The last time we imposed tariffs, this is what happened!

[Harry Dresden]

Do the math people, the last time we tried this protectionism crap, we lost a lot of jobs....expect more of the same. And it wasn't with our allies....Canada, Mexico and South Korea are suppose to be friends, yes?
Stocks Tumble As Trump Announces Tariff On Steel And Aluminum Imports
And we are in a different climate politically than we were then too. Trump and his administration have shown zero respect for the processes of the WTO. The advisers in the White House pushing this policy, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, do not respect international institutions at all. This will not be a fight between friends, it will be a fight between frenemies — and in that case the EU and others may be more swift to act against an administration that they believe does not respect the rule of international law.

Last time, Bush backed down before the EU was able to put up tariffs. This time, we may not be so lucky.
Bush steel tariff impact - Business Insider

Jul 7, 2017 - The last time the US fought the world on steel it was under the Bush administration, and it didn't work out so well for us. ... When all was said and done, the Institute for International Economics (IIE) estimated that as many as 26,000 jobs were lost in steel-using industries (like the auto industry, for example).

All this, to make a hand full of redneck good ol boys back home happy!!

how come you dont mention the time obama raised the tariff on tires?...that did not work out that great either.....

 

[tigerred59]

Thank you Pres. Trump!! ...

I'm exhausted.....this winning is sooo exhausting, stop it Trump, I can't take anymore

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Do the math people, the last time we tried this protectionism crap, we lost a lot of jobs....expect more of the same. And it wasn't with our allies....Canada, Mexico and South Korea are suppose to be friends, yes?
Stocks Tumble As Trump Announces Tariff On Steel And Aluminum Imports
And we are in a different climate politically than we were then too. Trump and his administration have shown zero respect for the processes of the WTO. The advisers in the White House pushing this policy, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, do not respect international institutions at all. This will not be a fight between friends, it will be a fight between frenemies — and in that case the EU and others may be more swift to act against an administration that they believe does not respect the rule of international law.

Last time, Bush backed down before the EU was able to put up tariffs. This time, we may not be so lucky.
Bush steel tariff impact - Business Insider

Jul 7, 2017 - The last time the US fought the world on steel it was under the Bush administration, and it didn't work out so well for us. ... When all was said and done, the Institute for International Economics (IIE) estimated that as many as 26,000 jobs were lost in steel-using industries (like the auto industry, for example).

All this, to make a hand full of redneck good ol boys back home happy!!

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more? He purposely crafted a policy designed to send jobs out of the US.

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more?

Um, yes. Something like "I" or "H.W." Why on Earth are you citing what Bush I (H.W. Bush) did when the context of the OP is the economic impact of tariffs as a result of protectionist policy that Bush II pursued?

Who cares about the WTO?

Who, in this case the WTO, favors or opposes any given tariff the U.S. might impose is irrelevant. The reasons any given individual or organization opposes them is relevant. What is the single best reason to oppose tariffs, specific ones or in general? This (click the links below; I didn't explain the entirety of the graphs or key concepts -- for individuals seeking hints on what to take from the remarks below, see this post: President Trump announces new tariffs: 25% for steel, 10% for aluminum):

Effects of a Tariff: Large Country

When a large importing country implements a tariff it will cause an increase in the price of the good on the domestic market and a decrease in the price in the rest of the world. But since Trump wants to impose the tariff on raw materials, it'll raise not only the price of steel and aluminum in the U.S., but also the price of everything made from that steel and aluminum.

As for who will bear the incidence of the tax/tariff, well, that depends on the elasticity of demand and the elasticity of supply for each given product class, and in some instances, each differentiable product.

Oh! So Bush II tried to impose tariffs after NAFTA was in place, with other countries already siphoning off steel production market share? One could not come up with a better way to hurt US Steel producers if they tried.

The WTO can get bent. Yes, I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I was looking at an old flyer yesterday: 23" color TV-$375

I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I would pay for American made products as long as Unions aren't involved. I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...12c4e0-b749-11e6-959c-172c82123976_story.html

On Wednesday, his first anniversary on the job, Mr. Wiedefeld unveiled what he called a “Back2Good” agenda for his second year on the job. Work will continue on rails and other subway infrastructure — SafeTrack is only two-thirds complete — but the focus will shift to accelerating the replacement of Metro’s antiquated fleet of rail cars, the cause of 60 percent of delays.

Anyone notice how fucked up this transit system is, that it cant be Back2Excellent? Until Unions are busted up , I wont buy an American Car..

 

[Picaro]

Despite the lies in the OP, the Bush tariffs had little or no effect on consumer prices. That's because the reduced costs from overseas labor racketeering and subsidies from our own govt.s tax codes encouraging off-shoring were never passed on to consumers in the first place, so nobody noticed. This is in fact true almost all across the board, in every line of products and imports.

As for sniveling about 'unions', the same applies; busting them up did nothing to reduce consumer prices. The price savings are as mythical as the '$60 an hour auto assembly line worker' was.

