Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.OK. This is not a collective. Collectives existed in the Soviet Union, not here. This is a Republic. We set policy through the political process.You did not address my point that we as a collective set policy, which contradicted a point of yours.
You did not address my point about how wages ARE relevant, which contradicted a point of yours.
I do not want to see US workers trying to compete with Third World Peasants making 1.67$ an hour.
That is not reasonable or fair competition.
I didnt say wages are not relevant at all. But they arent terribly relevant because unit cost of labor is the relevant statistic.
Workers will compete with third world peasants regardless of what you want. That they make 1.67/hr is irrelevant. Because the unit cost of labor is the only relevant statistic.
I only used "collective" as in We the People set policy. And we do. Your claim that we don't is incorrect.
First World Workers do NOT have to compete, and lose to Third World Peasants making 1.67$ an hour, unless We, The People choose to though the Trade Policy we set though the Political Process.
And though American workers are very productive relative to Third World Peasants, you can not pretend that the fact that our competitors are willing to work for less than one tenth was is a fairly meager wage in a First World Society is not an enormous and unfair advantage.
Well, you can. And we have. And that's why our Middle Class and Working Class have seen wage stagnation for generations.
It is time for a new policy.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.OK. This is not a collective. Collectives existed in the Soviet Union, not here. This is a Republic. We set policy through the political process.
I didnt say wages are not relevant at all. But they arent terribly relevant because unit cost of labor is the relevant statistic.
Workers will compete with third world peasants regardless of what you want. That they make 1.67/hr is irrelevant. Because the unit cost of labor is the only relevant statistic.
I only used "collective" as in We the People set policy. And we do. Your claim that we don't is incorrect.
First World Workers do NOT have to compete, and lose to Third World Peasants making 1.67$ an hour, unless We, The People choose to though the Trade Policy we set though the Political Process.
And though American workers are very productive relative to Third World Peasants, you can not pretend that the fact that our competitors are willing to work for less than one tenth was is a fairly meager wage in a First World Society is not an enormous and unfair advantage.
Well, you can. And we have. And that's why our Middle Class and Working Class have seen wage stagnation for generations.
It is time for a new policy.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.OK. This is not a collective. Collectives existed in the Soviet Union, not here. This is a Republic. We set policy through the political process.
I didnt say wages are not relevant at all. But they arent terribly relevant because unit cost of labor is the relevant statistic.
Workers will compete with third world peasants regardless of what you want. That they make 1.67/hr is irrelevant. Because the unit cost of labor is the only relevant statistic.
I only used "collective" as in We the People set policy. And we do. Your claim that we don't is incorrect.
First World Workers do NOT have to compete, and lose to Third World Peasants making 1.67$ an hour, unless We, The People choose to though the Trade Policy we set though the Political Process.
And though American workers are very productive relative to Third World Peasants, you can not pretend that the fact that our competitors are willing to work for less than one tenth was is a fairly meager wage in a First World Society is not an enormous and unfair advantage.
Well, you can. And we have. And that's why our Middle Class and Working Class have seen wage stagnation for generations.
It is time for a new policy.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
The wage stagnation thing is made for people who do not understand statistics.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.I only used "collective" as in We the People set policy. And we do. Your claim that we don't is incorrect.
First World Workers do NOT have to compete, and lose to Third World Peasants making 1.67$ an hour, unless We, The People choose to though the Trade Policy we set though the Political Process.
And though American workers are very productive relative to Third World Peasants, you can not pretend that the fact that our competitors are willing to work for less than one tenth was is a fairly meager wage in a First World Society is not an enormous and unfair advantage.
Well, you can. And we have. And that's why our Middle Class and Working Class have seen wage stagnation for generations.
It is time for a new policy.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
The above shows wages and salaries up almost 13% since Q1 2013.
OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.I only used "collective" as in We the People set policy. And we do. Your claim that we don't is incorrect.
First World Workers do NOT have to compete, and lose to Third World Peasants making 1.67$ an hour, unless We, The People choose to though the Trade Policy we set though the Political Process.
And though American workers are very productive relative to Third World Peasants, you can not pretend that the fact that our competitors are willing to work for less than one tenth was is a fairly meager wage in a First World Society is not an enormous and unfair advantage.
Well, you can. And we have. And that's why our Middle Class and Working Class have seen wage stagnation for generations.
It is time for a new policy.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
If we make Chinese products 45% more expensive they will retaliate and make our products more expensive. Good bye export market.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
If we craft trade policy so that China's exports are 45% more expensive, than their exports to US will drop.
