Trump Steel Tariffs Could Kill Up to 40,000 Auto Jobs, Nearly One-Third of Steel Workforce

[timosman]

https://www.cfr.org/blog/trump-steel-tariffs-could-kill-40000-auto-jobs-equal-nearly-one-third-steel-workforce


March 8, 2018

https://cfrd8-files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/styles/large_xl/public/image/2018/03/NEW%20GRAPHIC.jpg


“I want to bring the steel industry back into our country,” declared President Trump last month. “Maybe [things] will cost a little bit more, but we’ll have jobs.”

Tariff opponents in Congress and industry, however, have argued that what may be good for steel won’t be good for other industries. Asked why auto manufacturers are so opposed to tariffs if the impact on their costs is minimal, as the administration is arguing, newly elevated Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro was dismissive. “Look, they don’t like this. Of course they don’t,” he said. “What do they do? They spin. They put out fake news. They put all this hyperbole out.”

Is Navarro right? To answer, we’ve analyzed historical data to estimate the impact of Trump’s proposed 25 percent steel tariffs on auto sales and employment. For the technically minded, you can follow the details of our calculations in the endnotes.

We estimate that an average car requires roughly 1.2 tons of steel to build.[1] Given that tariffs tend to increase import prices (which determine domestic prices) by at least as much as the tariff, we calculate that a 25 percent steel tariff will increase the price of new passenger vehicles manufactured in the United States between 0.5 and 0.8 percent.[2]

Now, based on calculations for the sensitivity of auto sales to price, we estimate that such price rises of American-made cars would translate into a decline of between 1.6 and 3.6 percent in global sales.[3] This we illustrate in the top left figure above, which shows our sales projections with and without the Trump tariffs.

But what does this mean for American auto jobs? The historical relationship between U.S. auto sales and employment is tight, as shown below.

Based on this relationship, we would expect declining sales to result in auto-industry job losses ranging from 18,000 to 40,000 by the end of 2019.[4] This we illustrate in the bottom left figure above.

Given that employment in the U.S. auto industry is vastly higher than in the U.S. steel industry, such job losses would swamp any possible increase in steel employment. As we show in the right-hand figure above, the total amount of jobs at risk from Trump’s steel tariffs in the U.S. auto industry alone is equivalent to almost one-third of the entire U.S. steel industry workforce.

In short, Navarro is wrong—deeply so. Employment in the U.S. auto industry will suffer from Trump’s tariffs to a vastly greater degree than it could possibly benefit in the U.S. steel industry.



^ According to the World Steel Association, the amount of steel required to produce one ton of automobile or auto-part product ranges from 0.2 to 1.0 tons. For our calculations, we use a midpoint range of 0.5 to 0.7 to estimate that an average passenger vehicle of roughly two tons uses between 1.0 and 1.4 tons of steel. An earlier version of this post over-estimated average vehicle steel input and this has been corrected.
^ This estimate assumes that the auto industry will pass steel costs on to consumers and that steel prices in the United States will rise 25 percent due to tariffs. The latter assumption is conservatively based on recent findings that a 1 percent increase in tariff costs, alone, tends to raise import prices slightly more than 1 percent.
^ The boundaries of this range incorporate different methodologies for estimating automobile price sensitivities in recent research.
^ A portion of these laid-off workers who work in auto retail could conceivably be hired later by foreign auto companies exporting to the U.S. that gain market share over domestic producers.

[spudea]

In short, this council on foreign relations blogger is wrong. The assumption that all things being equal and no other business decisions will occur, thus prices must rise with the tariffs is too simple to be true. I know a single variable that throws this assumption out the window, the corporate tax cuts from 35% to 21%. Suddenly corporations are much more profitable due to the tax windfall, thus there is no reason to raise prices on their products to maintain the same profitability with the tariffs, in fact the effect of the tax cut is a company can push tighter margins and enjoy the same profitability. Additionally if the result is for a car maker to purchase higher quality steel, they can reduce their faults/error rates during production testing, a competent company can use this to reduce the overall impact of using the higher cost steel.

Again, in short, a deliberately elementary analysis generated to push a globalist narrative.

[oyarde]

Those numbers are complete bunk .

[nobody's_hero]

Just wondering, but would people not realize that there's an increased demand for steel?

I just wonder why it has to be that the auto company investors will just say, "oh well, put up the cobwebs, turn out the lights and shutter the doors, I guess the economy's broken" rather than, "hmm. . . it seems like a really good time to open a steel plant." That seems to line up with economic theory, even in a controlled environment.

If there's one thing America is good at these days, it's consuming, consuming, and —did I mention consuming?—, and where there's a demand, there's a would-be supplier. Even if the supply is artificially limited, people don't just up and quit trying to meet that demand.

China's economy didn't stop booming even though they tariff the ever-living-f'k out of everything that crosses their borders. Apparently people over there are still trying to make it work, and the laws of supply and demand obviously work even in an isolated [—I was looking for a better word here, because China has no problem shipping goods out of their country] economy. If putting up tariffs dissuaded investors as much as the author of the article would have us believe, then China would have shriveled up and blown away long ago, and yet, they're the ones lending us money.

[juleswin]

Just wondering, but would people not realize that there's an increased demand for steel?

I just wonder why it has to be that the auto company investors will just say, "oh well, put up the cobwebs, turn out the lights and shutter the doors, I guess the economy's broken" rather than, "hmm. . . it seems like a really good time to open a steel plant."

If there's one thing America is good at these days, it's consuming, consuming, and —did I mention consuming?—, and where there's a demand, there's a would-be supplier. Even if the supply is artificially limited, people don't just up and quit trying to meet that demand.

That maybe true if the tariff was design to tax every import with steel it in. But the way I understand it, it only affects raw material not the finished products, so Americans would still be consuming just not what is made in the states. So the most likely outcome would be for producers to set up shop outside the country and then import the finished good. The reason behind the job loss

Nevermind, seeing as the top steel exporters (Canada and Mexico) are exempted from the tax, it would mostly likely have a minimal effect on job loss.

[Zippyjuan]

That maybe true if the tariff was design to tax every import with steel it in. But the way I understand it, it only affects raw material not the finished products, so Americans would still be consuming just not what is made in the states. So the most likely outcome would be for producers to set up shop outside the country and then import the finished good. The reason behind the job loss

Nevermind, seeing as the top steel exporters (Canada and Mexico) are exempted from the tax, it would mostly likely have a minimal effect on job loss.

We have seen this movie before already. Bush's steel tariffs excluded Canada and cost an estimated 200,000 jobs in manufacturing.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-what-happened-the-last-time-the-us-imposed-tariffs-on-steel-2018-03-08#false


The Bush steel tariffs
In early 2002, then-President George W. Bush imposed steel tariffs of up to 30% on imports of steel in an effort to shore up domestic producers against low-cost imports.

These tariffs were controversial both at home and abroad because, even as they helped steelmakers, they squeezed steel users, such as the auto industry.

They were also seen as hypocritical at a time when the Republican administration was trying to encourage other countries to liberalize trade policies — and reduce their tariffs — through the Doha Round of World Trade Organization talks that were happening at the time.

(sound familiar?)


Some 200,000 workers in U.S. manufacturing lost their jobs because of tariffs under George W. Bush

[juleswin]

We have seen this movie before already. Bush's steel tariffs excluded Canada and cost an estimated 200,000 jobs in manufacturing.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-what-happened-the-last-time-the-us-imposed-tariffs-on-steel-2018-03-08#false



(sound familiar?)

But Trump is planning to exempt more countries which would mean even less effect on the job market. Btw I would like to see what would happen after 10 yrs plus of continuous tariffs. I think long term effect could lead to creation of homegrown industries and job growth. Sorta like the effect sanctions have on a country (see Russia, Iran and to an extent North Korea).

[CaptUSA]

RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad. :(

[CCTelander]

RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad. :(


But this time is different because ... Trump. He's a fuckin genius, man. /s

[spudea]

RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad. :(

Yeah bailing out US banks that made bad investments is not the same as advocating for fair, beneficial, reciprocal international trade. And your disingenuous, rudimentary equivocation of the two is harmful to any logical thinker.

[kcchiefs6465]

Yeah bailing out US banks that made bad investments is not the same as advocating for fair, beneficial, reciprocal international trade. And your disingenuous, rudimentary equivocation of the two is harmful to any logical thinker.
I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.

[CCTelander]

I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.


I remember the that too. From that to cheerleading for the very opposite in a few short years. Trump and his cheerleaders are definitely "advancing" the cause of liberty in a different direction.

[Raginfridus]

I think the culture war has affected people across the spectrum:


https://youtu.be/zQCTeGKHsVc

There's general panic that we're living in the twilight of civilization. Half the people say there's nothing to see here, and the other half say these are the end times.


https://youtu.be/w6qYjisp51M

[spudea]

I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.

We should be pro free trade. The question is how do you approach other countries that are not pro free trade. What we have currently is complete submission to foreign powers. Is that what should be advocated on RPF, submission to foreign mercantilism? In order to reach free trade parity where in effect there are no tariffs, all barriers should be the same so the net effect is zero.

971811614411276288

[nikcers]

We should be pro free trade. The question is how do you approach other countries that are not pro free trade. What we have currently is complete submission to foreign powers. Is that what should be advocated on RPF, submission to foreign mercantilism? In order to reach free trade parity where in effect there are no tariffs, all barriers should be the same so the net effect is zero.

971811614411276288
What country are you from? I thought America was monetizing debt by printing money to pay for debt with artificially controlled interest rates. What we want is free trade because the world is rejecting our dollar and wanting to trade with anything else but the dollar.

[oyarde]

I would actually expect a slight job increase to flat . The companies that have held off hiring needed positions in the last ten years got a tax break to help them pay the ridiculous health ins premiums they pay on ea employee .

[kcchiefs6465]

We should be pro free trade. The question is how do you approach other countries that are not pro free trade. What we have currently is complete submission to foreign powers. Is that what should be advocated on RPF, submission to foreign mercantilism? In order to reach free trade parity where in effect there are no tariffs, all barriers should be the same so the net effect is zero.

971811614411276288
I would ask Elon Musk how he feels about subsidies. Seems to me that green car manufacturers have an unfair advantage since the government has arbitrarily decided what the cars of the future will look like at the expense of combustion engines. Seems Elon Musk is a hypocrite and is not interested in free trade, but is interested in keeping Chinese cars out of the market. Go figure.

As far as trade deficits, the American people ought be glad anyone is even accepting printed fiat for assets. We'll see how their attitudes towards imported products change when the dollar crashes.

[juleswin]

I would actually expect a slight job increase to flat . The companies that have held off hiring needed positions in the last ten years got a tax break to help them pay the ridiculous health ins premiums they pay on ea employee .

Why do u talk like this? the query is about effect of the tariffs on auto jobs. Not the effect of the healthcare law on jobs. To simplify it for u, what do u think the effect of raising the cost of a materials used in building cars do to auto jobs? up, down or no effect?

[oyarde]

Why do u talk like this? the query is about effect of the tariffs on auto jobs. Not the effect of the healthcare law on jobs. To simplify it for u, what do u think the effect of raising the cost of a materials used in building cars do to auto jobs? up, down or no effect?

The companies effected will have more money now , so no negative effect on them. One of the reasons they hold off on hiring is cost of employer provided ins which is not related to health care law.

[Anti Federalist]

I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.

I have been pro tariff in all the years I have been here.

I have been a Second Amendment absolutist for all the years I have been here.

I have been in favor of border and immigration control for all the years I have been here.

I have been in favor of vast and massive spending cuts across the board, including the military, in all the years I've been here.

The winds of political change have blown all around me, and yet I like to think that I have remained true to my beliefs, even if those are not 100% in line with small l libertarianism.

Just because Trump happens to agree and advocate some of these positions, does not at all make me a "Trumptard" or whatever, any more than my agreeing with Obama on such things as asset forfeiture, police and prison reforms/abolition makes me a Bolshevik in the manner of the current leftist mobs in the streets and on TeeVee.

Not saying that you were making that accusation or assumption, I just took your post as opportunity to get that on the record.

[oyarde]

Why do u talk like this? the query is about effect of the tariffs on auto jobs. Not the effect of the healthcare law on jobs. To simplify it for u, what do u think the effect of raising the cost of a materials used in building cars do to auto jobs? up, down or no effect?
Personally , I am a free trade guy . However if there are controls , the kind that do not matter are the better end of it . I am giving this thread One Star though , because it certainly sucks . While I am free trade , there are some tariffs I would not oppose .

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[Swordsmyth]

I have been pro tariff in all the years I have been here.

I have been a Second Amendment absolutist for all the years I have been here.

I have been in favor of border and immigration control for all the years I have been here.

I have been in favor of vast and massive spending cuts across the board, including the military, in all the years I've been here.

The winds of political change have blown all around me, and yet I like to think that I have remained true to my beliefs, even if those are not 100% in line with small l libertarianism.

Just because Trump happens to agree and advocate some of these positions, does not at all make me a "Trumptard" or whatever, any more than my agreeing with Obama on such things as asset forfeiture, police and prison reforms/abolition makes me a Bolshevik in the manner of the current leftist mobs in the streets and on TeeVee.

Not saying that you were making that accusation or assumption, I just took your post as opportunity to get that on the record.


You must spread some reputation around......

[Anti Federalist]

Let's not forget, there would be no US auto industry if not for tariffs.

Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Kia, just to name a few, all have US plants, employing US workers, being part of the US economy, because it was cheaper to build them here, instead of importing them.

[Ender]

I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.

^^^YEP^^^

[nobody's_hero]

I have been pro tariff in all the years I have been here.

I have been a Second Amendment absolutist for all the years I have been here.

I have been in favor of border and immigration control for all the years I have been here.

I have been in favor of vast and massive spending cuts across the board, including the military, in all the years I've been here.

The winds of political change have blown all around me, and yet I like to think that I have remained true to my beliefs, even if those are not 100% in line with small l libertarianism.

Just because Trump happens to agree and advocate some of these positions, does not at all make me a "Trumptard" or whatever, any more than my agreeing with Obama on such things as asset forfeiture, police and prison reforms/abolition makes me a Bolshevik in the manner of the current leftist mobs in the streets and on TeeVee.

Not saying that you were making that accusation or assumption, I just took your post as opportunity to get that on the record.

Same here. Been anti- "free trade" (note the quotations) since I first learned about Ross Perot.

[oyarde]

Let's not forget, there would be no US auto industry if not for tariffs.

Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Kia, just to name a few, all have US plants, employing US workers, being part of the US economy, because it was cheaper to build them here, instead of importing them.

And most of those plants were built in more rural areas away from detroit to provide better paying jobs for the peasants and tax revenues in counties that had nothing like that before .

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[CaptUSA]

Yeah bailing out US banks that made bad investments is not the same as advocating for fair, beneficial, reciprocal international trade. And your disingenuous, rudimentary equivocation of the two is harmful to any logical thinker.

