold standard. If we were on that, I think our money would depreciate and the chinese stuff would cost more in US dollar terms. Things somehow would balance out. With the chinese hoarding dollars that we are printing up (worthless?), its one crazy system and this is the unintended consequence !!
As for getting rid of stuff, how about those "incredible regulations?"
That's falls under what DT is speaking of when he complains about stupid politicians and stupid deals.
Me dino now thinks of weeds for some reason.
That not counting a Vegas gambler at heart, I suppose.