The products that our consumers want will then be manufactured elsewhere.
We would then NOT be competing with the workers of China.
We would still be competing with everyone else in the world.
Hopefully more fairly.
We would still have INTERNAL competition.
The rest of your post is touchy feely filler.
Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.I only used "collective" as in We the People set policy. And we do. Your claim that we don't is incorrect.
First World Workers do NOT have to compete, and lose to Third World Peasants making 1.67$ an hour, unless We, The People choose to though the Trade Policy we set though the Political Process.
And though American workers are very productive relative to Third World Peasants, you can not pretend that the fact that our competitors are willing to work for less than one tenth was is a fairly meager wage in a First World Society is not an enormous and unfair advantage.
Well, you can. And we have. And that's why our Middle Class and Working Class have seen wage stagnation for generations.
It is time for a new policy.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
What do we export to China that would change. Oranges?If we make Chinese products 45% more expensive they will retaliate and make our products more expensive. Good bye export market.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
If we craft trade policy so that China's exports are 45% more expensive, than their exports to US will drop.
The products that our consumers want will then be manufactured elsewhere.
We would then NOT be competing with the workers of China.
We would still be competing with everyone else in the world.
Hopefully more fairly.
We would still have INTERNAL competition.
The rest of your post is touchy feely filler.
American consumers and companies will be paying 45% more for products across the board. Hello, recession. Recall that the Smoot-Hawley tariff did pretty much what you suggest. What we got was the Great Depression.
People who never Econ 101 are so easy to pwn.
Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
And the result is what? We get goods cheaper? Sounds OK to me. Chinese consumers are subsidizing American consumers. I can handle that.Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.No, my claim is we are not a collective. I can't help it if you are inarticulate.
We always compete. We export products. We compete with others in those export markets. We can shut out foreign competition and the result will be, as it always is, stagnating industries, higher inflation, lower standards of living. No country has ever been able to tariff themselves to prosperity.
Our competitors (at least you acknowledge they are competitors) have disadvantages as well as advantages. Yes they have a lower per hour wage rate. But they frequently have a higher labor unit cost rate, which is the critical number.
Wages have not stagnated. That is a liberal meme. Look at levels of consumption for a better proxy of living standard and ours has gone way up, certainly over generations.
We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
We actually arent. Every job moved off shore creates 3 jobs here. Free trade is a win-win.What do we export to China that would change. Oranges?If we make Chinese products 45% more expensive they will retaliate and make our products more expensive. Good bye export market.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
If we craft trade policy so that China's exports are 45% more expensive, than their exports to US will drop.
The products that our consumers want will then be manufactured elsewhere.
We would then NOT be competing with the workers of China.
We would still be competing with everyone else in the world.
Hopefully more fairly.
We would still have INTERNAL competition.
The rest of your post is touchy feely filler.
American consumers and companies will be paying 45% more for products across the board. Hello, recession. Recall that the Smoot-Hawley tariff did pretty much what you suggest. What we got was the Great Depression.
People who never Econ 101 are so easy to pwn.
Who fucking cares.
We are exporting jobs, that is what I care about.
Who cares how cheap goods (a TV) is if you don't have a job.And the result is what? We get goods cheaper? Sounds OK to me. Chinese consumers are subsidizing American consumers. I can handle that.Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
You dont get it. If goods are cheaper that leaves more money to buy other things. Or save. Or whatever.Who cares how cheap goods (a TV) is if you don't have a job.And the result is what? We get goods cheaper? Sounds OK to me. Chinese consumers are subsidizing American consumers. I can handle that.Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
Let things be more expensive as long as it means more jobs for America. Let a TV cost 5 grand again if it means I can afford to buy food for my family and pay rent. I can live with that.
Yes. It's better than being homeless and not having anything to eat or living in a cardboard box.You dont get it. If goods are cheaper that leaves more money to buy other things. Or save. Or whatever.Who cares how cheap goods (a TV) is if you don't have a job.And the result is what? We get goods cheaper? Sounds OK to me. Chinese consumers are subsidizing American consumers. I can handle that.Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.OK so now you are being dishonest.It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
Let things be more expensive as long as it means more jobs for America. Let a TV cost 5 grand again if it means I can afford to buy food for my family and pay rent. I can live with that.
It will not create one single more job "for America."
If you took your position to its logical conclusion everyone in America would make his own clothes and grow his own food. We had that system here at one time. No one was unemployed. You want that again?
Just as I thought.Who else at CNBC supports Trump's tax plan?Thats wrong.
Only 100%?Not surprising, given that economists - regardless of political stripe - agree that free trade is good for Americans.