Yeah... using government to benefit one politically connected industry at the expense of the others. Yeah, totally different. Because logic! :rolleyes:

[kcchiefs6465]

Let's not forget, there would be no US auto industry if not for tariffs.

Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Kia, just to name a few, all have US plants, employing US workers, being part of the US economy, because it was cheaper to build them here, instead of importing them.
No US auto industry if not for tariffs, huh?

Next you'll tell me there wouldn't be schools without taxes.

The benevolent government, protecting US industry. You think they give a fuck about American workers?

They tax and debase and drive the middle class into poverty yet they are the protecters of the vulnerable? You barely have to scratch the surface to smell bullshit.

[dannno]

Yeah... using government to benefit one politically connected industry at the expense of the others. Yeah, totally different. Because logic! :rolleyes:

That's not true, Trump is using this as an opportunity to negotiate and balance it out so there is less politically connected subsidies and expenses of various industries, globally.

For example, Trump is going to Mexico now and asking for lower tariffs across the board, including reducing our steel and aluminum tariff for them. Trump is working the wall into the deal so that we won't have to pay for it.

[kcchiefs6465]

And bailouts - let's not forget bailouts
Thank you for reminding me.

You know what AF, maybe there shouldn't be a US auto industry, the unionized, mismanaged, bastard children of the state.

[CaptUSA]

That's not true, Trump is using this as an opportunity to negotiate and balance it out so there is less politically connected subsidies and expenses of various industries, globally.

For example, Trump is going to Mexico now and asking for lower tariffs across the board, including reducing our steel and aluminum tariff for them. Trump is working the wall into the deal so that we won't have to pay for it.

Listen to yourself! You are saying Trump is impoverishing our citizens to use as leverage to force other countries to stop impoverishing theirs! And you think this is the proper role of government! What the hell has happened to this place?!

Oh I know...

[The Northbreather]

RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad. :(

This

[dannno]

Listen to yourself! You are saying Trump is impoverishing our citizens to use as leverage to force other countries to stop impoverishing theirs! And you think this is the proper role of government! What the hell has happened to this place?!

Oh I know...


You aren't listening to what I'm saying at all. The overall tariffs paid, in either direction, will be MUCH lower. That is what Trump is negotiating. You aren't even THINKING about tariffs going in the other direction, or the fact that we pay them to other governments to tap into their markets and sell to other people.

Do you only care about taxes we pay to the US govt., do you NOT care about taxes we pay to other countries, and that it creates huge trade imbalances which are now going to dissolve and allow our country to be way more productive?

[dannno]

RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad. :(

Government already picked winners and losers, they picked us as the loser. Now Trump is reversing that with these deals. Trump isn't done, he is using these tariffs to wheel and deal and balance things out.

Ya, it would be better to have a completely free market, but we can't do that here let-a-lone in other countries. So Trump is balancing out the trade deals so there is less corruption, picking winners and losers, etc.

If you don't understand, maybe you should sit back, pay attention and watch instead of marching around yelling and defending a CFR article.

Other politicians, that the CFR controls btw, they are controlled by special interests and pick winners and losers. They are attacking Trump because they don't control him, and he is making deals for the American people for once.

[dannno]

This

Is totally incorrect.

[nikcers]

The whole idea of the government not picking winners is because the government can't pick winners. If people were good in business and therefore good at picking winners, then they wouldn't go into politics. The government is picking "winners" but they are basically just the governments cronies, eventually they are going to back the wrong horse with too much money for taxpayers to bail out.

[The Northbreather]

Is totally incorrect.

THIS time we’re going to do it right. We’ve meddled with things before and just made things worse in the long run but THIS time, THIS issue, it’ll work. Trust me.....

[dannno]

THIS time we’re going to do it right. We’ve meddled with things before and just made things worse in the long run but THIS time, THIS issue, it’ll work. Trust me.....

Trump isn't controlled by the deep state, hence the OP.. I'm not sure if you noticed it was written by the CFR and all deep state folks have been rabidly anti-Trump.

[Zippyjuan]

Trump isn't controlled by the deep state, hence the OP.. I'm not sure if you noticed it was written by the CFR and all deep state folks have been rabidly anti-Trump.

What is "deep state"? Is it Goldman Sachs? The Military Industrial Complex? Government insiders? (Trump administration is full of these people).

[dannno]

What is "deep state"? Is it Goldman Sachs? The Military Industrial Complex? Government insiders? (Trump administration is full of these people).

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

He has not been taking their advice on very many issues, in fact he has used them as a bellweather on what NOT to do... and his patience is starting to run short on the war stuff.

[Anti Federalist]

No US auto industry if not for tariffs, huh?

Next you'll tell me there wouldn't be schools without taxes.

The benevolent government, protecting US industry. You think they give a fuck about American workers?

They tax and debase and drive the middle class into poverty yet they are the protecters of the vulnerable? You barely have to scratch the surface to smell bullshit.

No I don't, I think that was just an unintended consequence that worked out for the average mundane for once.

[Zippyjuan]

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

He has not been taking their advice on very many issues, in fact he has used them as a bellweather on what NOT to do... and his patience is starting to run short on the war stuff.

It was his choice to give the Generals more power.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/9/donald-trump-listens-to-generals-advice-on-militar/


Unlike Obama, Trump defers to generals’ advice on military strategy

The same President Trump who can be gruff and erratic in public tweets is a commander in chief who is deferential and attentive when he talks to a star-studded cast of his closest military advisers.

People familiar with the budding relationships portray Mr. Trump as often in listening mode among his generals and as accessible as the next phone call. They contrast the billionaire real estate developer’s affinity for the top brass with former President Barack Obama’s documented standoffishness.

The Tomahawk strike on Syria on Friday underscores that Washington’s warrior class is again in charge of presenting military options to the White House instead of the other way around.

With three Marines and a soldier always nearby, perhaps no president in recent memory has surrounded himself on a daily basis with so many senior generals and their strategic brainpower.



More at link.

[Anti Federalist]

Thank you for reminding me.

You know what AF, maybe there shouldn't be a US auto industry, the unionized, mismanaged, bastard children of the state.

You know, the US auto industry was the envy of the world, for over eight decades.

You know when it fell apart and started requiring bailouts?

Precisely at the same time that government stuck it's stupid head into the game and started mandating and demanding, through fatwas issued by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats and minions.

[Pauls' Revere]

RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad. :(

^^this^^

I frankly could care less if American auto makers lose. They have been bailed out numerous times over the decades. I swore never to buy an American car again. I will gladly pay extra due to tariffs for a Japanese or German vehicle than either GM or Chrysler.

[nobody's_hero]

You know, the US auto industry was the envy of the world, for over eight decades.

You know when it fell apart and started requiring bailouts?

Precisely at the same time that government stuck it's stupid head into the game and started mandating and demanding, through fatwas issued by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats and minions.

And the sons and daughters of those auto workers who once went to their employers to demand raises, now work (if they work at all) at fast food restaurants and cry to the government for minimum wage increases and free housing.

This is all by design, you know.

People argue that "free trade" is not to blame, but the Federal Reserve and it's policies. I argue from the position that they are both to blame, because without all the policies specifically geared towards chasing out decent-paying middle-class US jobs and encouraging cheap credit-bought garbage to flow into the country, people would have quickly realized just how worthless their FRN's were becoming, and the revolution would have happened long ago.

[Swordsmyth]

And the sons and daughters of those auto workers who once went to their employers to demand raises, now work (if they work at all) at fast food restaurants and cry to the government for minimum wage increases and free housing.

This is all by design, you know.

People argue that "free trade" is not to blame, but the Federal Reserve and it's policies. I argue from the position that they are both to blame, because without all the policies specifically geared towards chasing out decent-paying middle-class US jobs and encouraging cheap credit-bought garbage to flow into the country, people would have quickly realized just how worthless their FRN's were becoming, and the revolution would have happened long ago.

^^^THIS^^^

[Swordsmyth]

I still don't understand why so called "libertarians" think it is ethical to profit off other governments robbing their own citizens money and our citizens jobs and market opportunities.

[Zippyjuan]

And the sons and daughters of those auto workers who once went to their employers to demand raises, now work (if they work at all) at fast food restaurants and cry to the government for minimum wage increases and free housing.

This is all by design, you know.

People argue that "free trade" is not to blame, but the Federal Reserve and it's policies. I argue from the position that they are both to blame, because without all the policies specifically geared towards chasing out decent-paying middle-class US jobs and encouraging cheap credit-bought garbage to flow into the country, people would have quickly realized just how worthless their FRN's were becoming, and the revolution would have happened long ago.

That was how they got to be high paying jobs- unions. Otherwise they would have been just another low paying manufacturing job.

High paying jobs tend to either require highly specialized knowledge (like tech jobs), Union, or governmental.

[Swordsmyth]

That was how they got to be high paying jobs- unions. Otherwise they would have been just another low paying manufacturing job.

Which still would pay better than flipping burgers.

[Krugminator2]

]And the sons and daughters of those auto workers who once went to their employers to demand raises, now work (if they work at all) at fast food restaurants and cry to the government for minimum wage increases and free housing.[/B]


People argue that "free trade" is not to blame, but the Federal Reserve and it's policies. I argue from the position that they are both to blame, because without all the policies specifically geared towards chasing out decent-paying middle-class US jobs and encouraging cheap credit-bought garbage to flow into the country, people would have quickly realized just how worthless their FRN's were becoming, and the revolution would have happened long ago.

Those people should have never had those jobs. The union workers (and management) were overpaid. It is interesting that everyone talks about evil, greedy Wall Street. How about calling out the greed of the UAW? What does it tell you that these people can't hack it at a minimum wage job? How valuable were they really? America made crappy, expensive cars. Foreign competition forced car companies to make a better, cheaper product. I can't relate to this kind of nostalgia for the bad old days of America business being second rate.

Here is a better explanation. The US manufactures more now than at any point in history. Automation now does the job that some meathead did who formerly got paid $60 an hour. The end.

[Swordsmyth]

Those people should have never had those jobs. The union workers (and management) were overpaid. It is interesting that everyone talks about evil, greedy Wall Street. How about calling out the greed of the UAW? What does it tell you that these people can't hack it at a minimum wage job? How valuable were they really? America made crappy, expensive cars. Foreign competition forced car companies to make a better, cheaper product. I can't relate to this kind of nostalgia for the bad old days of America business being second rate.

Here is a better explanation. The US manufactures more now than at any point in history. Automation now does the job that some meathead did who formerly got paid $60 an hour. The end.

What you say might be true (although it ignores the military and economic independence angle) if the other countries weren't tariffing our products and subsidizing theirs.

[Anti Federalist]

^^this^^

I frankly could care less if American auto makers lose. They have been bailed out numerous times over the decades. I swore never to buy an American car again. I will gladly pay extra due to tariffs for a Japanese or German vehicle than either GM or Chrysler.

LOL, more than likely, that Japanese or German vehicle is made right here.

[nobody's_hero]

Those people should have never had those jobs. The union workers (and management) were overpaid. It is interesting that everyone talks about evil, greedy Wall Street. How about calling out the greed of the UAW? What does it tell you that these people can't hack it at a minimum wage job? How valuable were they really? America made crappy, expensive cars. Foreign competition forced car companies to make a better, cheaper product. I can't relate to this kind of nostalgia for the bad old days of America business being second rate.

Here is a better explanation. The US manufactures more now than at any point in history. Automation now does the job that some meathead did who formerly got paid $60 an hour. The end.

To be clear, before I'm dogpiled by the "free marketeers" who think they've found a gap in my argument, I'm not saying unions are without sin.

In lots of cases, including and especially the UAW, they negotiated themselves right out of a job. But for a long time, manufacturing was "the" middle-class job to have. Nothing has filled that gap, except welfare handouts and a general sense of entitlement which now is the norm, and if you're a socialist in DC looking to rid america of the middle class, you must see to it that you do everything in your power to see those jobs eradicated. I would say they succeeded, considering when those companies said they were leaving, TPTB practically helped them pack their bags.

Even still, if you held a gun to my head and told me to choose between overpaid unionized workers in the private sector or welfare kings and queens with hands stretched outward with intent to live on the public dollar, I would, without hesitation, choose the former. One might bring down a company, but the others will bring down a nation.

[Anti Federalist]

And the sons and daughters of those auto workers who once went to their employers to demand raises, now work (if they work at all) at fast food restaurants and cry to the government for minimum wage increases and free housing.

This is all by design, you know.

People argue that "free trade" is not to blame, but the Federal Reserve and it's policies. I argue from the position that they are both to blame, because without all the policies specifically geared towards chasing out decent-paying middle-class US jobs and encouraging cheap credit-bought garbage to flow into the country, people would have quickly realized just how worthless their FRN's were becoming, and the revolution would have happened long ago.

And have a +rep.

This is exactly right.

[Anti Federalist]

Even still, if you held a gun to my head and told me to choose between overpaid unionized workers in the private sector or welfare kings and queens with hands stretched outward, I would, without hesitation, choose the former. One might bring down a company, but the others will bring down a nation.

And this.

I'm out of ammo though...

[nobody's_hero]

LOL, more than likely, that Japanese or German vehicle is made right here.

Toyota's North American HQ is in Texas, and BMW's largest plant in the world is in South Carolina.

[Zippyjuan]

LOL, more than likely, that Japanese or German vehicle is made right here.

The automotive industry is totally international. I was reading that the average car part crosses the border seven times before it is finally installed into a completed car. What is an American or Japanese or German or whatever car is harder and harder to determine.

[TheCount]

No I don't, I think that was just an unintended consequence that worked out for the average mundane for once.
The auto industry and its workers experienced a couple periods of hard times because of those tariffs. They got away with selling substandard shit to Americans, and nearly went out of business twice when their poor decisions finally came home to roost.

If protectionist tariffs are so great, why does a protected industry additionally require bailouts?

[TheCount]

And the sons and daughters of those auto workers who once went to their employers to demand raises, now work (if they work at all) at fast food restaurants and cry to the government for minimum wage increases and free housing.

The auto industry is doing pretty well, actually.

[kcchiefs6465]

I still don't understand why so called "libertarians" think it is ethical to profit off other governments robbing their own citizens money and our citizens jobs and market opportunities.
This is literally the definition of tariffs.

[Swordsmyth]

This is literally the definition of tariffs.
Yup, and the other governments do it to us, so just like the definition of assault is "to do violence to another person" but it is OK to defend yourself it is also OK to use defensive tariffs.

[kcchiefs6465]

Yup, and the other governments do it to us, so just like the definition of assault is "to do violence to another person" but it is OK to defend yourself it is also OK to use defensive tariffs.
Defensive taxes....

You ever notice how your ilk, whether they be Donald 'taxes are good for American workers' Trump or Elizabeth 'tax the rich' Warren in nature, just can't let people be?

If it isn't one reason it's another.

I think that is why I get so hostile.