 

[Picaro]

Do the math people, the last time we tried this protectionism crap, we lost a lot of jobs....expect more of the same. And it wasn't with our allies....Canada, Mexico and South Korea are suppose to be friends, yes?
Stocks Tumble As Trump Announces Tariff On Steel And Aluminum Imports
And we are in a different climate politically than we were then too. Trump and his administration have shown zero respect for the processes of the WTO. The advisers in the White House pushing this policy, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, do not respect international institutions at all. This will not be a fight between friends, it will be a fight between frenemies — and in that case the EU and others may be more swift to act against an administration that they believe does not respect the rule of international law.

Last time, Bush backed down before the EU was able to put up tariffs. This time, we may not be so lucky.
Bush steel tariff impact - Business Insider

Jul 7, 2017 - The last time the US fought the world on steel it was under the Bush administration, and it didn't work out so well for us. ... When all was said and done, the Institute for International Economics (IIE) estimated that as many as 26,000 jobs were lost in steel-using industries (like the auto industry, for example).

All this, to make a hand full of redneck good ol boys back home happy!!

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more? He purposely crafted a policy designed to send jobs out of the US.

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more?

Um, yes. Something like "I" or "H.W." Why on Earth are you citing what Bush I (H.W. Bush) did when the context of the OP is the economic impact of tariffs as a result of protectionist policy that Bush II pursued?

Who cares about the WTO?

Who, in this case the WTO, favors or opposes any given tariff the U.S. might impose is irrelevant. The reasons any given individual or organization opposes them is relevant. What is the single best reason to oppose tariffs, specific ones or in general? This (click the links below; I didn't explain the entirety of the graphs or key concepts -- for individuals seeking hints on what to take from the remarks below, see this post: President Trump announces new tariffs: 25% for steel, 10% for aluminum):

Effects of a Tariff: Large Country

When a large importing country implements a tariff it will cause an increase in the price of the good on the domestic market and a decrease in the price in the rest of the world. But since Trump wants to impose the tariff on raw materials, it'll raise not only the price of steel and aluminum in the U.S., but also the price of everything made from that steel and aluminum.

As for who will bear the incidence of the tax/tariff, well, that depends on the elasticity of demand and the elasticity of supply for each given product class, and in some instances, each differentiable product.

Oh! So Bush II tried to impose tariffs after NAFTA was in place, with other countries already siphoning off steel production market share? One could not come up with a better way to hurt US Steel producers if they tried.

The WTO can get bent. Yes, I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I was looking at an old flyer yesterday: 23" color TV-$375

I would pay more for american products also. Maybe then the ass on my jeans would not wear out in a year. It would be nice to have some quality products again as well as supporting american jobs. When your neighbor has money he or she spens it where you work not china!

I would pay more for american products

One already can pay more for American products, and if foreign firms or domestic retailers pare back their trade, you will surely find yourself buying more American products and paying more for them than you would for comparable foreign made ones.

lol bullshit. they charge whatever they can get away with, period; and, the Peanut Gallery can lookup for themselves how few companies there are dominating every major industry, here, and globally, for that matter. Don't listen to idiots, check out the data for yourselves. Shadowstats.com and SeekingAlpha sites usually have the best, and if you can find them the Japanese analysts are also excellent, especially their inflation estimates. Sometimes the Ozzie press makes them available.

 

[my2¢]

Democrats love taxes as long as they’re not imposed on other countries. What’s that tell you about loyalty?
Democrat is the party of Marxist subversion and most Democrats are too stupid/brainwashed to realize it.

Other countries won't be paying this tax, American consumers will.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do the math people, the last time we tried this protectionism crap, we lost a lot of jobs....expect more of the same. And it wasn't with our allies....Canada, Mexico and South Korea are suppose to be friends, yes?
Stocks Tumble As Trump Announces Tariff On Steel And Aluminum Imports
And we are in a different climate politically than we were then too. Trump and his administration have shown zero respect for the processes of the WTO. The advisers in the White House pushing this policy, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, do not respect international institutions at all. This will not be a fight between friends, it will be a fight between frenemies — and in that case the EU and others may be more swift to act against an administration that they believe does not respect the rule of international law.

Last time, Bush backed down before the EU was able to put up tariffs. This time, we may not be so lucky.
Bush steel tariff impact - Business Insider

Jul 7, 2017 - The last time the US fought the world on steel it was under the Bush administration, and it didn't work out so well for us. ... When all was said and done, the Institute for International Economics (IIE) estimated that as many as 26,000 jobs were lost in steel-using industries (like the auto industry, for example).

All this, to make a hand full of redneck good ol boys back home happy!!

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more? He purposely crafted a policy designed to send jobs out of the US.

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more?

Um, yes. Something like "I" or "H.W." Why on Earth are you citing what Bush I (H.W. Bush) did when the context of the OP is the economic impact of tariffs as a result of protectionist policy that Bush II pursued?

Who cares about the WTO?