Donald Trump’s solution is to ... levy a 45% tax on Chinese imports. The idea is to make Chinese goods more expensive so that American producers who pay their workers more can gain a competitive edge.
There’s a painful side effect to this plan, however: It would, well, make a lot of products more expensive, and most of the price hikes would come straight out of consumer wallets. ... A 45% tariff on Chinese imports would encourage other low-cost exporters, such as Vietnam, Bangladesh and Mexico, to ship more goods to America. Whether U.S. producers would gain an edge is debatable. ...
Trump’s tariff plan would likely meet firm public resistance. Economists would also protest. “Economists disagree about a lot,” says Ozimek, “but there’s very strong agreement that free trade benefits Americans, on average.” A poll of economists by the University of Chicago, for instance, found that 100% of them believe U.S. trade with China makes most Americans better off.
Most economists also agree that free trade—like anything that improves efficiency and market performance—produces winners and losers. And the losers usually include people who get the job done slower, at a higher cost than competitors. Protecting underperformers isn’t likely to help the U.S. economy. Helping them perform better would.
Donald Trump wants you to pay more for smartphones, TVs and a lot else
Reductio ad absurdum fallacy sighted.Yes. It's better than being homeless and not having anything to eat or living in a cardboard box.You dont get it. If goods are cheaper that leaves more money to buy other things. Or save. Or whatever.Who cares how cheap goods (a TV) is if you don't have a job.And the result is what? We get goods cheaper? Sounds OK to me. Chinese consumers are subsidizing American consumers. I can handle that.Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.OK so now you are being dishonest.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
Let things be more expensive as long as it means more jobs for America. Let a TV cost 5 grand again if it means I can afford to buy food for my family and pay rent. I can live with that.
It will not create one single more job "for America."
If you took your position to its logical conclusion everyone in America would make his own clothes and grow his own food. We had that system here at one time. No one was unemployed. You want that again?
It's better that imports are more expensive and Americans have jobs than stuff is cheap and we are all homeless and jobless.Reductio ad absurdum fallacy sighted.Yes. It's better than being homeless and not having anything to eat or living in a cardboard box.You dont get it. If goods are cheaper that leaves more money to buy other things. Or save. Or whatever.Who cares how cheap goods (a TV) is if you don't have a job.And the result is what? We get goods cheaper? Sounds OK to me. Chinese consumers are subsidizing American consumers. I can handle that.Except when one side cheats and manipulate the value of their own currency like China does.
Let things be more expensive as long as it means more jobs for America. Let a TV cost 5 grand again if it means I can afford to buy food for my family and pay rent. I can live with that.
It will not create one single more job "for America."
If you took your position to its logical conclusion everyone in America would make his own clothes and grow his own food. We had that system here at one time. No one was unemployed. You want that again?
I'm done with you.
If we make Chinese products 45% more expensive they will retaliate and make our products more expensive. Good bye export market.OK so now you are being dishonest.We do not get to decide if we compete. If we are selling merchandise we are competing. Unless you would like the US to quit exporting products.We as a GROUP get to set policy and thus decide if we want to compete or not.
My understanding of history is that we were quite protectionist during our period of rapid industrialization.
Japan certainly did not have Open Markets during it's period of rapid growth.
China is certainly not practicing Free and Open and Fair Trade, now. It's behavior is more akin to Mercantilism.
Link to support your "Levels of Consumption" claim.
It is absurd to claim we do not and can not craft Trade POlicy.
It is also absurd to pretend that all trade is an either or choice with as much complexity as operating a light switch.
And I am truly interested in your claim that Wage Stagnation is a myth. Link please.
No one said we could not craft trade policy. What you claimed was that we don't need to compete. You understand those arent the same things, right?
You either engage in trade or you dont. You seem to think we can tariff our way to prosperity. But that never works. Prosperity comes from people conducting business and trading with each other. Both sides come out ahead otherwie they wouldn't do business. Eliminating that means eliminating prosperity.
If we craft trade policy so that China's exports are 45% more expensive, than their exports to US will drop.
The products that our consumers want will then be manufactured elsewhere.
We would then NOT be competing with the workers of China.
We would still be competing with everyone else in the world.
Hopefully more fairly.
We would still have INTERNAL competition.
The rest of your post is touchy feely filler.
American consumers and companies will be paying 45% more for products across the board. Hello, recession. Recall that the Smoot-Hawley tariff did pretty much what you suggest. What we got was the Great Depression.
People who never Econ 101 are so easy to pwn.