[nikcers]

Yup, and the other governments do it to us, so just like the definition of assault is "to do violence to another person" but it is OK to defend yourself it is also OK to use defensive tariffs.
Yes but the Tarrifs that tax Americans is violence against oneself though. I thought the whole point of the Ron Paul movement was to stop the government from destroying our country, because we know that it doesn't know better, and its doing a damn good job trying.

[Swordsmyth]

Defensive taxes....

You ever notice how your ilk, whether they be Donald 'taxes are good for American workers' Trump or Elizabeth 'tax the rich' Warren in nature, just can't let people be?

If it isn't one reason it's another.

I think that is why I get so hostile.

I will let anyone be who let's me be.

[Swordsmyth]

Yes but the Tarrifs that tax Americans is violence against oneself though.
No it isn't, it is like quitting being a gigolo and getting a job, temporarily your standard of living might go down but you will regain your independence and the ability to achieve an even better standard of living in the future.


I thought the whole point of the Ron Paul movement was to stop the government from destroying our country, because we know that it doesn't know better, and its doing a damn good job trying.
It was also to stop foreigners from destroying our country.

[TheCount]

Yup, and the other governments do it to us, so just like the definition of assault is "to do violence to another person" but it is OK to defend yourself it is also OK to use defensive tariffs.
Except both sets of tariffs do harm to Americans. If you want to compare it to assault, it's the government saying "you can't hit my people, only I can do that!" and walloping Americans a second time.

[Swordsmyth]

Except both sets of tariffs do harm to Americans. If you want to compare it to assault, it's the government saying "you can't hit my people, only I can do that!" and walloping Americans a second time.
When fighting off a mugger you may skin your knuckles or even break your hand, if you don't fight back you may lose your life.

[The Northbreather]

Trump isn't controlled by the deep state, hence the OP.. I'm not sure if you noticed it was written by the CFR and all deep state folks have been rabidly anti-Trump.

I don’t remember saying he was controlled by the deep state.

I happen to like the fact that he doesn’t just go along with everything hes told. Doesn’t change the fact that he’s a bit authoritarian in general and is completely wrong on this issue.

Seems like you are pretty anti-central planning by the government except when it comes to Trump.

[Anti Federalist]

The automotive industry is totally international. I was reading that the average car part crosses the border seven times before it is finally installed into a completed car. What is an American or Japanese or German or whatever car is harder and harder to determine.

Ummm, yah, I think that is what I said.

[The Northbreather]

When fighting off a mugger you may skin your knuckles or even break your hand, if you don't fight back you may lose your life.

What weird mugger gives you cheap goods in exchange for counterfeit money?

[Swordsmyth]

What weird mugger gives you cheap goods in exchange for counterfeit money?

The same weird mugger to whom you sell things in exchange for your own counterfeit money and who somehow manages to take your work tools during the mugging.

[dannno]

I don’t remember saying he was controlled by the deep state.

I happen to like the fact that he doesn’t just go along with everything hes told. Doesn’t change the fact that he’s a bit authoritarian in general and is completely wrong on this issue.

Seems like you are pretty anti-central planning by the government except when it comes to Trump.

No, you see, we already have really bad trade deals that were purposely setup, historically, all the way back from WWII to help prop up other nations.

Trump is going to even those out, so there will be less central planning.

[The Northbreather]

The same weird mugger to whom you sell things in exchange for your own counterfeit money and who somehow manages to take your work tools during the mugging.
Are you under the impression that the reason for China’s ascent and the USs decline is that they’ve stolen our tools rather than our own dimwit policies that interfere with business and innovation being at fault.

[TheCount]

I just wonder why it has to be that the auto company investors will just say, "oh well, put up the cobwebs, turn out the lights and shutter the doors, I guess the economy's broken" rather than, "hmm. . . it seems like a really good time to open a steel plant." That seems to line up with economic theory, even in a controlled environment.
Why would investors want to invest in an industry which is profitable solely due to executive fatwa? That fatwa could be revoked at any time by congress, courts, or a future president.

No, they'll seek government funding for this, or at the very least loan guarantees so that they can safely fleece the people via malinvestment.

[Swordsmyth]

Are you under the impression that the reason for China’s ascent and the USs decline is that they’ve stolen our tools rather than our own dimwit policies that interfere with business and innovation being at fault.

Both, our politicians have happily destroyed us through any method that would turn them a personal profit in money or power and the foreigners have been quite happy to prey on us with their consent.

[The Northbreather]

No, you see, we already have really bad trade deals that were purposely setup, historically, all the way back from WWII to help prop up other nations.

Trump is going to even those out, so there will be less central planning.
So instead of admitting that market interference is bad and either doing nothing or doing something novel like removing restrictions he gonna do some really really good central planning “so there will be less central planning”.

Okay well I guess we just have to leave it there as we have fundamental philosophical differences.

I’m going with poor old misguided Ron lol

[TheCount]

When fighting off a mugger you may skin your knuckles or even break your hand, if you don't fight back you may lose your life.It takes a certain sort of person to interpret the voluntary trade actions of individual Americans as a hostile assault against the state.

[Swordsmyth]

It takes a certain sort of person to interpret the voluntary trade actions of individual Americans as a hostile assault again the state.

The Americans are only receiving stolen goods (most of them are doing it through ignorance), it is the foreign governments that are mugging us.

[kcchiefs6465]

The Americans are only receiving stolen goods (most of them are doing it through ignorance), it is the foreign governments that are mugging us.
Do you know how much my standard of living would fall to buy products made strictly in America? How much everyone's standard of living would fall? Countries more apt to produce certain things should produce them. Period. Taxing that advantage makes everyone poorer.

Automation increases wealth, too, I'm sure you are offended to hear.

If you want full employment, look no further than periods where if all in a family did not work they starved.

You are the one advocating to infringe on the Rights of others. No different than 'tax the rich' socialists, in spirit. I don't care if you only buy American made products (as impossible as that is).

Can't I just buy a brand new car for $6,000 without your and Big Brother's approval?

[kcchiefs6465]

And to equate trade to a crime, regardless of what the so called trade deficit is is about as creepy as nationalistic rhetoric gets.

[Swordsmyth]

Do you know how much my standard of living would fall to buy products made strictly in America? How much everyone's standard of living would fall? Countries more apt to produce certain things should produce them. Period. Taxing that advantage makes everyone poorer.

Automation increases wealth, too, I'm sure you are offended to hear.

If you want full employment, look no further than periods where if all in a family did not work they starved.

You are the one advocating to infringe on the Rights of others. No different than 'tax the rich' socialists, in spirit. I don't care if you only buy American made products (as impossible as that is).

Can't I just buy a brand new car for $6,000 without your and Big Brother's approval?

I don't want to tax comparative advantage (other than low tariffs as part of a reformed tax system), I want to tax trade war where countries with no comparative advantage artificially warp the market with tariffs and subsidies.

[Swordsmyth]

And to equate trade to a crime, regardless of what the so called trade deficit is is about as creepy as nationalistic rhetoric gets.

It is a crime when other countries steal their own citizens' money and our citizens' jobs and market opportunities.

[kcchiefs6465]

I don't want to tax comparative advantage (other than low tariffs as part of a reformed tax system), I want to tax trade war where countries with no comparative advantage artificially warp the market with tariffs and subsidies.
You mean the US?

Which has bastardized practically every market imaginable?

FFS, they have exacted a world reserve currency backed by nothing! That all currencies are tied to! And by military threat they have maintained an advantage in trade. Namely, worth-less-and-less-paper is traded for actual products and materials.

This might singlehandedly be the most hypocritical and silly thing I've read this year.

[kcchiefs6465]

It is a crime when other countries steal their own citizens' money and our citizens' jobs and market opportunities.
God Bless America! That is a dense comment!

[Swordsmyth]

You mean the US?

Which has bastardized practically every market imaginable?

FFS, they have exacted a world reserve currency backed by nothing! That all currencies are tied to! And by military threat they have maintained an advantage in trade. Namely, worth-less-and-less-paper is traded for actual products and materials.

This might singlehandedly be the most hypocritical and silly thing I've read this year.

I oppose all the wrong things our government does including those you named but I also oppose the harm that foreigners do to us, the elite have no country and they rob the rest of us from any quarter they can.

[Swordsmyth]

God Bless America! That is a dense comment!

Don't foreign countries steal from their citizens when they tariff our goods and subsidize theirs?
They have managed to take our industries and what would have been our market share in our own country and theirs through unethical means.

[timosman]

And to equate trade to a crime, regardless of what the so called trade deficit is is about as creepy as nationalistic rhetoric gets.

That's some serious trolling. :cool:

[kcchiefs6465]

Don't foreign countries steal from their citizens when they tariff our goods and subsidize theirs?
They have managed to take our industries and what would have been our market share in our own country and theirs through unethical means.
I feel like the word 'tariff' is disingenuous. Would you agree that the use of 'tax' in its place is fair? Ultimately isn't that what it is-- a tax on imported goods?

To answer the question, yes they do steal wealth from the people of a given country. That does not translate to the United States needing to adopt similar policies. In fact, the opposite.

There is nothing more unethical than funny money. It corrupts literally every transaction which occurs with it.

[Swordsmyth]

I feel like the word 'tariff' is disingenuous. Would you agree that the use of 'tax' in its place is fair? Ultimately isn't that what it is-- a tax on imported goods?
Whatever suits you.


To answer the question, yes they do steal wealth from the people of a given country. That does not translate to the United States needing to adopt similar policies. In fact, the opposite.
"Yes robbers use guns but that doesn't mean you can have one to defend yourself":rolleyes:
If they are robbing their own citizens then you are receiving stolen goods when you buy from them, no good can come of it, we end up losing our industries and jobs as a consequence of buying from a fence.



There is nothing more unethical than funny money. It corrupts literally every transaction which occurs with it.
I agree but that is another topic.

[kcchiefs6465]

That's some serious trolling. :cool:
Do you not have a pointless poll to waste time on?

Maybe a poll about polls and voting and other cute things?

Might just shut the fuck up and pick up a book if you don't mind me being frank.

[kcchiefs6465]

Whatever suits you.
It would suit me to call it theft, but I digress.



"Yes robbers use guns but that doesn't mean you can have one to defend yourself":rolleyes:
If they are robbing their own citizens then you are receiving stolen goods when you buy from them, no good can come of it, we end up losing our industries and jobs as a consequence of buying from a fence.
The US Government is robbing and subsidizing citizens of this country. Should no one buy American?

The US currency is backed by words, is debased and travels the world distorting markets. Should every country follow suit and debase their own currency? Attempt to manipulate the market? Or should they boycott the dollar?

Furthermore, that 'no good can come of it' is simply patently untrue. People in a given country need to fix their country if conditions aren't sympathetic to freedom (as we should). A lot of good comes from being able to purchase things more cheaply. For the US to receive cheaper steel, cars, vegetables etc.

As far as distortion to markets go, manipulating a currency trumps all fraud, especially when it is considered that the dollar is the currency of currencies and OPEC oil must be priced in it.



I agree but that is another topic.
It is not unrelated to the topic of 'fair trade' and that is the point.

[Swordsmyth]

It would suit me to call it theft, but I digress.


The US Government is robbing and subsidizing citizens of this country. Should no one buy American?

The US currency is backed by words, is debased and travels the world distorting markets. Should every country follow suit and debase their own currency? Attempt to manipulate the market? Or should they boycott the dollar?

Furthermore, that 'no good can come of it' is simply patently untrue. People in a given country need to fix their country if conditions aren't sympathetic to freedom (as we should). A lot of good comes from being able to purchase things more cheaply. For the US to receive cheaper steel, cars, vegetables etc.

As far as distortion to markets go, manipulating a currency trumps all fraud, especially when it is considered that the dollar is the currency of currencies and OPEC oil must be priced in it.


It is not unrelated to the topic of 'fair trade' and that is the point.

Other countries are free to do whatever they think necessary to defend themselves, we must do what we can to defend ourselves while also doing what we can to stop our government from doing wrong to the rest of the world.

[kcchiefs6465]

Other countries are free to do whatever they think necessary to defend themselves, we must do what we can to defend ourselves while also doing what we can to stop our government from doing wrong to the rest of the world.
You know, I typed near 500 words on this further explaining the detriment and this piece of shit device somehow deleted it. Probably all for the better, as annoying as it is.

In short: we aren't going to see eye to eye, you (actually) won't leave people alone (as you implied earlier), protectionism destroys prosperity and Meh.

[nobody's_hero]

If you want full employment, look no further than periods where if all in a family did not work they starved.



No need to go that far back. I'd like to aim somewhere for the mid-20th century where manufacturing was booming, a dad worked a 9-5 and was able to raise a family with 3-4 kids, mom didn't have to work because dad had a stable, decent paying job at the factory and worked it all the way to retirement.

Now mom raises 3-4 kids by herself (and the help of a welfare program all-too-eager to offer sustenance in exchange for votes), dad's in jail, the factories are gone, and China and Europe are sitting behind walls of protective tariffs (which should have destroyed their economies, according to "free market" theory, but apparently not in the real world) with our former employers like, "hey, you need to borrow some money?" LOL.

[Krugminator2]

No need to go that far back. I'd like to aim somewhere for the mid-20th century where manufacturing was booming,

China and Europe are sitting behind walls of protective tariffs (which should have destroyed their economies, according to "free market" theory, but apparently not in the real world)

In the mid 20th century, the world bought from the US b/c WWII destroyed Europe. China hadn't opened up its economy and automation was not nearly as it is advanced now.

Are you under the impression China and Europe are doing well? China is still one of the poorest places on Earth. Welfare in the US buys more than the average income in China. The US does better than all but a couple very small countries in Europe. Most of Europe is a decaying mess.

[nikcers]

In the mid 20th century, the world bought from the US b/c WWII destroyed Europe. China hadn't opened up its economy and automation was not nearly as it is advanced now.

Are you under the impression China and Europe are doing well? China is still one of the poorest places on Earth. Welfare in the US buys more than the average income in China. The US does better than all but a couple very small countries in Europe. Most of Europe is a decaying mess.
I think we are all just aiming for the American dream, and for each of us its a little bit different, but for a lot of us its a family with two parents and one doesn't have to work unless they are paying off braces or for just for the Holidays to buy gifts. Where having health insurance meant that if you got sick you wouldn't go broke. Where if you got layed off at your job you could apply at several places on your way home and have an interview the following Monday. Where the bank doesn't own everyones houses, everyone doesn't have a credit card bill and student loan debt they will never pay. Where people aren't in jail for something that was grown in the ground. Where people don't commit crimes to go to jail because it beats living on the streets.

[fcreature]

So good to see the pro-tax crowd here defending this tariff nonsense.

[oyarde]

So good to see the pro-tax crowd here defending this tariff nonsense.

It is nonsense . So is the title of the OP . No jobs have been lost . All propaganda .