Who, in this case the WTO, favors or opposes any given tariff the U.S. might impose is irrelevant. The reasons any given individual or organization opposes them is relevant. What is the single best reason to oppose tariffs, specific ones or in general? This (click the links below; I didn't explain the entirety of the graphs or key concepts -- for individuals seeking hints on what to take from the remarks below, see this post: President Trump announces new tariffs: 25% for steel, 10% for aluminum):

Effects of a Tariff: Large Country

When a large importing country implements a tariff it will cause an increase in the price of the good on the domestic market and a decrease in the price in the rest of the world. But since Trump wants to impose the tariff on raw materials, it'll raise not only the price of steel and aluminum in the U.S., but also the price of everything made from that steel and aluminum.

As for who will bear the incidence of the tax/tariff, well, that depends on the elasticity of demand and the elasticity of supply for each given product class, and in some instances, each differentiable product.

Oh! So Bush II tried to impose tariffs after NAFTA was in place, with other countries already siphoning off steel production market share? One could not come up with a better way to hurt US Steel producers if they tried.

The WTO can get bent. Yes, I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I was looking at an old flyer yesterday: 23" color TV-$375

I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I would pay for American made products as long as Unions aren't involved. I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...12c4e0-b749-11e6-959c-172c82123976_story.html

On Wednesday, his first anniversary on the job, Mr. Wiedefeld unveiled what he called a “Back2Good” agenda for his second year on the job. Work will continue on rails and other subway infrastructure — SafeTrack is only two-thirds complete — but the focus will shift to accelerating the replacement of Metro’s antiquated fleet of rail cars, the cause of 60 percent of delays.

Anyone notice how fucked up this transit system is, that it cant be Back2Excellent? Until Unions are busted up , I wont buy an American Car..

I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

While I have to take your word for what you will and won't pay for -- that is to say, your word about what is your own price elasticity of demand (a simple way for laymen to think of that concept is the notion of "worth it") -- I can assure you that comparatively few consumers are willing (or able) to pay for the "excellent" grade of pretty much anything. "Good enough" is what most consumers are willing to pay for because "excellent" is almost always very expensive, even after removing the intangible component of such goods' selling prices. It doesn't matter what be the product under consideration:

• Cotton or things made from various grades and types of cotton
• Steel or things made from various grades and types of steel
• Beef or foods made from various grades and types of beef

For just about every use one might have for a given product, there is a version of that product that is ideal for (excellent) the use and there are other versions that good enough. Even for something as simple as making an apple pie or baked apples, some consumers will opt to use, say, Red Delicious apples because they're less expensive than are Granny Smith apples, even though the latter is a better choice for the texture of the finished product. (I don't know if RD apples are or are not less pricey than are GS apples. I'm just illustrating a point.)


The intangible component of goods pricing is hard to credibly quantify on an item-by-item basis because the public isn't privy to firms' production costs. It's even harder to do for B2B goods (raw materials and intermediate goods) because people aren't generally familiar with such products, let alone their pricing.

That said, I can readily think of one consumer goods producer that happens to offer its wares both to final consumers and to garment manufacturers. For the types of products they offer, there is no competing product that is better, though I suspect there are comparable (comparably excellent) ones. I cannot say for sure, but I'd wager that there are at most ten folks on the whole of this forum who've ever bought their products or bought goods made using their textiles. The reason is very simple: their wares -- cashmere -- are very expensive. Most people are quite content to buy lambswool products because it's "good enough" and costs a hell of a lot less than do cashmere goat products, and even "basic" cashmere costs a lot less than the very densely woven cashmere textiles Loro Piana produces.

So while you, I and others may be willing and able to pay for "excellent" goods, many folks aren't and they certainly shouldn't be forced to do so by dint of having their options limited by a tariff.


It's also worth nothing that at the "excellent" end of the marketplace, American producers suffer not from competition from foreign producers. It's at the low cost, "good enough" segment of the market that U.S. producers have been at a pricing disadvantage. That disadvantage derived from the labor cost differential, and to some extent the land and facilities cost differentials, between the U.S. and foreign locales. Those differentials, particularly the labor one, is being effectively eliminated -- both direct manufacturing labor costs and indirect and overhead labor costs -- with process automation. Manufacturing gizmos that fabricate things cost about the same regardless of where they're purchased, and the reason for that is that they're sold in an essentially global marketplace. In other words, production costs around the world are converging to create a situation in which production cost itself is less and less a differentiating factor in buying decisions for comparable quality products, be that quality "excellent," "good," "so-so," "lame," or something else.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Do the math people, the last time we tried this protectionism crap, we lost a lot of jobs....expect more of the same. And it wasn't with our allies....Canada, Mexico and South Korea are suppose to be friends, yes?
Stocks Tumble As Trump Announces Tariff On Steel And Aluminum Imports
And we are in a different climate politically than we were then too. Trump and his administration have shown zero respect for the processes of the WTO. The advisers in the White House pushing this policy, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, do not respect international institutions at all. This will not be a fight between friends, it will be a fight between frenemies — and in that case the EU and others may be more swift to act against an administration that they believe does not respect the rule of international law.