[nobody's_hero]

I think we are all just aiming for the American dream, and for each of us its a little bit different, but for a lot of us its a family with two parents and one doesn't have to work unless they are paying off braces or for just for the Holidays to buy gifts. Where having health insurance meant that if you got sick you wouldn't go broke. Where if you got layed off at your job you could apply at several places on your way home and have an interview the following Monday. Where the bank doesn't own everyones houses, everyone doesn't have a credit card bill and student loan debt they will never pay. Where people aren't in jail for something that was grown in the ground. Where people don't commit crimes to go to jail because it beats living on the streets.

That's a prettier picture than even I'd have painted. honestly I'd settle for everyone working for their own living and keeping too busy to worry about what I got. You got the gist of it, though. The working class was replaced by a welfare class, and while I 've seen a lot of little-L libertarians mock and jeer and recite South Park 'dey terk er jerbs', I have to wonder who is really laughing. Those languishing in free housing collecting checks every week, or we who pay their checks.

[nikcers]

It is nonsense . So is the title of the OP . No jobs have been lost . All propaganda .
Are you talking Paul Bunyan Mythological Trump or real life Trump? Where do you think homeless people come from? Do you think that they are all just hard on their luck or idiots with money? We don't have real gains from the tax cuts because they haven't cut spending and so its just horse shit that people are defending this disgusting bipartisanship fucking of the American people. I don't care if you want to pretend this myth that the economy is getting better, but I see everyone claiming that Ron Paul is going to be right, even people like Bill Gates is saying it, they don't say RON PAUL WAS RIGHT. They say oh the economy is going to go into another recession. Well I am here to say Ron Paul is right, but we can still stop it, if we are loud enough.

[oyarde]

Are you talking Paul Bunyan Mythological Trump or real life Trump? Where do you think homeless people come from? Do you think that they are all just hard on their luck or idiots with money? We don't have real gains from the tax cuts because they haven't cut spending and so its just horse shit that people are defending this disgusting bipartisanship fucking of the American people. I don't care if you want to pretend this myth that the economy is getting better, but I see everyone claiming that Ron Paul is going to be right, even people like Bill Gates is saying it, they don't say RON PAUL WAS RIGHT. They say oh the economy is going to go into another recession. Well I am here to say Ron Paul is right, but we can still stop it, if we are loud enough.
Economic growth has been pretty well unchanged since the crash ( around 2 percent ) it will not change in my opinion until the next crash . So , no , I have never been of the opinion that the economy is better . I do not see that jobs have been lost to tariffs , I believe that to be of little effect .

[nikcers]

Economic growth has been pretty well unchanged since the crash ( around 2 percent ) it will not change in my opinion until the next crash . So , no , I have never been of the opinion that the economy is better . I do not see that jobs have been lost to tariffs , I believe that to be of little effect .
No you' are wrong, in this glass ecnomy made up of thoughts and feelings and the MSM narrative is that tarrifs are bad, it will get worse, and if he had announced them and not did them the economy would of magically done better. Thats how the economy works until we put a better system in, so you're wrong.

[fcreature]

It is nonsense . So is the title of the OP . No jobs have been lost . All propaganda .

Undoubtedly, far more jobs will be lost from any additional tariffs than will be "saved". By the way, what good is a saved job if it disappears again the moment the tariff is removed?

This nostalgia of mid 20th century American manufacturing has got to go. This nonsense is based on the same premise as the arguments of the Luddites.

American manufacturing like you saw in the steel and aluminum industries will never return to where it was, despite all the good intentions in the world by the nanny state. But that's not a bad thing... Automation allows 1 worker to do the work of many in a much safer way. Why in the world do you want to return to a time in the past where workers would do back-breaking labor for 40+ years only to retire missing a few of their fingers, maybe a limb, and with who knows how many environmentally caused diseases?

If we can produce steel at a competitive quality and price and it's in demand, then we'll produce it. If we can't then that simply means it's more efficient for our economy to import the steel and use it as an input in upstream manufacturing processes. If another country wants to screw their own citizenry over by taxing them at our benefit, why in the world would be want to do the same?

[kahless]

If we can produce steel at a competitive quality and price and it's in demand, then we'll produce it. If we can't then that simply means it's more efficient for our economy to import the steel and use it as an input in upstream manufacturing processes.

In other words we cannot compete with Chinese slave labor, their complete disregard for the environment, human rights and we should enrich the Chinese Communist party so they pose a greater threat than we already made them through trade.

To hell with morality, to hell with any effort to bring back more than 55,000 factories and 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs lost due to the trade since Bush I. To hell with Americans, all hail China.

^That is effectively the position of the free traders. Disgusting pagan immorality.

[TheCount]

In other words we cannot compete with Chinese slave labor, their complete disregard for the environment, human rights and we should enrich the Chinese Communist party so they pose a greater threat than we already made them through trade.

You have this precisely backwards.

The person who has decided that America cannot compete is you. If you believed otherwise, you wouldn't need protectionism.

[kcchiefs6465]

No need to go that far back. I'd like to aim somewhere for the mid-20th century where manufacturing was booming, a dad worked a 9-5 and was able to raise a family with 3-4 kids, mom didn't have to work because dad had a stable, decent paying job at the factory and worked it all the way to retirement.

Now mom raises 3-4 kids by herself (and the help of a welfare program all-too-eager to offer sustenance in exchange for votes), dad's in jail, the factories are gone, and China and Europe are sitting behind walls of protective tariffs (which should have destroyed their economies, according to "free market" theory, but apparently not in the real world) with our former employers like, "hey, you need to borrow some money?" LOL.
You mean decades of loose monetary policy has consequences?

Considering the current track record of the government, the dollar having lost some 99% of its value, the booming deficit spending, the largest prison population in the world in true numbers and per capita, the waste, fraud and cronyism at every level-- why do you trust them to get it right this time? (Getting it right in the sense of placing tariffs on the right industry)

[timosman]

Do you not have a pointless poll to waste time on?

Maybe a poll about polls and voting and other cute things?

Might just shut the fuck up and pick up a book if you don't mind me being frank.

Chillax.

[spudea]

So instead of admitting that market interference is bad and either doing nothing or doing something novel like removing restrictions he gonna do some really really good central planning “so there will be less central planning”.

Okay well I guess we just have to leave it there as we have fundamental philosophical differences.

I’m going with poor old misguided Ron lol

How can you remove restrictions if there were no restrictions in the first place? How do you remove restrictions other countries place on the USA without some sort of leverage?

973171763835228162

[Raginfridus]

In other words we cannot compete with Chinese slave labor, their complete disregard for the environment, human rights and we should enrich the Chinese Communist party so they pose a greater threat than we already made them through trade.

To hell with morality, to hell with any effort to bring back more than 55,000 factories and 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs lost due to the trade since Bush I. To hell with Americans, all hail China.

^That is effectively the position of the free traders. Disgusting pagan immorality.
https://youtu.be/UGBZnfB46es

[fcreature]

In other words we cannot compete with Chinese slave labor, their complete disregard for the environment, human rights and we should enrich the Chinese Communist party so they pose a greater threat than we already made them through trade.

To hell with morality, to hell with any effort to bring back more than 55,000 factories and 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs lost due to the trade since Bush I. To hell with Americans, all hail China.

^That is effectively the position of the free traders. Disgusting pagan immorality.

Oh so now you are claiming the moral high-ground? I suppose only you can care about Chinese slaves? You are using an argument that every big government goon uses on a regular basis for each tax they want to impose and for each additional freedom they want to strip from us.

Why do you even want to bother trying to compete with slave labor? It's a pointless endeavor. Why do you insist our working class be subjected to hard labor, low output tasks? Our economy thrives on adding value. Value that is created via capital, investment, technology, science, and specialized labor. We don't need to produce aluminum when we can import it, add in some electrical components, and export it for a 500x return on investment.

Why is it you are so hyper-focused on the Chinese boogeyman? How much of our steel is imported from China. Somewhere less than 4%?

Your solution to the immoral Chinese labor practices that you supposedly are so concerned about is for our government to respond via additional immoral actions. Except the difference here is that we can actually control the morality of what our government does. We are not Chinese citizens and have no voice in their political process. You would have our government steal / tax its own citizens and destroy its own wealth all in the name of your morality, achieving nothing in the process.

Well, I hope you are at least consistent in your belief. Of course this would mean that you are for nation building, preemptive war, the welfare state, higher taxes... pretty much everything we're supposedly against around here.

[dannno]

So instead of admitting that market interference is bad and either doing nothing or doing something novel like removing restrictions he gonna do some really really good central planning “so there will be less central planning”.

Okay well I guess we just have to leave it there as we have fundamental philosophical differences.

I’m going with poor old misguided Ron lol


No, it's not a philosophical difference, it is you misunderstanding what is going to happen. Philosophically, we both want lower taxes, less money going to government, and what money does go to government we want it to be spread out in a way that does not favor specific regions or industries.

What you don't seem to understand, is that is already happening on a MASSIVE scale - specifically, our country is massively penalized by other governments all around the world.

Trump put up the tariffs as a place to start negotiations for them to lower the tariffs and make trade policies more beneficial for both sides. For example, he essentially told Mexico and Canada they were going to be paying the new tariffs by default - but they have a way out - lowering their tariffs on us. That would mean they wouldn't end up paying the steel or aluminum tariff, but they would have to lower their tariffs that we pay going in the other direction.. Net result?? Lower tariffs!!

Trump knows how to negotiate, these tariffs will not cost us anything, what he will do with negotiations that benefit us will far outweigh any costs that we see.

[CaptUSA]

No, it's not a philosophical difference, it is you misunderstanding what is going to happen. Philosophically, we both want lower taxes, less money going to government, and what money does go to government we want it to be spread out in a way that does not favor specific regions or industries.

What you don't seem to understand, is that is already happening on a MASSIVE scale - specifically, our country is massively penalized by other governments all around the world.

Trump put up the tariffs as a place to start negotiations for them to lower the tariffs and make trade policies more beneficial for both sides. For example, he essentially told Mexico and Canada they were going to be paying the new tariffs by default - but they have a way out - lowering their tariffs on us. That would mean they wouldn't end up paying the steel or aluminum tariff, but they would have to lower their tariffs that we pay going in the other direction.. Net result?? Lower tariffs!!

Trump knows how to negotiate, these tariffs will not cost us anything, what he will do with negotiations that benefit us will far outweigh any costs that we see.

Ok, Dannno, listen... I'm all for other countries to stop impoverishing their citizens. That's a noble idea. But to impoverish our own to gain leverage for them to do so, is not wise. And it is CERTAINLY not the role of government. Get back on the Ron Paul train here.

Obviously, some sectors of our economy would like a wider pool of potential consumers. That's a good thing. But our government doesn't owe that to them. What it does owe us is to stay out of the commerce between individual Americans and the importers whose goods we want. Our government is meant to enforce negative rights - not to create positive rights out of thin air for politically connected interests.

[Swordsmyth]

Ok, Dannno, listen... I'm all for other countries to stop impoverishing their citizens. That's a noble idea. But to impoverish our own to gain leverage for them to do so, is not wise. And it is CERTAINLY not the role of government. Get back on the Ron Paul train here.

Obviously, some sectors of our economy would like a wider pool of potential consumers. That's a good thing. But our government doesn't owe that to them. What it does owe us is to stay out of the commerce between individual Americans and the importers whose goods we want. Our government is meant to enforce negative rights - not to create positive rights out of thin air for politically connected interests.

OUR citizens are being impoverished by being forced to compete with slave labor with the playing field tilted in the slaves favor by tariffs and subsidies.

[Ender]

OUR citizens are being impoverished by being forced to compete with slave labor with the playing field tilted in the slaves favor by tariffs and subsidies.

US citizens ARE slave labor.

The "American Dream" is a form of slavery but has all the buzz words to keep people obedient. Public Education is the formula to keep kids "babies" until they are compliant. If they rebel, they are drugged.

We need to fix our own country first, get rid of the slavery HERE, bring freedom to the people & then help other countries understand that true freedom brings prosperity.

[Swordsmyth]

US citizens ARE slave labor.

The "American Dream" is a form of slavery but has all the buzz words to keep people obedient. Public Education is the formula to keep kids "babies" until they are compliant. If they rebel, they are drugged.

We need to fix our own country first, get rid of the slavery HERE, bring freedom to the people & then help other countries understand that true freedom brings prosperity.
And we can't do that if people are reduced to absolute serfdom.
The American middle class was the best hope for freedom that is why the globalists destroyed it.

[Ender]

And we can't do that if people are reduced to absolute serfdom.
The American middle class was the best hope for freedom that is why the globalists destroyed it.

The "middle class" is the epitome of serfdom. They are NOT free- just edumacated to think so.

[Swordsmyth]

The "middle class" is the epitome of serfdom. They are NOT free- just edumacated to think so.

LOL

[fcreature]

OUR citizens are being impoverished by being forced to compete with slave labor with the playing field tilted in the slaves favor by tariffs and subsidies.

We have benefited more from global trade than any country in the history of civilization. Your statement is flat out wrong. If anything, we've been enriched.

[Swordsmyth]

We have benefited more from global trade than any country in the history of civilization. Your statement is flat out wrong. If anything, we've been enriched.

BUNK, the elite have profited off of everyone while impoverishing Americans to better enslave them.

[kcchiefs6465]

Oh so now you are claiming the moral high-ground? I suppose only you can care about Chinese slaves? You are using an argument that every big government goon uses on a regular basis for each tax they want to impose and for each additional freedom they want to strip from us.

Why do you even want to bother trying to compete with slave labor? It's a pointless endeavor. Why do you insist our working class be subjected to hard labor, low output tasks? Our economy thrives on adding value. Value that is created via capital, investment, technology, science, and specialized labor. We don't need to produce aluminum when we can import it, add in some electrical components, and export it for a 500x return on investment.

Why is it you are so hyper-focused on the Chinese boogeyman? How much of our steel is imported from China. Somewhere less than 4%?

Your solution to the immoral Chinese labor practices that you supposedly are so concerned about is for our government to respond via additional immoral actions. Except the difference here is that we can actually control the morality of what our government does. We are not Chinese citizens and have no voice in their political process. You would have our government steal / tax its own citizens and destroy its own wealth all in the name of your morality, achieving nothing in the process.

Well, I hope you are at least consistent in your belief. Of course this would mean that you are for nation building, preemptive war, the welfare state, higher taxes... pretty much everything we're supposedly against around here.
This.

[fcreature]

What you don't seem to understand, is that is already happening on a MASSIVE scale - specifically, our country is massively penalized by other governments all around the world.

So 300 million Americans have the luxury of buying anything we can imagine under the sun, cheaper than you can anywhere else in the world and we're the ones losing in this deal?

[Superfluous Man]

BUNK, the elite have profited off of everyone while impoverishing Americans to better enslave them.

But Americans aren't impoverished. All Americans at all income levels are better off economically than ever before. There are fewer in poverty now than there ever have been. For that matter, is there even such a thing as an American in poverty anymore? Nowadays, our definition of "poor" in America has changed so much that our so-called poor have an obesity problem.

[fcreature]

But Americans aren't impoverished. All Americans at all income levels are better off economically than ever before. There are fewer in poverty now than there ever have been. For that matter, is there even such a thing as an American in poverty any more? Nowadays, our definition of "poor" in America has changed so much that our so-called poor have an obesity problem.

Clearly he has no idea what poverty is.

I wonder who this mysterious "elite" even is. Anyone have any names?

[Swordsmyth]

But Americans aren't impoverished. All Americans at all income levels are better off economically than ever before. There are fewer in poverty now than there ever have been. For that matter, is there even such a thing as an American in poverty any more? Nowadays, our definition of "poor" in America has changed so much that our so-called poor have an obesity problem.

Have you seen the household debt levels lately?
Or the welfare rolls?

[Zippyjuan]

We have benefited more from global trade than any country in the history of civilization. Your statement is flat out wrong. If anything, we've been enriched.

Trade is not the zero sum game some seem to think. It is not just one side benefiting. Unless both sides seem some benefit, they will not engage in the transaction. Tariffs are government subsidies to a particular industry paid for by higher prices faced by consumers.

[fcreature]

Trade is not the zero sum game some seem to think. It is not just one side benefiting. Unless both sides seem some benefit, they will not engage in the transaction. Tariffs are government subsidies to a particular industry paid for by higher prices faced by consumers.

This changes nothing.

Tariffs are taxes. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Zippyjuan]

Clearly he has no idea what poverty is.

I wonder who this mysterious "elite" even is. Anyone have any names?

What is "poverty"?

Poor in this country today have living standards which would have qualified them as wealthy 100 years ago. Not all homes even had indoor plumbing back then.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/02/america-in-1915/462360/


Here is a closer look at America, one century ago.

America suffered worse working conditions, in just about every way.

For men: Work for men was more widespread, more dangerous, worse paid, and, well, just more annoying. According to the 1920 census, 85 percent of men over 14 were in the labor force, compared with just 69 percent for men over 16 today. It was the dawn of scientific management, with factory workers introduced to a brand new office colleague, the time clock. Manufacturing workers averaged 55 hours at work per week, 10 percent more than self-reported averages today. And the jobs were more dangerous: With a fatality rate of 61 deaths per 100,000 workers, the workplace was about 30 times more dangerous than it is today.

For women: Women were much less likely to work, and in 1915, many were finding employment at elementary and high schools. The reason for women’s early entry into education in the U.S., however, is a little depressing. School boards preferred female teachers not only because they were seen as more loving, but also because they would do what male principals told them while accepting less than a man’s wage.

For the elderly: For those who did make it to old age (something of a feat back then), Social Security didn’t exist, and in bad times, poverty among the old was so bad that contemporaries wrote of growing old as if it were a dystopia—the “haunting fear in the winter of life.” In 1938 a writer with the American Association for Old-Age Security said "our modern system of industrial production has rendered our lives insecure to the point of despair.” The industrializing economy was no country for old men or women. As families moved off farms into cities and suburbs, it became harder for some old people to find work in factories, which ran on limber sinews and sweat. In the 40 years before 1920, the share of men over 65 working on farms dropped 39 percent.

America ate lard and cold cereal and paid a lot of money for it.

It’s hard to imagine many Americans begging to switch places with a 1915 gourmand. Food was not only less varied in 1915, but also considerably more expensive. The typical American spent one-third of his income on food 100 years ago, which is twice today’s share.

The early 20th century was a golden age of cold-cereal products—Corn Flakes, Quaker Puffed Rice and Puffed Wheat, and Shredded Wheat all came on the market between 1906 and 1912—but on the farm, people enjoyed a heartier meal of eggs and pancakes. Lunch at the office provided a logistical challenge, as in 1915, there existed no such thing as a plastic bag to keep a sandwich fresh. Instead, contemporary cookbooks called for keeping sandwiches moist by "wrapping [them] in a dry towel, covered with a towel wrung out of hot water.”

The average American ate roughly equivalent amounts of lard and chicken—11.5 pounds and 14 pounds, respectively, per year. One century later, the ratio has, blessedly, widened. Americans eat 57 pounds of chicken, compared to just 1.5 pounds of lard. But Americans, gluttons to their core, have replaced fat’s flavor with something even worse: Their sugar intake has jumped from 88 to 130 pounds in the last 100 years.


Lots more at link.


There were all sorts of tech amenities that might seem quotidian today that were rarities in 1915. Thirty percent of the country had a telephone. Less than 20 percent had a stove. Very few people owned a refrigerator, and almost nobody owned a radio. Within 60 years, clothes washers, dryers, air-conditioning, and television sets would all be household staples, but in 1915 they were nowhere to be seen. Instead, the most popular media product of the time might have been the player pianos or the phonograph.

[Swordsmyth]

What is "poverty"?

Poor in this country today have living standards which would have qualified them as wealthy 100 years ago. Not all homes even had indoor plumbing back then.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/02/america-in-1915/462360/



Lots more at link.

100 years ago most people had no debts and there was no welfare.

[fcreature]

In other words we cannot compete with Chinese slave labor, their complete disregard for the environment, human rights and we should enrich the Chinese Communist party so they pose a greater threat than we already made them through trade.

To hell with morality, to hell with any effort to bring back more than 55,000 factories and 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs lost due to the trade since Bush I. To hell with Americans, all hail China.

^That is effectively the position of the free traders. Disgusting pagan immorality.

I really can't get past this. I don't know off-hand where you stand, but if I heard this type of thinking from any of the pro-Trump types there is no way I could take it seriously.

What happened to America First? What happened to MAGA? All of a sudden we're concerned about what other countries are doing? Should we double down and spend another trillion dollars rebuilding the Middle East? After all, their people are enslaved and impoverished. It would be immoral to not tax US citizens to help them.

Maybe I'm just not smart enough to play 49234D chess, but I'm pretty sure it's considered a GOOD deal when someone offers to give you something for less than it's worth. Typically I wouldn't think of us being the ones who are getting screwed in this scenario, but hey I'm no reality TV star, super businessman extraordinaire... so what do I know.

So what we have now are Trump supporters arguing that its good to tax US citizens to help the Chinese out. Because we have a moral obligation to support their people at the expense of ours. Go figure.

[Swordsmyth]

I really can't get past this. I don't know off-hand where you stand, but if I heard this type of thinking from any of the pro-Trump types there is no way I could take it seriously.

What happened to America First? What happened to MAGA? All of a sudden we're concerned about what other countries are doing? Should we double down and spend another trillion dollars rebuilding the Middle East? After all, their people are enslaved and impoverished. It would be immoral to not tax US citizens to help them.

Maybe I'm just not smart enough to play 49234D chess, but I'm pretty sure it's considered a GOOD deal when someone offers to give you something for less than it's worth. Typically I wouldn't think of us being the ones who are getting screwed in this scenario, but hey I'm no reality TV star so what do I know.

So what we have now are Trump supporters arguing that its good to tax US citizens to help the Chinese out. Go figure.

When someone offers to give you something for less than it's worth it is usually a con job.

The loss of our independence and wealth production capacity isn't worth the temporary profit which is almost entirely taken by the globalist elite anyway.

[fcreature]

When someone offers to give you something for less than it's worth it is usually a con job.

The loss of our independence and wealth production capacity isn't worth the temporary profit which is almost entirely taken by the globalists elite anyway.

lol

Informed consent is now a con. Lack of taxes destroys wealth. And what is that about loss of independence?

What are you smoking?

[TheCount]

Trump is going to even those out, so there will be less central planning.
Trumpkin math:

Central planning + central planning = less central planning

Statism + statism = less statism

Freedom - freedom = more freedom

[The Northbreather]

BUNK, the elite have profited off of everyone while impoverishing Americans to better enslave them.
Bunk, fatal radical left ideology tries to level the playing field through big government force.

Here’s the deal broski. The universe ain’t fair in its distribution of poker hands so in order to make the game as fair as possible we say the government helps NOBODY as that give the most individual opportunity for pursuit of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Promoting the understanding and adoption of this idea is how you win.

Groveling at the masters feet for help and hating those you perceive as privaliged is how you lose. (It’s also disgusting to witness)

[Swordsmyth]

Bunk, fatal radical left ideology tries to level the playing field through big government force.

Here’s the deal broski. The universe ain’t fair in its distribution of poker hands so in order to make the game as fair as possible we say the government helps NOBODY as that give the most individual opportunity for pursuit of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Promoting the understanding and adoption of this idea is how you win.

Groveling at the masters feet for help and hating those you perceive as privaliged is how you lose. (It’s also disgusting to witness)

If you can get foreign governments to stop interfering in the marketplace then we can talk.
Pretending that the elite don't rob and enslave the rest of us will only help them to do so.

[timosman]

We have benefited more from global trade than any country in the history of civilization.

When do you think you will be able to retire and enjoy the lavish lifestyle all these trade policies have afforded you?:cool:

[nikcers]

If you can get foreign governments to stop interfering in the marketplace then we can talk.
Pretending that the elite don't rob and enslave the rest of us will only help them to do so.
Pretending like taxation is going to fix a spending problem is suicidal, foreign governments aren't robbing me, my government is.

[Superfluous Man]

Have you seen the household debt levels lately?
Or the welfare rolls?

Sure. And those people on welfare are rich by the standards of past generations.

Today, thanks in part to our trade with the rest of the world, the average American has to work fewer hours to earn enough to be able to buy more and better stuff than ever before.

[Zippyjuan]

Sure. And those people on welfare are rich by the standards of past generations.

Today, thanks in part to our trade with the rest of the world, the average American has to work fewer hours to earn enough to be able to buy more and better stuff than ever before.

One third of their income went just to buying food. That is down to about ten percent.

Trade (plus technology) has greatly increased our supplies and varieties of foods available while also lowering the costs of them. We don't really have much seasonal variation either- some foods were simply unavailable part of the year you can now get year round.

[Swordsmyth]

Sure. And those people on welfare are rich by the standards of past generations.
A house N*&%#@ is still a slave


Today, thanks in part to our trade with the rest of the world, the average American has to work fewer hours to earn enough to be able to buy more and better stuff than ever before.
If they can get the work hours.

[Zippyjuan]

A house N*&%#@ is still a slave


If they can get the work hours.

Tariffs aren't going to free any slaves. As for work hours, 100 years ago you spend about 20 hours just to earn enough to buy food for the week (55 hour work week, one third of money going to food).

[Superfluous Man]

One third of their income went just to buying food. That is down to about ten percent.

Trade (plus technology) has greatly increased our supplies and varieties of foods available while also lowering the costs of them. We don't really have much seasonal variation either- some foods were simply unavailable part of the year you can now get year round.

Food, clothes, phones that connect to the internet and have more power and better graphics than an PCs in existence 20 years ago, cars, speed boats, vacations, medicine, and on and on with luxuries galore. These are things that blue collar workers afford today. Even home ownership, though it's still below what it was in the 90's is higher than any time before that.

[The Northbreather]

If you can get foreign governments to stop interfering in the marketplace then we can talk.
Pretending that the elite don't rob and enslave the rest of us will only help them to do so.

Sigh ok. So you want help from the government that’s controlled by the “elite” to use its power/force enforce policy that will diminish the power of the aforementioned “elite”?

Mmm ok. I feel like that’s not going to work, again.

How about reducing the size of government as a solution instead of endorsing it through slave think.

[Swordsmyth]

Sigh ok. So you want help from the government that’s controlled by the “elite” to use its power/force enforce policy that will diminish the power of the aforementioned “elite”?

Mmm ok. I feel like that’s not going to work, again.

How about reducing the size of government as a solution instead of endorsing it through slave think.

Since the government is in charge of determining it's own size (barring an actual revolution) then you must think we can gain control of it in order to make it do what it should, therefore we can make it defend us from foreign governments which is part of it's legitimate function.

[The Northbreather]

Since the government is in charge of determining it's own size (barring an actual revolution) then you must think we can gain control of it in order to make it do what it should, therefore we can make it defend us from foreign governments which is part of it's legitimate function.
Actually the people are at fault for the size of government, people who ask the government to fix their problems instead of saying leave me the fuck alone and keep your filthy hands of my money.

[kahless]

I really can't get past this. I don't know off-hand where you stand, but if I heard this type of thinking from any of the pro-Trump types there is no way I could take it seriously.

What happened to America First? What happened to MAGA?

Your choice of doing the bidding for the Chinese Communist party to the point of putting American companies out of business while thousands of Americans lose their jobs is not only immoral it is repugnant and treasonous.

Your choice of doing the bidding for the Chinese Communist party so they can continue their horrible human rights record, work people like slaves and destroy the environment so they can succeed at harming American businesses and jobs is immoral and repugnant.

Protecting American interests over Chinese interests is America first and MAGA.


All of a sudden we're concerned about what other countries are doing?

Would you financially support your violent neighbour over your own children's businesses so he can beat his wife and kids, then later you and your children?



Should we double down and spend another trillion dollars rebuilding the Middle East?

I see we are at the typical RPF grasping at straws part of the thread. When no other point can be made just accuse the person of supporting spending another trillion in the Middle East which no one here ever advocates.



After all, their people are enslaved and impoverished. It would be immoral to not tax US citizens to help them.

You do not fund immorality at home or abroad.



I'm pretty sure it's considered a GOOD deal when someone offers to give you something for less than it's worth

It is not a good deal if it is a national security issue due to reliance on ones enemy that comes with the loss of your manufacturing, massive job losses and growing the welfare state as a result.

[Superfluous Man]

When someone offers to give you something for less than it's worth it is usually a con job.

The loss of our independence and wealth production capacity isn't worth the temporary profit which is almost entirely taken by the globalist elite anyway.

If you don't think buying things from China is a good use of your money, then boycott them. Just leave the rest of us who don't agree alone.

[Superfluous Man]

Protecting American interests over Chinese interests is America first and MAGA.

TheTexan couldn't have said it any better.

[CaptUSA]

OUR citizens are being impoverished by being forced to compete with slave labor with the playing field tilted in the slaves favor by tariffs and subsidies.

Wow. So this is just economic illiteracy. It’s no wonder you can’t understand Ron Paul’s message here. You should really try to understand things before commenting on them. I mean, you’re on a Ron Paul forum... do you think there’s any chance that he’s right on this?

[The Northbreather]

If you don't think buying things from China is a good use of your money, then boycott them. Just leave the rest of us who don't agree alone.

Yep. And endorsing the concept that the US state should become the moral authority for you as well as the world is irresponsible reckless and lazy.

The us has no moral responsibility to interfere on behalf of Chinese citizens wtf, they are not infringing on the rights of us citizens, taxes do however.

[Swordsmyth]

Wow. So this is just economic illiteracy. It’s no wonder you can’t understand Ron Paul’s message here. You should really try to understand things before commenting on them.

The "free" trade worshipers are the ones who are economically illiterate, consumption without production leads to bankruptcy and enslavement.