Last time, Bush backed down before the EU was able to put up tariffs. This time, we may not be so lucky.
Bush steel tariff impact - Business Insider

Jul 7, 2017 - The last time the US fought the world on steel it was under the Bush administration, and it didn't work out so well for us. ... When all was said and done, the Institute for International Economics (IIE) estimated that as many as 26,000 jobs were lost in steel-using industries (like the auto industry, for example).

All this, to make a hand full of redneck good ol boys back home happy!!

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more? He purposely crafted a policy designed to send jobs out of the US.

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more?

Um, yes. Something like "I" or "H.W." Why on Earth are you citing what Bush I (H.W. Bush) did when the context of the OP is the economic impact of tariffs as a result of protectionist policy that Bush II pursued?

Who cares about the WTO?

Who, in this case the WTO, favors or opposes any given tariff the U.S. might impose is irrelevant. The reasons any given individual or organization opposes them is relevant. What is the single best reason to oppose tariffs, specific ones or in general? This (click the links below; I didn't explain the entirety of the graphs or key concepts -- for individuals seeking hints on what to take from the remarks below, see this post: President Trump announces new tariffs: 25% for steel, 10% for aluminum):

Effects of a Tariff: Large Country

When a large importing country implements a tariff it will cause an increase in the price of the good on the domestic market and a decrease in the price in the rest of the world. But since Trump wants to impose the tariff on raw materials, it'll raise not only the price of steel and aluminum in the U.S., but also the price of everything made from that steel and aluminum.

As for who will bear the incidence of the tax/tariff, well, that depends on the elasticity of demand and the elasticity of supply for each given product class, and in some instances, each differentiable product.

Oh! So Bush II tried to impose tariffs after NAFTA was in place, with other countries already siphoning off steel production market share? One could not come up with a better way to hurt US Steel producers if they tried.

The WTO can get bent. Yes, I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I was looking at an old flyer yesterday: 23" color TV-$375

I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I would pay for American made products as long as Unions aren't involved. I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...12c4e0-b749-11e6-959c-172c82123976_story.html

On Wednesday, his first anniversary on the job, Mr. Wiedefeld unveiled what he called a “Back2Good” agenda for his second year on the job. Work will continue on rails and other subway infrastructure — SafeTrack is only two-thirds complete — but the focus will shift to accelerating the replacement of Metro’s antiquated fleet of rail cars, the cause of 60 percent of delays.

Anyone notice how fucked up this transit system is, that it cant be Back2Excellent? Until Unions are busted up , I wont buy an American Car..

I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

While I have to take your word for what you will and won't pay for -- that is to say, your word about what is your own price elasticity of demand (a simple way for laymen to think of that concept is the notion of "worth it") -- I can assure you that comparatively few consumers are willing (or able) to pay for the "excellent" grade of pretty much anything. "Good enough" is what most consumers are willing to pay for because "excellent" is almost always very expensive, even after removing the intangible component of such goods' selling prices. It doesn't matter what be the product under consideration:

• Cotton or things made from various grades and types of cotton
• Steel or things made from various grades and types of steel
• Beef or foods made from various grades and types of beef

For just about every use one might have for a given product, there is a version of that product that is ideal for (excellent) the use and there are other versions that good enough. Even for something as simple as making an apple pie or baked apples, some consumers will opt to use, say, Red Delicious apples because they're less expensive than are Granny Smith apples, even though the latter is a better choice for the texture of the finished product. (I don't know if RD apples are or are not less pricey than are GS apples. I'm just illustrating a point.)


The intangible component of goods pricing is hard to credibly quantify on an item-by-item basis because the public isn't privy to firms' production costs. It's even harder to do for B2B goods (raw materials and intermediate goods) because people aren't generally familiar with such products, let alone their pricing.

That said, I can readily think of one consumer goods producer that happens to offer its wares both to final consumers and to garment manufacturers. For the types of products they offer, there is no competing product that is better, though I suspect there are comparable (comparably excellent) ones. I cannot say for sure, but I'd wager that there are at most ten folks on the whole of this forum who've ever bought their products or bought goods made using their textiles. The reason is very simple: their wares -- cashmere -- are very expensive. Most people are quite content to buy lambswool products because it's "good enough" and costs a hell of a lot less than do cashmere goat products, and even "basic" cashmere costs a lot less than the very densely woven cashmere textiles Loro Piana produces.

So while you, I and others may be willing and able to pay for "excellent" goods, many folks aren't and they certainly shouldn't be forced to do so by dint of having their options limited by a tariff.


It's also worth nothing that at the "excellent" end of the marketplace, American producers suffer not from competition from foreign producers. It's at the low cost, "good enough" segment of the market that U.S. producers have been at a pricing disadvantage. That disadvantage derived from the labor cost differential, and to some extent the land and facilities cost differentials, between the U.S. and foreign locales. Those differentials, particularly the labor one, is being effectively eliminated -- both direct manufacturing labor costs and indirect and overhead labor costs -- with process automation. Manufacturing gizmos that fabricate things cost about the same regardless of where they're purchased, and the reason for that is that they're sold in an essentially global marketplace. In other words, production costs around the world are converging to create a situation in which production cost itself is less and less a differentiating factor in buying decisions for comparable quality products, be that quality "excellent," "good," "so-so," "lame," or something else.