I mean, you’re on a Ron Paul forum... do you think there’s any chance that he’s right on this?

On this he is wrong, on almost everything else he is right.

[The Northbreather]

Dear nanny, please protect our hypothetical obsolete jobs by making the world safe and sh1t more expensive.

Your greatest admirers,
The Peons

[kahless]

TheTexan couldn't have said it any better.

It is like how much more obvious can I be about my beliefs but despite that he asked again about America First and MAGA.

Since no one is debating the value of free trade within the borders of the US or outside the borders of the US when it is mutually beneficial, I believe some here obviously do not have the best interests of US citizens in mind.

[CaptUSA]

The "free" trade worshipers are the ones who are economically illiterate, consumption without production leads to bankruptcy and enslavement.



On this he is wrong, on almost everything else he is right.

This is a key point of the liberty message. I’m sorry you don’t get it. It is not government’s role to “level any playing fields”. It is not the role of our government to make sure other countries don’t impoverish their subjects. It’s not government’s role to ensure US businesses have a market in other countries to sell their goods.

The role of government is to protect liberty. Not violate it. You progressives always want to give government more power as long as they promise to give you things. You should read more and type less. Maybe you’d learn something. Positive rights don’t exist. By creating them by government edict, you always violate someone’s negative rights.

[Zippyjuan]

The "free" trade worshipers are the ones who are economically illiterate, consumption without production leads to bankruptcy and enslavement.



On this he is wrong, on almost everything else he is right.

But we do have production. True we don't produce every single last item we need or want. But on the individual scale it is impossible for you do do that as well. So the individuals started to trade. Those more efficient at producing one thing traded that with somebody more efficient at producing something else and both were better off.

[kahless]

Dear nanny, please protect our hypothetical obsolete jobs by making the world safe and sh1t more expensive.

Your greatest admirers,
The Peons

^As I predicted a couple posts back. When their anti-Americanism is exposed on RPF they always make some sort of leap to US foreign military intervention on whatever the topic is now matter how irrelevant to the discussion.

[CaptUSA]

https://www.cato.org/blog/reciprocal-trade-demands-defy-basic-economics-common-sense?utm_content=buffer6f63b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Might this help?

[fcreature]

Your choice of doing the bidding for the Chinese Communist party to the point of putting American companies out of business while thousands of Americans lose their jobs is not only immoral it is repugnant and treasonous.

Your choice of doing the bidding for the Chinese Communist party so they can continue their horrible human rights record, work people like slaves and destroy the environment so they can succeed at harming American businesses and jobs is immoral and repugnant.


You can play the moral high ground all you want. It won't win you any arguments. I'm going to assume you've never purchased any good produced in China, less you be a hypocrite who is supportive of the Chinese Communist party.

Go ahead. Keep trying to convince me that taxing every single American is American first and MAGA.

Keep ignoring the economic reality that tariffs destroy vastly far more jobs than they create or save.

Here in the real world we know that taxes destroy wealth. We understand that tariffs are a direct tax on all American consumers. We can look at the results of past tariffs and see their impact on the economy - a loss of jobs that far surpasses those they "save". And disincentiving industry to reinvest, improve, and find ways to compete on their own merit.

We also know that manufacturing is the largest sector of the US economy and has been growing nearly every year over the last decade. We can see that our production is at near all-time highs.

But you've got your alternative facts... what am I going to do to convince you otherwise?



I see we are at the typical RPF grasping at straws part of the thread. When no other point can be made just accuse the person of supporting spending another trillion in the Middle East which no one here ever advocates.


So pointing out your flawed logic is grasping at straws now? Well, from my side it simply looks like you have no response. Why can't you just answer the question? Nice job quoting that and conveniently forgetting this little nugget I also posted:


Well, I hope you are at least consistent in your belief. Of course this would mean that you are for nation building, preemptive war, the welfare state, higher taxes... pretty much everything we're supposedly against around here.

As you can see, there are countless examples that can be used aside from rebuilding the Middle East. Pick whichever you like.

I'll repeat (and you'll ignore...). Less than 4% of steel we import is Chinese. If you are so concerned about the Chinese Communist party and the welfare of the Chinese citizens and our contribution towards that due to our minimal steel imports, what about the rest of the atrocities in the world? Where does it end?

You are literally advocating that we police the world. This is what you are proposing.


It is not a good deal if it is a national security issue due to reliance on ones enemy ...

Woah! Who is the one grasping at straws now? This is a national security issue? Is that a serious argument you are making? Military consumption of steel/aluminum accounts for a whopping 3% of our current domestic production... pre-tariff.


... that comes with the loss of your manufacturing, massive job losses and growing the welfare state as a result.

And we've already established that you are just flat out wrong on all 3 accounts above. Our manufacturing is as strong as ever, tariffs lead to more job loss than job creation, and taxes destroy wealth leading to a growth in the welfare state.

[The Northbreather]

This is a key point of the liberty message. I’m sorry you don’t get it. It is not government’s role to “level any playing fields”. It is not the role of our government to make sure other countries don’t impoverish their subjects. It’s not government’s role to ensure US businesses have a market in other countries to sell their goods.

The role of government is to protect liberty. Not violate it. You progressives always want to give government more power as long as they promise to give you things. You should read more and type less. Maybe you’d learn something. Positive rights don’t exist. By creating them by government edict, you always violate someone’s negative rights.
This is correct.

Faith in govt meddling over individual liberty is why we’re fooked.

[Swordsmyth]

This is a key point of the liberty message. I’m sorry you don’t get it. It is not government’s role to “level any playing fields”. It is not the role of our government to make sure other countries don’t impoverish their subjects. It’s not government’s role to ensure US businesses have a market in other countries to sell their goods.

The role of government is to protect liberty. Not violate it. You progressives always want to give government more power as long as they promise to give you things. You should read more and type less. Maybe you’d learn something. Positive rights don’t exist. By creating them by government edict, you always violate someone’s negative rights.

Part of the role of government is to protect the citizens from foreign enemies, foreign governments deliberately seek to destroy what some Americans have built through unethical means and you say we should look the other way because it benefits you.

[CaptUSA]

But we do have production. True we don't produce every single last item we need or want. But on the individual scale it is impossible for you do do that as well. So the individuals started to trade. Those more efficient at producing one thing traded that with somebody more efficient at producing something else and both were better off.

Hmmm. Could that be why wealth is concentrated in the cities even though they have very few resources? Could it be that each trade makes both parties a little more wealthy? Is it just a coincidence that most major cities are located at a trade port or rail hub? Man, it’s almost like magic or something. I guess we don’t really need central planning after all.

[Swordsmyth]

But we do have production. True we don't produce every single last item we need or want. But on the individual scale it is impossible for you do do that as well. So the individuals started to trade. Those more efficient at producing one thing traded that with somebody more efficient at producing something else and both were better off.
The longer the trade war goes on without us defending ourselves the closer we get to producing nothing.

[CaptUSA]

Part of the role of government is to protect the citizens from foreign enemies, foreign governments deliberately seek to destroy what some Americans have built through unethical means and you say we should look the other way because it benefits you.

So, they are harming us by making our purchases less expensive. Got it. Those damned bastards!

[kahless]

It is not the role of our government to make sure other countries don’t impoverish their subjects.

It is our governments role to ensure other countries do not impoverish us.

[CaptUSA]

It is our governments role to ensure other countries do not impoverish us.

Ugh. They are making us more wealthy!!!

But even if they weren’t and somehow we were losing wealth on the trades (ahem, you know we wouldn’t make the trade then, right?), it still wouldn’t be the role of government to intervene in the deal unless they were forcibly taking our wealth without our consent.

Meh, progressives... what are ya gonna do? They’ll never get it.

[Swordsmyth]

So, they are harming us by making our purchases less expensive. Got it. Those damned bastards!
They are harming us exactly the same way government harms people by giving out welfare, if we don't do something all of America will be one giant slum deprived of the will or the capacity to create wealth and dependent on government for their needs, we will then be required to jump through any hoops demanded of us to keep getting our needs supplied, welcome to the plantation.

[Krugminator2]

It must just be a miracle Hong Kong and Switzerland are so wealthy. They rank at the top of free trade and they don't produce or manufacture hardly any of their own stuff.

Someone should tell their governments to protect the workers. Poverty is right around the corner.

[fcreature]

The "free" trade worshipers are the ones who are economically illiterate, consumption without production leads to bankruptcy and enslavement.

If you are so economically literate, why do you keep posting factually incorrect statements about our economy? Specifically in regard to our manufacturing and production?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS
http://www.macrotrends.net/2583/industrial-production-historical-chart

United States industrial production, measured in real output, is at (or above) all time highs.

[Krugminator2]

Ugh. They are making us more wealthy!!!

But even if they weren’t and somehow we were losing wealth on the trades (ahem, you know we wouldn’t make the trade then, right?), it still wouldn’t be the role of government to intervene in the deal unless they were forcibly taking our wealth without our consent.

Meh, progressives... what are ya gonna do? They’ll never get it.

Something that seems to get lost is the United States doesn't trade much with China. United States citizens do. Just from a moral perspective, what right does the government have to a tell private businesses that they can't buy soccer balls or tennis shoes made by Chinese workers?

[CaptUSA]

They are harming us exactly the same way government harms people by giving out welfare, if we don't do something all of America will be one giant slum deprived of the will or the capacity to create wealth and dependent on government for their needs, we will then be required to jump through any hoops demanded of us to keep getting our needs supplied, welcome to the plantation.

You do realize that our increased wealth is applied in other industries, right? It’s a common misconception leveled by Marxists who only look at one industry at a time when making their pleas for more government. Every penny we save in cheaper steel is a penny used for some other purpose. Those other purposes matter, too. Production is enhanced by trade; not harmed. There’s no way around it.

[Swordsmyth]

It must just be a miracle Hong Kong and Switzerland are so wealthy. They rank at the top of free trade and they don't produce or manufacture hardly any of their own stuff.

Someone should tell their governments to protect the workers. Poverty is right around the corner.

Tiny countries with low populations can make almost their entire living off of trade services but there are only so many jobs in that industry and those that service them, a large nation like America needs other industries.

Also Hong Kong and Switzerland are vulnerable to their enemies because they can't supply their own needs, they must submit to tyrants (China or the EU) to a sufficient degree to keep them appeased, as time goes by it will take more and more to appease their enemies until they are no longer free at all.

[Swordsmyth]

You do realize that our increased wealth is applied in other industries, right? It’s a common misconception leveled by Marxists who only look at one industry at a time when making their pleas for more government. Every penny we save in cheaper steel is a penny used for some other purpose. Those other purposes matter, too. Production is enhanced by trade; not harmed. There’s no way around it.

At first perhaps but those other industries are being targeted by those who are engaging in trade war against us, if we don't put a stop to it we will eventually have no industries to benefit from cheap imports.

[Zippyjuan]

Tiny countries with low populations can make almost their entire living off of trade services but there are only so many jobs in that industry and those that service them, a large nation like America needs other industries.

Also Hong Kong and Switzerland are vulnerable to their enemies because they can't supply their own needs, they must submit to tyrants (China or the EU) to a sufficient degree to keep them appeased, as time goes by it will take more and more to appease their enemies until they are no longer free at all.

We need the government to deny our freedoms (to trade with whomever we want) so that we can be freer!

[Swordsmyth]

If you are so economically literate, why do you keep posting factually incorrect statements about our economy? Specifically in regard to our manufacturing and production?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS
http://www.macrotrends.net/2583/industrial-production-historical-chart

United States industrial production, measured in real output, is at (or above) all time highs.

Manipulated numbers.

[Zippyjuan]

China is blocking our exports! We need tariffs to protect us!

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IMPxpMEVxdw/TlwHrlS8rXI/AAAAAAAAPpo/Y1Iv8bwTjFU/s1600/china.jpg

That shows percent change. Here are actual figures:

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/cea/images/chart_3.gif

https://www.uschina.org/sites/default/files/StateExports1.jpg

[fcreature]

Manipulated numbers.

So should we go by your feelings instead?

Wow. So this is what things have come to around here. Sad!

[Swordsmyth]

So should we go by your feelings instead?

Wow. So this is what things have come to around here. Sad!
No we can go by the loss of our industries instead of numbers put out by the same people who have been destroying them.

I suppose you will next insist that we accept the government's numbers on inflation and unemployment?

[Zippyjuan]

Manipulated numbers.

Do you have the "real numbers"? Can you share?

[kahless]

Keep ignoring the economic reality that tariffs destroy vastly far more jobs than they create or save.

Here in the real world we know that taxes destroy wealth. We understand that tariffs are a direct tax on all American consumers. We can look at the results of past tariffs and see their impact on the economy - a loss of jobs that far surpasses those they "save". And disincentiving industry to reinvest, improve, and find ways to compete on their own merit.

We also know that manufacturing is the largest sector of the US economy and has been growing nearly every year over the last decade. We can see that our production is at near all-time highs.

But you've got your alternative facts... what am I going to do to convince you otherwise?

What country have you been living in these last 40 years, it certainly is not the US if you fail to recognize the loss of manufacturing and jobs to overseas.



So pointing out your flawed logic is grasping at straws now? Well, from my side it simply looks like you have no response. Why can't you just answer the question? Nice job quoting that and conveniently forgetting this little nugget I also posted: As you can see, there are countless examples that can be used aside from rebuilding the Middle East. Pick whichever you like.

You made the leap from trade to some how saying I support spending another trillion dollars foreign intervention in the Middle East which is ridiculous.



I'll repeat (and you'll ignore...). Less than 4% of steel we import is Chinese. If you are so concerned about the Chinese Communist party and the welfare of the Chinese citizens and our contribution towards that due to our minimal steel imports, what about the rest of the atrocities in the world? Where does it end?

You are literally advocating that we police the world. This is what you are proposing.

Never advocated that. More on that below.


And we've already established that you are just flat out wrong on all 3 accounts above. Our manufacturing is as strong as ever, tariffs lead to more job loss than job creation, and taxes destroy wealth leading to a growth in the welfare state.

The only thing that has been established here is that you are a hard core globalist on trade at the expense of America. You do not give a damn about growing the welfare state in the US as a result of globalist trade policies that you support.

The government's purpose is to ensure strategic free trade that is designed to be advantageous to America first and foremost, as a result of us having the largest and most lucrative consumer market. Trade policy should be used to advance America’s national and economic security priorities NOT work against it. This can be done by making access to U.S. markets contingent on foreigners playing by the rules in ALL sectors whether agriculture or high tech. If they don’t cooperate, they should pay a tariff in the best interests of American companies and American workers first.

Some countries are not going to like playing by the rules. Too bad, what alternative will they have? If they retaliate it will hurt them far more than us not being able to sell their cheap goods and services in our market.

[The Northbreather]

//

[The Northbreather]

It is our governments role to ensure other countries do not impoverish us.

Nope that’s your role or the role of your business.

You don’t have a right wealth, you do have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The way to keep they playing field level any open is to keep the government from making your business decisions for you or outright stealing your money from you (taxes).

Although our slogan isn’t “ America, where you have the right to wealth”, I feel like that’s what the masters broadcast so they can keep our cities full of fresh slaves wanting that guaranteed money$$

[kahless]

Americans are getting screwed on trade.



2017 US Trade Deficits in Billions

1 China -375.2
2 Mexico -71.1
3 Japan -68.8
4 Germany -64.3
5 Vietnam-38.3
6 Ireland -38.1
7 Italy -31.6
8 Malaysia -24.6
9 India -22.9
10 Korea, South -22.9
11 Thailand -20.4
12 Canada -17.6
13 Taiwan -16.7
14 France -15.3
15 Switzerland -14.3

Source: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/toppartners.html#def



US Trade Deficit at 9 Year High
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade
https://d3fy651gv2fhd3.cloudfront.net/charts/united-states-balance-of-trade.png?s=ustbtot&v=201802061652v

A Libertarian system would be ideal within our own borders. Outside of that the free trade ideology is completely retarded unless you are sadist or intent on making the US a shit hole country or are one of the global elite that benefits screwing the American people.

[phill4paul]

If you are so economically literate, why do you keep posting factually incorrect statements about our economy? Specifically in regard to our manufacturing and production?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS
http://www.macrotrends.net/2583/industrial-production-historical-chart

United States industrial production, measured in real output, is at (or above) all time highs.

Federal Reserve figures are to be trusted. Everything is fine. Ignore the homeless camps.

[fcreature]

No we can go by the loss of our industries instead of numbers put out by the same people who have been destroying them.

I suppose you will next insist that we accept the government's numbers on inflation and unemployment?

I can quite easily explain to you why government calculations on inflation and unemployment numbers are misleading and back it up with hard numbers and math.

Common sense would lead you to the assumption that production has increased. There is no reason to believe that overall manufacturing output has not been increasing. This lines up with the all the available data I have available. One would assume this due to automation, technical improvements, scientific refinement, etc. Some specific industries may have less production, but there are countless new manufacturing opportunities arising every day. Take energy for example.

Explain to me how the numbers regarding our manufacturing output are incorrect. Back it up with math and some hard data. Your feelings on the subject aren't going to cut it.

[Zippyjuan]

Americans are getting screwed on trade.



US Trade Deficit at 9 Year High
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade
https://d3fy651gv2fhd3.cloudfront.net/charts/united-states-balance-of-trade.png?s=ustbtot&v=201802061652v

A Libertarian system would be ideal within our own borders. Outside of that the free trade ideology is completely retarded unless you are sadist or intent on making the US a $#@! hole country or are one of the global elite that benefits screwing the American people.

Why do we have trade deficits with those countries? Are they the same as us economically- same levels of wealth? Are they able to buy as much stuff from us as we buy from them? For the most part, we are wealthier and can afford more things than they can. Does that mean we are worse off because we are better off? (also noting that if we buy stuff from them, they have more money to possibly buy stuff from us)

[fcreature]

Federal Reserve figures are to be trusted. Everything is fine. Ignore the homeless camps.

So because homeless camps exist (as if they haven't in the past...), that means US manufacturing output is decreasing? The homeless camps can't at all be related to huge government growth, high taxes, or massive regulations?

Listen. Disagree with the numbers if you want, but at least tell me why they're wrong and what the real numbers are.

[kahless]

It is our governments role to ensure other countries do not impoverish us.


Nope that’s your role or the role of your business.

You don’t have a right wealth, you do have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The way to keep they playing field level any open is to keep the government from making your business decisions for you or outright stealing your money from you (taxes).

Although our slogan isn’t “ America, where you have the right to wealth”, I feel like that’s what the masters broadcast so they can keep our cities full of fresh slaves wanting that garenteed money$$

I did not say that and I bolded the keyword my quote above. If a governments foreign policy is intent on decimating our means of production through trade policy it is a national security issue.



https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-addressing-unfair-trade-practices-threaten-harm-national-security/
Economic vitality, growth, and prosperity at home is absolutely necessary for American power and influence abroad.

President Donald J. Trump

COUNTERING TRADE PRACTICES THAT UNDERMINE NATIONAL SECURITY: President Donald J. Trump is addressing global overcapacity and unfair trade practices in the steel and aluminum industries by putting in place a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports.

President Trump is taking action to protect America’s critical steel and aluminum industries, which have been harmed by unfair trade practices and global excess capacity.
The President is exercising his authority to impose a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and a 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports in order to protect our national security.
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended, provides the President with authority to adjust imports being brought into the United States in quantities or under circumstances that threaten to impair national security.
The tariffs on steel and aluminum are anticipated to reduce imports to levels needed for these industries to achieve long-term viability.
As a result, these industries will be able to re-open closed mills, sustain a skilled workforce, and maintain or increase production.
The strengthening of our domestic steel and aluminum industries will reduce our reliance on foreign producers.
The President recognizes that Canada and Mexico present a special case, and will continue ongoing discussions with those countries to address our concerns.
The President welcomes any country with which we have a security relationship to discuss alternative ways to address our concerns, including our concerns about global excess capacity. He has left open an avenue for potentially modifying or removing a tariff under certain conditions for individual countries.
Modification or removal of the tariffs would be possible if alternative means are agreed upon to ensure imports from a country no longer threaten to impair our national security.
Under the direction of the President, the United States Trade Representative is responsible for negotiations with countries that seek an alternative means to the steel and aluminum tariffs.
In addition, there will be a mechanism for U.S. parties to apply for exclusion of specific products based on demand that is unmet by domestic production or on specific national security considerations.
This process will be managed by the Department of Commerce in consultation with other Federal agencies.

PROTECTING INDUSTRIES VITAL TO NATIONAL SECURITY: The tariffs imposed by President Trump will address steel and aluminum import quantities and circumstances that threaten to impair our national security.

President Trump’s action will address the conclusions reached in the Commerce Department’s Section 232 reports on the effects of steel and aluminum imports on our national security.
The Department of Commerce concluded that steel import levels and global excess capacity are weakening our internal economy and therefore threaten to impair national security.
The Department of Commerce’s report concluded that levels of foreign steel imports threaten to impair national security by displacing domestic production.
The Department of Commerce concluded that global excess steel capacity will cause U.S. producers to face more and more competition from foreign imports as other countries increase their exports to further their own economic objectives.
The Department of Commerce also concluded that the quantities and circumstances of aluminum imports are weakening our internal economy and threaten to impair national security.
Rising levels of foreign imports put domestic producers at risk of losing the capacity to produce aluminum needed to support critical infrastructure and national defense.
The report found that excess production and capacity, particularly in China, has been a major factor in the decline of domestic aluminum production.
The Department of Commerce concluded that if no action were taken, the U.S. could be in danger of losing the capability to smelt primary aluminum altogether.

CONSISTENT ACTION: President Trump’s action to protect American steel and aluminum industries is consistent with his Administration’s policies and practices.

President Trump’s action is in line with his long-standing commitment to confronting harmful, unfair trade.
On March 31, 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order on Establishing Enhanced Collection and Enforcement of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties and Violations of Trade and Customs Laws.
The Trump Administration has previously affirmed the importance of addressing unfair trade and the threat it poses to our national security.
One of the pillars of the President’s National Security Strategy is to “Promote American Prosperity.
The National Security Strategy stated that the United States will counter all unfair trade practices that distort markets.
A key principle of the President’s 2018 Trade Policy Agenda is to enact trade policy that will support our national security policy.
The 2018 Agenda stated that U.S. trade policy, like our national security policy, will seek to protect U.S. national interests.

[Swordsmyth]

Why do we have trade deficits with those countries? Are they the same as us economically- same levels of wealth? Are they able to buy as much stuff from us as we buy from them? For the most part, we are wealthier and can afford more things than they can. Does that mean we are worse off because we are better off?

It has NOTHING to do with their tariffs, subsidies and other trade barriers.:rolleyes:

[Zippyjuan]

I did not say that and I bolded the keyword my quote above. If a governments foreign policy is intent on decimating our means of production through trade policy it is a national security issue.

Is it a national security issue? Are we in danger of losing access to supplies in the event of a war or major international event? Will Canada or Mexico or Brazil cut off our supplies?

Imports account for about 30% of our steel consumption. China accounts for about four percent of those imports or about 1.2% of our total steel needs (less than $2 billion worth)

https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2017/08/Steel-imports-from-foreign-countries_WF.png.

[Swordsmyth]

Is it a national security issue? Are we in danger of losing access to supplies in the event of a war or major international event? Will Canada or Mexico cut off our supplies?

Imports account for about 30% of our steel consumption. China accounts for about four percent of those imports or about 1.2% of our total steel needs (less than $2 billion worth)

https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2017/08/Steel-imports-from-foreign-countries_WF.png.

China continues to try to destroy every other country's steel industry, do you expect us to wait until they succeed?

[kahless]

Another prospective.

There Is No "Free Trade" - There Is Only The 'Darwinian Game Of Trade'
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-12/there-no-free-trade-there-only-darwinian-game-trade

Those bleating about "free trade" are simply pushing a Darwinian strategy that benefits them above everyone else.
...
Then there's currency manipulation, for example, China's peg to the US dollar. What's the "free market" price of Chinese goods in the US? Nobody knows because the peg protects China from its own currency being too strong or too weak to benefit its export-dependent economy.
....
Protecting fragile domestic industries with tariffs has a long history, including in the US, but the real action isn't in tariffs: it's in the bureaucratic tools to limit trade and the soft and hard power plays that secure cheap resources while denying access to those resources to geopolitical rivals.
...
If we ask cui bono, to whose benefit?, we find the consumer has received shoddy goods and paltry discounts from "free trade," while corporations, banks and financiers have benefited enormously.

Rising income and wealth inequality is causally linked to globalization and the expansion of Darwinian trade and capital flows: the winners are few and the losers are many. Tariffs will not solve the larger problems of reduced employment, stagnant wages and rising income inequality. To make a dent in those issues, we'll need to tackle central bank and central-state policies that have pushed financial speculation to supremacy over the productive economy.
https://www.oftwominds.com/photos2016/corp-profits3-16b.png

[Zippyjuan]

Another prospective.

There Is No "Free Trade" - There Is Only The 'Darwinian Game Of Trade'
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-12/there-no-free-trade-there-only-darwinian-game-trade


Rising income and wealth inequality is causally linked to globalization and the expansion of Darwinian trade and capital flows:

Perhaps government should manage trade and prices so that things will be distributed more fairly. Instead of "survival of the fittest" where the inefficient are allowed to fail. Maybe they can force the wealthy to give money to the poor so that the "wealth gap" isn't quite so bad.

[kahless]

Perhaps government should manage trade and prices so that things will be distributed more fairly. Instead of "survival of the fittest" where the inefficient are allowed to fail. Maybe they can force the wealthy to give money to the poor so that the "wealth gap" isn't quite so bad.

If it was not for your red bar I would LOL thinking that was sarcasm. I and most here would disagree with you on that.

However I have no problem with anyone pointing out wealth inequality. It is the solutions that I worry about. I think it is worth noting since the risk is revolution for a system that is far worse than we have now.

My concern is losing the free market system due to massively growing monopolies and globalism.

[Swordsmyth]

Perhaps government should manage trade and prices so that things will be distributed more [un]fairly. Instead of "survival of the fittest" where the inefficient are allowed to fail.
^^^That^^^ (with a small edit) is what other governments are doing, we must do our best to defend against it.

[Zippyjuan]

If it was not for your red bar I would LOL thinking that was sarcasm. I and most here would disagree with you on that.

However I have no problem with anyone pointing out wealth inequality. It is the solutions that I worry about. I think it is worth noting since the risk is revolution for a system that is far worse than we have now.

My concern is losing the free market system due to massively growing monopolies and globalism.

Tariffs are good for monopolies. Protects them from competition.

[Anti Federalist]

Is it a national security issue?

If the US had to fight a major two front war against real adversaries, you might as well surrender now.

We no longer have the means to produce the tanks, and ships, and planes, and guns, and trucks, and munitions that we did during WWII for instance.

[Anti Federalist]

Tariffs are good for monopolies. Protects them from competition.

Then why are there a multitude of automobiles that you can choose from?

The only monopolies I see are globalist and borderless...Google and Fedbook and MicroSquash come to mind.

[Swordsmyth]

Tariffs are good for monopolies. Protects them from competition.
Which is exactly how other governments are using them.

[Zippyjuan]

If the US had to fight a major two front war against real adversaries, you might as well surrender now.

We no longer have the means to produce the tanks, and ships, and planes, and guns, and trucks, and munitions that we did during WWII for instance.

We didn't then either. We were still trying to dig out of the Great Depression and demand (and thus production) of goods was still low. They converted making consumer goods into using the same resources to make war goods. (we also have larger stockpiles of weapons already on hand today).

http://www.pbs.org/thewar/at_home_war_production.htm


War production profoundly changed American industry. Companies already engaged in defense work expanded. Others, like the automobile industry, were transformed completely. In 1941, more than three million cars were manufactured in the United States. Only 139 more were made during the entire war. Instead, Chrysler made fuselages. General Motors made airplane engines, guns, trucks and tanks. Packard made Rolls-Royce engines for the British air force. And at its vast Willow Run plant in Ypsilanti, Michigan, the Ford Motor Company performed something like a miracle 24-hours a day. The average Ford car had some 15,000 parts. The B-24 Liberator long-range bomber had 1,550,000. One came off the line every 63 minutes.



http://ww2awartobewon.com/wwii-archives/american-steel-shortage-lend-lease/


BRITIAN COMES TO U.S. AID IN STEEL SHORTAGE

10,000 Tons Monthly to Be Shipped to States as Output There Lags

From the July 11, 1944 Edition of Stars and Stripes

WASHINGTON, July 10–England has agreed to ship 10,000 tons of steel a month to the U.S. to head off an impending critical shortage, William L. Batt, chairman of the Combined Production and resources Board, announced.

The transaction was arranged at the request of military and war-production officials faced with the threatened curtailment of tank, sip, heavy-truck and artillery manufacturing this fall because of insufficient U.S. steel output, Batt said.

[Swordsmyth]

We didn't then either. We were still trying to dig out of the Great Depression and demand (and thus production) of goods was still low. They converted making consumer goods into using the same resources to make war goods. (we also have larger stockpiles of weapons already on hand today).

http://www.pbs.org/thewar/at_home_war_production.htm

Stockpiles are never enough, do we have the capacity required even if we do convert civilian production to military? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?
Weapons are higher tech now than they used to be, do we have the required industries? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?

[r3volution 3.0]

Production is a means to an end; the purpose of all economic activity is consumption.

...something to keep in mind.


RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad. :(


I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.

Tragic indeed


I think the culture war has affected people across the spectrum

...and the source of the tragedy.

[phill4paul]

So because homeless camps exist (as if they haven't in the past...), that means US manufacturing output is decreasing? The homeless camps can't at all be related to huge government growth, high taxes, or massive regulations?