Since I have come back from Saudi Arabia, where I made obscene profits without paying taxes, I learned the many ways of not being screwed by unions and their mediocracy of production. If it means buying a non American product so be it, it is up the worthless companies who deal with these devils, that cause companies like GM and Chrysler to go bankrupt, then screw the people who bought the cars, because the warranties are covered under the Chapter 11 and all those stock holders got the shaft, Republican Car dealers under Obama were forced to close, but those unions pukes got their money..So if Gm and Chrysler go Chapter 11 again, does this mean a repeat of events , NO FUCKING THANK YOU....

The Truth about the GM and Chrysler Bailouts

 

[usmbguest5318]

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more? He purposely crafted a policy designed to send jobs out of the US.

Bush wrote NAFTA, need I say more?

Um, yes. Something like "I" or "H.W." Why on Earth are you citing what Bush I (H.W. Bush) did when the context of the OP is the economic impact of tariffs as a result of protectionist policy that Bush II pursued?

Who cares about the WTO?

Who, in this case the WTO, favors or opposes any given tariff the U.S. might impose is irrelevant. The reasons any given individual or organization opposes them is relevant. What is the single best reason to oppose tariffs, specific ones or in general? This (click the links below; I didn't explain the entirety of the graphs or key concepts -- for individuals seeking hints on what to take from the remarks below, see this post: President Trump announces new tariffs: 25% for steel, 10% for aluminum):

Effects of a Tariff: Large Country

When a large importing country implements a tariff it will cause an increase in the price of the good on the domestic market and a decrease in the price in the rest of the world. But since Trump wants to impose the tariff on raw materials, it'll raise not only the price of steel and aluminum in the U.S., but also the price of everything made from that steel and aluminum.

As for who will bear the incidence of the tax/tariff, well, that depends on the elasticity of demand and the elasticity of supply for each given product class, and in some instances, each differentiable product.

Oh! So Bush II tried to impose tariffs after NAFTA was in place, with other countries already siphoning off steel production market share? One could not come up with a better way to hurt US Steel producers if they tried.

The WTO can get bent. Yes, I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I was looking at an old flyer yesterday: 23" color TV-$375

I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I would pay for American made products as long as Unions aren't involved. I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...12c4e0-b749-11e6-959c-172c82123976_story.html

On Wednesday, his first anniversary on the job, Mr. Wiedefeld unveiled what he called a “Back2Good” agenda for his second year on the job. Work will continue on rails and other subway infrastructure — SafeTrack is only two-thirds complete — but the focus will shift to accelerating the replacement of Metro’s antiquated fleet of rail cars, the cause of 60 percent of delays.

Anyone notice how fucked up this transit system is, that it cant be Back2Excellent? Until Unions are busted up , I wont buy an American Car..

I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

While I have to take your word for what you will and won't pay for -- that is to say, your word about what is your own price elasticity of demand (a simple way for laymen to think of that concept is the notion of "worth it") -- I can assure you that comparatively few consumers are willing (or able) to pay for the "excellent" grade of pretty much anything. "Good enough" is what most consumers are willing to pay for because "excellent" is almost always very expensive, even after removing the intangible component of such goods' selling prices. It doesn't matter what be the product under consideration:

• Cotton or things made from various grades and types of cotton
• Steel or things made from various grades and types of steel
• Beef or foods made from various grades and types of beef

For just about every use one might have for a given product, there is a version of that product that is ideal for (excellent) the use and there are other versions that good enough. Even for something as simple as making an apple pie or baked apples, some consumers will opt to use, say, Red Delicious apples because they're less expensive than are Granny Smith apples, even though the latter is a better choice for the texture of the finished product. (I don't know if RD apples are or are not less pricey than are GS apples. I'm just illustrating a point.)


The intangible component of goods pricing is hard to credibly quantify on an item-by-item basis because the public isn't privy to firms' production costs. It's even harder to do for B2B goods (raw materials and intermediate goods) because people aren't generally familiar with such products, let alone their pricing.

That said, I can readily think of one consumer goods producer that happens to offer its wares both to final consumers and to garment manufacturers. For the types of products they offer, there is no competing product that is better, though I suspect there are comparable (comparably excellent) ones. I cannot say for sure, but I'd wager that there are at most ten folks on the whole of this forum who've ever bought their products or bought goods made using their textiles. The reason is very simple: their wares -- cashmere -- are very expensive. Most people are quite content to buy lambswool products because it's "good enough" and costs a hell of a lot less than do cashmere goat products, and even "basic" cashmere costs a lot less than the very densely woven cashmere textiles Loro Piana produces.

So while you, I and others may be willing and able to pay for "excellent" goods, many folks aren't and they certainly shouldn't be forced to do so by dint of having their options limited by a tariff.


It's also worth nothing that at the "excellent" end of the marketplace, American producers suffer not from competition from foreign producers. It's at the low cost, "good enough" segment of the market that U.S. producers have been at a pricing disadvantage. That disadvantage derived from the labor cost differential, and to some extent the land and facilities cost differentials, between the U.S. and foreign locales. Those differentials, particularly the labor one, is being effectively eliminated -- both direct manufacturing labor costs and indirect and overhead labor costs -- with process automation. Manufacturing gizmos that fabricate things cost about the same regardless of where they're purchased, and the reason for that is that they're sold in an essentially global marketplace. In other words, production costs around the world are converging to create a situation in which production cost itself is less and less a differentiating factor in buying decisions for comparable quality products, be that quality "excellent," "good," "so-so," "lame," or something else.

Since I have come back from Saudi Arabia, where I made obscene profits without paying taxes, I learned the many ways of not being screwed by unions and their mediocracy of production. If it means buying a non American product so be it, it is up the worthless companies who deal with these devils, that cause companies like GM and Chrysler to go bankrupt, then screw the people who bought the cars, because the warranties are covered under the Chapter 11 and all those stock holders got the shaft, Republican Car dealers under Obama were forced to close, but those unions pukes got their money..So if Gm and Chrysler go Chapter 11 again, does this mean a repeat of events , NO FUCKING THANK YOU....

The Truth about the GM and Chrysler Bailouts

Since I have come back from Saudi Arabia, where I made obscene profits without paying taxes, I learned the many ways of not being screwed by unions and their mediocracy of production. If it means buying a non American product so be it

Fine. As I wrote, you can have whatever drivers you want for your own price elasticity of demand. If something pertaining to unions govens part or all of what drives your elasticity calculus, fine. Your personal elasticity really isn't the point or something that matters to anyone other than you and perhaps your family members.

I'm not interested in engaging with you about how your elasticity calculus works. What I'm willing to discuss is public policy, and that has nothing to do with your personal price elasticity of demand. Public policy has an impact on your decisions, but I can assure you it's not something anyone sets based on or in terms of your union-driven elasticity of demand.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Um, yes. Something like "I" or "H.W." Why on Earth are you citing what Bush I (H.W. Bush) did when the context of the OP is the economic impact of tariffs as a result of protectionist policy that Bush II pursued?

Who, in this case the WTO, favors or opposes any given tariff the U.S. might impose is irrelevant. The reasons any given individual or organization opposes them is relevant. What is the single best reason to oppose tariffs, specific ones or in general? This (click the links below; I didn't explain the entirety of the graphs or key concepts -- for individuals seeking hints on what to take from the remarks below, see this post: President Trump announces new tariffs: 25% for steel, 10% for aluminum):

Effects of a Tariff: Large Country

When a large importing country implements a tariff it will cause an increase in the price of the good on the domestic market and a decrease in the price in the rest of the world. But since Trump wants to impose the tariff on raw materials, it'll raise not only the price of steel and aluminum in the U.S., but also the price of everything made from that steel and aluminum.

As for who will bear the incidence of the tax/tariff, well, that depends on the elasticity of demand and the elasticity of supply for each given product class, and in some instances, each differentiable product.

Oh! So Bush II tried to impose tariffs after NAFTA was in place, with other countries already siphoning off steel production market share? One could not come up with a better way to hurt US Steel producers if they tried.

The WTO can get bent. Yes, I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I was looking at an old flyer yesterday: 23" color TV-$375

I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I would pay for American made products as long as Unions aren't involved. I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...12c4e0-b749-11e6-959c-172c82123976_story.html

On Wednesday, his first anniversary on the job, Mr. Wiedefeld unveiled what he called a “Back2Good” agenda for his second year on the job. Work will continue on rails and other subway infrastructure — SafeTrack is only two-thirds complete — but the focus will shift to accelerating the replacement of Metro’s antiquated fleet of rail cars, the cause of 60 percent of delays.

Anyone notice how fucked up this transit system is, that it cant be Back2Excellent? Until Unions are busted up , I wont buy an American Car..

I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

While I have to take your word for what you will and won't pay for -- that is to say, your word about what is your own price elasticity of demand (a simple way for laymen to think of that concept is the notion of "worth it") -- I can assure you that comparatively few consumers are willing (or able) to pay for the "excellent" grade of pretty much anything. "Good enough" is what most consumers are willing to pay for because "excellent" is almost always very expensive, even after removing the intangible component of such goods' selling prices. It doesn't matter what be the product under consideration:

• Cotton or things made from various grades and types of cotton
• Steel or things made from various grades and types of steel
• Beef or foods made from various grades and types of beef

For just about every use one might have for a given product, there is a version of that product that is ideal for (excellent) the use and there are other versions that good enough. Even for something as simple as making an apple pie or baked apples, some consumers will opt to use, say, Red Delicious apples because they're less expensive than are Granny Smith apples, even though the latter is a better choice for the texture of the finished product. (I don't know if RD apples are or are not less pricey than are GS apples. I'm just illustrating a point.)


The intangible component of goods pricing is hard to credibly quantify on an item-by-item basis because the public isn't privy to firms' production costs. It's even harder to do for B2B goods (raw materials and intermediate goods) because people aren't generally familiar with such products, let alone their pricing.

That said, I can readily think of one consumer goods producer that happens to offer its wares both to final consumers and to garment manufacturers. For the types of products they offer, there is no competing product that is better, though I suspect there are comparable (comparably excellent) ones. I cannot say for sure, but I'd wager that there are at most ten folks on the whole of this forum who've ever bought their products or bought goods made using their textiles. The reason is very simple: their wares -- cashmere -- are very expensive. Most people are quite content to buy lambswool products because it's "good enough" and costs a hell of a lot less than do cashmere goat products, and even "basic" cashmere costs a lot less than the very densely woven cashmere textiles Loro Piana produces.

So while you, I and others may be willing and able to pay for "excellent" goods, many folks aren't and they certainly shouldn't be forced to do so by dint of having their options limited by a tariff.


It's also worth nothing that at the "excellent" end of the marketplace, American producers suffer not from competition from foreign producers. It's at the low cost, "good enough" segment of the market that U.S. producers have been at a pricing disadvantage. That disadvantage derived from the labor cost differential, and to some extent the land and facilities cost differentials, between the U.S. and foreign locales. Those differentials, particularly the labor one, is being effectively eliminated -- both direct manufacturing labor costs and indirect and overhead labor costs -- with process automation. Manufacturing gizmos that fabricate things cost about the same regardless of where they're purchased, and the reason for that is that they're sold in an essentially global marketplace. In other words, production costs around the world are converging to create a situation in which production cost itself is less and less a differentiating factor in buying decisions for comparable quality products, be that quality "excellent," "good," "so-so," "lame," or something else.

Since I have come back from Saudi Arabia, where I made obscene profits without paying taxes, I learned the many ways of not being screwed by unions and their mediocracy of production. If it means buying a non American product so be it, it is up the worthless companies who deal with these devils, that cause companies like GM and Chrysler to go bankrupt, then screw the people who bought the cars, because the warranties are covered under the Chapter 11 and all those stock holders got the shaft, Republican Car dealers under Obama were forced to close, but those unions pukes got their money..So if Gm and Chrysler go Chapter 11 again, does this mean a repeat of events , NO FUCKING THANK YOU....

The Truth about the GM and Chrysler Bailouts

Since I have come back from Saudi Arabia, where I made obscene profits without paying taxes, I learned the many ways of not being screwed by unions and their mediocracy of production. If it means buying a non American product so be it

Fine. As I wrote, you can have whatever drivers you want for your own price elasticity of demand. If something pertaining to unions govens part or all of what drives your elasticity calculus, fine. Your personal elasticity really isn't the point or something that matters to anyone other than you and perhaps your family members.

I'm not interested in engaging with you about how your elasticity calculus works. What I'm willing to discuss is public policy, and that has nothing to do with your personal price elasticity of demand. Public policy has an impact on your decisions, but I can assure you it's not something anyone sets based on or in terms of your union-driven elasticity of demand.

Going back to the Washington DC Metro's back2good and union work. Whenever the prices go up on fares, the union would be there with their hand outs looking for more money, yet during the 16 years I have lived in the Metropolitan area, the metro sucked. Even today it still sucks, but those metro union workers till get paid, obscene profits, for doing nothing but mediocre work. you want to risk your life with mediocracy that is your choice, I will pay that extra dollar for a better products.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Oh! So Bush II tried to impose tariffs after NAFTA was in place, with other countries already siphoning off steel production market share? One could not come up with a better way to hurt US Steel producers if they tried.

The WTO can get bent. Yes, I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I was looking at an old flyer yesterday: 23" color TV-$375

I'm willing to pay a little more for American-made products if more Americans have jobs.

I would pay for American made products as long as Unions aren't involved. I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...12c4e0-b749-11e6-959c-172c82123976_story.html

On Wednesday, his first anniversary on the job, Mr. Wiedefeld unveiled what he called a “Back2Good” agenda for his second year on the job. Work will continue on rails and other subway infrastructure — SafeTrack is only two-thirds complete — but the focus will shift to accelerating the replacement of Metro’s antiquated fleet of rail cars, the cause of 60 percent of delays.

Anyone notice how fucked up this transit system is, that it cant be Back2Excellent? Until Unions are busted up , I wont buy an American Car..

I wont pay for shit that cant be excellent, but has to be made by contract, no more, no less than what is called for, mediocracy.

While I have to take your word for what you will and won't pay for -- that is to say, your word about what is your own price elasticity of demand (a simple way for laymen to think of that concept is the notion of "worth it") -- I can assure you that comparatively few consumers are willing (or able) to pay for the "excellent" grade of pretty much anything. "Good enough" is what most consumers are willing to pay for because "excellent" is almost always very expensive, even after removing the intangible component of such goods' selling prices. It doesn't matter what be the product under consideration:

• Cotton or things made from various grades and types of cotton
• Steel or things made from various grades and types of steel
• Beef or foods made from various grades and types of beef

For just about every use one might have for a given product, there is a version of that product that is ideal for (excellent) the use and there are other versions that good enough. Even for something as simple as making an apple pie or baked apples, some consumers will opt to use, say, Red Delicious apples because they're less expensive than are Granny Smith apples, even though the latter is a better choice for the texture of the finished product. (I don't know if RD apples are or are not less pricey than are GS apples. I'm just illustrating a point.)


The intangible component of goods pricing is hard to credibly quantify on an item-by-item basis because the public isn't privy to firms' production costs. It's even harder to do for B2B goods (raw materials and intermediate goods) because people aren't generally familiar with such products, let alone their pricing.

That said, I can readily think of one consumer goods producer that happens to offer its wares both to final consumers and to garment manufacturers. For the types of products they offer, there is no competing product that is better, though I suspect there are comparable (comparably excellent) ones. I cannot say for sure, but I'd wager that there are at most ten folks on the whole of this forum who've ever bought their products or bought goods made using their textiles. The reason is very simple: their wares -- cashmere -- are very expensive. Most people are quite content to buy lambswool products because it's "good enough" and costs a hell of a lot less than do cashmere goat products, and even "basic" cashmere costs a lot less than the very densely woven cashmere textiles Loro Piana produces.

So while you, I and others may be willing and able to pay for "excellent" goods, many folks aren't and they certainly shouldn't be forced to do so by dint of having their options limited by a tariff.


It's also worth nothing that at the "excellent" end of the marketplace, American producers suffer not from competition from foreign producers. It's at the low cost, "good enough" segment of the market that U.S. producers have been at a pricing disadvantage. That disadvantage derived from the labor cost differential, and to some extent the land and facilities cost differentials, between the U.S. and foreign locales. Those differentials, particularly the labor one, is being effectively eliminated -- both direct manufacturing labor costs and indirect and overhead labor costs -- with process automation. Manufacturing gizmos that fabricate things cost about the same regardless of where they're purchased, and the reason for that is that they're sold in an essentially global marketplace. In other words, production costs around the world are converging to create a situation in which production cost itself is less and less a differentiating factor in buying decisions for comparable quality products, be that quality "excellent," "good," "so-so," "lame," or something else.

Since I have come back from Saudi Arabia, where I made obscene profits without paying taxes, I learned the many ways of not being screwed by unions and their mediocracy of production. If it means buying a non American product so be it, it is up the worthless companies who deal with these devils, that cause companies like GM and Chrysler to go bankrupt, then screw the people who bought the cars, because the warranties are covered under the Chapter 11 and all those stock holders got the shaft, Republican Car dealers under Obama were forced to close, but those unions pukes got their money..So if Gm and Chrysler go Chapter 11 again, does this mean a repeat of events , NO FUCKING THANK YOU....

The Truth about the GM and Chrysler Bailouts

Since I have come back from Saudi Arabia, where I made obscene profits without paying taxes, I learned the many ways of not being screwed by unions and their mediocracy of production. If it means buying a non American product so be it

Fine. As I wrote, you can have whatever drivers you want for your own price elasticity of demand. If something pertaining to unions govens part or all of what drives your elasticity calculus, fine. Your personal elasticity really isn't the point or something that matters to anyone other than you and perhaps your family members.

I'm not interested in engaging with you about how your elasticity calculus works. What I'm willing to discuss is public policy, and that has nothing to do with your personal price elasticity of demand. Public policy has an impact on your decisions, but I can assure you it's not something anyone sets based on or in terms of your union-driven elasticity of demand.

Going back to the Washington DC Metro's back2good and union work. Whenever the prices go up on fares, the union would be there with their hand outs looking for more money, yet during the 16 years I have lived in the Metropolitan area, the metro sucked. Even today it still sucks, but those metro union workers till get paid, obscene profits, for doing nothing but mediocre work. you want to risk your life with mediocracy that is your choice, I will pay that extra dollar for a better products.

I will pay that extra dollar for a better products.

How many ways do I need to say it? Public policy is not about what you personally are willing or not willing to pay for. I don't care, and neither does anyone else (other perhaps than your family members), how you choose to spend your money, and I don't care about the normative conclusions you arrive at regarding how you will or won't spend your money. I'm also not going to discuss or debate either of those two things with you. You are free to use your resources however you see fit, and I, frankly, have absolutely nothing to say about your normative decisions in that regard.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Democrats love taxes as long as they’re not imposed on other countries. What’s that tell you about loyalty?
Democrat is the party of Marxist subversion and most Democrats are too stupid/brainwashed to realize it.

Other countries won't be paying this tax, American consumers will.

Funny that you are aware of this reality except when Democrats impose taxes on American businesses.

 

[my2¢]

Democrats love taxes as long as they’re not imposed on other countries. What’s that tell you about loyalty?
Democrat is the party of Marxist subversion and most Democrats are too stupid/brainwashed to realize it.

Other countries won't be paying this tax, American consumers will.

Funny that you are aware of this reality except when Democrats impose taxes on American businesses.

Grade Trump's first year