Listen. Disagree with the numbers if you want, but at least tell me why they're wrong and what the real numbers are.

The homeless camps in my area behind the Wal-Mart didn't in the past. U.S. manufacturing of furniture, textiles and apparel employed most everyone at middle-class wages. Now it doesn't. I blame NAFTA and GATT for that. And a trade imbalance that wiped them out. But, hey, I'm glad you can by your cheap assed pressed wood desks and Chinese and Taiwanese jeans at that Wal-Mart that at leasts masks the blighted conditions they live in.

[timosman]

Federal Reserve figures are to be trusted. Everything is fine. Ignore the homeless camps.

The homeless are there to remind you to keep working so you don't become one.

[fcreature]

The homeless camps in my area behind the Wal-Mart didn't in the past. U.S. manufacturing of furniture, textiles and apparel employed most everyone at middle-class wages. Now it doesn't. I blame NAFTA and GATT for that. And a trade imbalance that wiped them out. But, hey, I'm glad you can by your cheap assed pressed wood desks and Chinese and Taiwanese jeans at that Wal-Mart that at leasts masks the blighted conditions they live in.

So in other words, you've got nothing but conjecture.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the real manufacturing output is in our economy.

I know this if a really hard concept to grasp for a lot of people but manufacturing output / production can increase while employment numbers within that same industry decrease.

Maybe we should just go back to the good old days when all we had were sticks and rocks.

[Zippyjuan]

The homeless camps in my area behind the Wal-Mart didn't in the past. U.S. manufacturing of furniture, textiles and apparel employed most everyone at middle-class wages. Now it doesn't. I blame NAFTA and GATT for that. And a trade imbalance that wiped them out. But, hey, I'm glad you can by your cheap assed pressed wood desks and Chinese and Taiwanese jeans at that Wal-Mart that at leasts masks the blighted conditions they live in.

There has always been homelessness in this country.

[phill4paul]

So in other words, you've got nothing but conjecture.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the real manufacturing output is in our economy.

I know this if a really hard concept to grasp for a lot of people but manufacturing output / production can increase while employment numbers within that same industry decrease.

Maybe we should just go back to the good old days when all we had were sticks and rocks.

It's not fucking conjecture. I witnessed it with my own fucking eyes, in my own fucking lifetime. Jesus fucking Christ. Those industries were DESTROYED. The local Technical Institute that used to teach these trades completely shut it down and turned to teaching people how to wipe other peoples asses in assisted living homes. Read the lies, damned lies and statistics all you care to. Until, you've lived and witnessed it just shut the fuck up.

[The Northbreather]

Stockpiles are never enough, do we have the capacity required even if we do convert civilian production to military? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?
Weapons are higher tech now than they used to be, do we have the required industries? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?
Yeah the empire has gear and personnel spread all over the damn globe.

Bad move. Creates enemies and costs a shitload. The toilet paper bill for one day would prolly set you up for the rest of your days. God knows how much it costs to move all that iron and steel around.

I wonder if there would be a surplus if all that sh!t was here like it should be.

[fcreature]

It's not $#@!ing conjecture. I witnessed it with my own $#@!ing eyes, in my own $#@!ing lifetime. Jesus $#@!ing Christ. Those industries were DESTROYED. The local Technical Institute that used to teach these trades completely shut it down and turned to teaching people how to wipe other peoples asses in assisted living homes. Read the lies, damned lies and statistics all you care to. Until, you've lived and witnessed it just shut the $#@! up.

It is conjecture. You are drawing conclusions based on incomplete information.

What you witnessed with your own eyes were specific companies going out of business in specific places. You did not witness the entire US manufacturing sector get wiped out. You personally witnessed a very small, minute piece of the puzzle. And for some reason you are assuming "unfair" trade policies are the causation of what you have witnessed when in reality there are a million different factors in play here. Forgive me if I expect a little effort put into an analysis of a causation relationship before you decide to tax me on the basis of it. Maybe something aside from your obvious sour grapes.

There have always been homeless people. The fact that there is homeless people does not mean they're there because of a lack of tariffs.

[r3volution 3.0]

So in other words, you've got nothing but conjecture.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the real manufacturing output is in our economy.

I know this if a really hard concept to grasp for a lot of people but manufacturing output / production can increase while employment numbers within that same industry decrease.

Maybe we should just go back to the good old days when all we had were sticks and rocks.

https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/blog_us_steel_production_1984_2014.jpg

Production has been more or less flat for decades.

As you imply, the main loss of jerbs in that particular industry was a function of increasing productivity.

The overwhelming problem for US industry in general, however, is regulation (and, to a lesser extent [yes, lesser] taxes).

Protective tariffs do nothing whatsoever to address either of these problems, of course; in fact, they make them worse, by stifling innovation.

When it comes to stagnant, socialistic economies and their reformation, one might do well to listen to this fellow:

https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/lee-kuan-yew.jpg

Not this one

http://www.sickchirpse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Donald-Trump-Disabled-.jpg

[Swordsmyth]

Yeah the empire has gear and personnel spread all over the damn globe.

Bad move. Creates enemies and costs a $#@!load. The toilet paper bill for one day would prolly set you up for the rest of your days. God knows how much it costs to move all that iron and steel around.

I wonder if there would be a surplus if all that sh!t was here like it should be.

We need to bring the troops and the equipment home but we also need the industries to provide a continuous supply in case of war, lacking what we need to defend ourselves will guarantee that we will be attacked sooner or later.

[kahless]

It's not fucking conjecture. I witnessed it with my own fucking eyes, in my own fucking lifetime. Jesus fucking Christ. Those industries were DESTROYED. The local Technical Institute that used to teach these trades completely shut it down and turned to teaching people how to wipe other peoples asses in assisted living homes. Read the lies, damned lies and statistics all you care to. Until, you've lived and witnessed it just shut the fuck up.

Exactly. Which is why I asked him where he has been living for the last 40 years not to have noticed it.

[The Northbreather]

Stockpiles are never enough, do we have the capacity required even if we do convert civilian production to military? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?
Weapons are higher tech now than they used to be, do we have the required industries? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?
What world are you living in?

I’m pretty sure the weapons industry is number one in exports, right next to printed money

[Zippyjuan]

We need to bring the troops and the equipment home but we also need the industries to provide a continuous supply in case of war, lacking what we need to defend ourselves will guarantee that we will be attacked sooner or later.

Yeah- the US doesn't have enough military hardware.

[r3volution 3.0]

The Dangers of Free Trade!

http://ifreetrade.org/photos/singapore-gdp-per-capita.png

[Swordsmyth]

What world are you living in?

I’m pretty sure the weapons industry is number one in exports, right next to printed money

It is the feeder industries that are most important, also no full fledged major wars are going on that we are supplying.

[Swordsmyth]

The Dangers of Free Trade!

http://ifreetrade.org/photos/singapore-gdp-per-capita.png

New York City is doing great too, it's the rest of us who aren't in the international trade industry that are being destroyed.

[fcreature]

Exactly. Which is why I asked him where he has been living for the last 40 years not to have noticed it.

Answer these questions.

1) If all academic / government manufacturing output numbers are false, what are the true numbers?
2) What is the flaw in the manner in which the production numbers are calculated?
3) Is it possible for manufacturing output to increase while simultaneously decreasing the amount of labor needed?
4) What is more important? Manufacturing employment or manufacturing output?

[r3volution 3.0]

New York City is doing great too, it's the rest of us who aren't in the international trade industry that are being destroyed.

You think NYC is a free trade paragon like Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore?

No, NYC relies on high finance, largely thanks to certain geopolitical considerations, and is otherwise extremely anti-business.

It will be Detroit in 30 years if you people have your way.

[The Northbreather]

It is the feeder industries that are most important, also no full fledged major wars are going on that we are supplying.

Yeah the neo-conservatives are always ichin for another war as well. Good for industry, the military-industrial type.

[Ender]

It is the feeder industries that are most important, also no full fledged major wars are going on that we are supplying.

You're joking, right?

[Swordsmyth]

You think NYC is a free trade paragon like Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore?

No, NYC relies on high finance, largely thanks to certain geopolitical considerations, and is otherwise extremely anti-business.

It will be Detroit in 30 years if you people have your way.

The point is that the rest of the US is not a trade hub, Singapore is a single city that can support itself as a trade hub, the whole world can't be composed of trade hubs.
People have to do something to earn their keep and pursue happiness, free trade is a nice concept but when other countries engage in trade war and destroy your industries and impoverish your people that isn't free trade.
America is well on it's way to becoming a communist welfare state if we continue to let the rest of the world abuse us, it's almost too late now.

[Swordsmyth]

You're joking, right?

Everything going on right now rolled into one war is nothing compared to a great power war.

[r3volution 3.0]

The point is that the rest of the US is not a trade hub, Singapore is a single city that can support itself as a trade hub, the whole world can't be composed of trade hubs.
People have to do something to earn their keep and pursue happiness, free trade is a nice concept but when other countries engage in trade war and destroy your industries and impoverish your people that isn't free trade.
America is well on it's way to becoming a communist welfare state if we continue to let the rest of the world abuse us, it's almost too late now.

No, the point is that free trade encourages economic development, while protectionism leads to the opposite.

How is it that the very punishment we impose on Iran...as a punishment, mind you...we think helps us when we impose it on ourselves?

Rather dumb, rather dumb...

Anyway, as for America's descent in socialism, protectionism is a critical part of that; being itself socialism and also encouraging more of the same.

I have an alternative suggestion, a truly crazy idea; let's try free markets.

[kahless]

It is conjecture. You are drawing conclusions based on incomplete information.

What you witnessed with your own eyes were specific companies going out of business in specific places. You did not witness the entire US manufacturing sector get wiped out. You personally witnessed a very small, minute piece of the puzzle. And for some reason you are assuming "unfair" trade policies are the causation of what you have witnessed when in reality there are a million different factors in play here. Forgive me if I expect a little effort put into an analysis of a causation relationship before you decide to tax me on the basis of it. Maybe something aside from your obvious sour grapes.

There have always been homeless people. The fact that there is homeless people does not mean they're there because of a lack of tariffs.

He said "those industries" so it does not sound like he is just speaking of one company. Curious, do you live outside the US or maybe just live in a major US city away from any form of manufacturing? Maybe you are allot younger than Phil who I gather reading from another thread has been around awhile like I have to notice these things.

Go back 30 years ago I sat in meeting rooms more than once as a new comer being let go with people that had been with the companies 10-40 years since production was being moved offshore. Many cities in my state look like burned out shell of remnants of US manufacturing of companies I was once familiar with that I know for a fact moved offshore.

To this day though I still have family and friends losing their careers having worked in firms 10-20, 30 years losing jobs specifically due to manufacturing moving to India or China.

[Swordsmyth]

No, the point is that free trade encourages economic development, while protectionism leads to the opposite.

How is it that the very punishment we impose on Iran...as a punishment, mind you...we think helps us when we impose it on ourselves?

Rather dumb, rather dumb...

Anyway, as for America's descent in socialism, protectionism is a critical part of that; being itself socialism and also encouraging more of the same.

I have an alternative suggestion, a truly crazy idea; let's try free markets.

There is a difference between sanctions and defensive tariffs, the ideal is low tariffs but there is a reason other countries tariff us and subsidize their industries, it may cost them in the long run but it will destroy us first if we don't respond.

[Ender]

Everything going on right now rolled into one war is nothing compared to a great power war.

Well the US spent the equivalent of 4 Trillion on WWII and about 5.6 Tr in the ME.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/study-us-spent-dollar56-trillion-on-wars-in-middle-east-asia

[r3volution 3.0]

There is a difference between sanctions and defensive tariffs, the ideal is low tariffs but there is a reason other countries tariff us and subsidize their industries, it may cost them in the long run but it will destroy us first if we don't respond.

How so?

Maybe our sanctions will encourage their domestic whatever production.

MIGA?

...and, if this brilliant economic theory is correct, perhaps we ought to ask the rest of the world to sanction us.

Then we could really "create jobs."

Why, stuff that we once imported at very low cost we could produce at higher cost ourselves.

That would be a big win, because the progress of civilization consists of having to spend more labor to produce the same widget, right?

[phill4paul]

It is conjecture. You are drawing conclusions based on incomplete information.

What you witnessed with your own eyes were specific companies going out of business in specific places. You did not witness the entire US manufacturing sector get wiped out. You personally witnessed a very small, minute piece of the puzzle. And for some reason you are assuming "unfair" trade policies are the causation of what you have witnessed when in reality there are a million different factors in play here. Forgive me if I expect a little effort put into an analysis of a causation relationship before you decide to tax me on the basis of it. Maybe something aside from your obvious sour grapes.

There have always been homeless people. The fact that there is homeless people does not mean they're there because of a lack of tariffs.

Not specific companies...whole INDUSTRIES. Furniture making, apparel, textiles. And yes, what I witnessed was a specific result, a causation, of imbalanced trade practices. Period. Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. I've lived and witnessed it. And, yes, there has always been homelessness. But, there has never been homeless camps in this area. I'm talking upwards of 100 people living in a tent enclaves and many more scattered about. The area went from below 2% unemployment in the late 90's to over 15% in 2010. And that was even after a huge exodus which fudges the unemployment numbers. At one time the areas furniture industry supplied 70% of the nations furniture needs. Now foreign imports provide 75% of the nations needs. The apparel industry tanked after NAFTA and GATT because the apparel business moved to Mexico where it was cheaper to make so that they could compete with China. The textile industry did the same. So don't tell me I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about. I do. But, ya know, globalism is the way to go. Cheap shit for everyone. Yay!

[Swordsmyth]

Well the US spent the equivalent of 4 Trillion on WWII and about 5.6 Tr in the ME.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/study-us-spent-dollar56-trillion-on-wars-in-middle-east-asia

And how may years were we at war in each case?

[Pauls' Revere]

LOL, more than likely, that Japanese or German vehicle is made right here.

Sure, but its made by Toyota or Honda. Not GM, Chrysler, or Ford.

[Ender]

And how may years were we at war in each case?

Well, officially we're not at war in the ME, as there has never been a constitutional declaration.

[Swordsmyth]

How so?

Maybe our sanctions will encourage their domestic whatever production.

MIGA?
The sanctions do tend to backfire, low tariffs are the ideal but it is safer to err on the side of self sufficiency and production than on the side of dependency and consumption.




...and, if this brilliant economic theory is correct, perhaps we ought to ask the rest of the world to sanction us.

The we could really "create jobs."
While not ideal we would be better off that way, there is a reason our enemies attack us with tariffs and subsidies rather than sanctions, we are capable of supplying our own needs and building wealth on our own unlike some nations with insufficient resources.

[Swordsmyth]

Well, officially we're not at war in the ME, as there has never been a constitutional declaration.
Fine, over how many years did those military expenditures take place?

Everything going on right now rolled into one would just be a sideshow in a great power war.

[Zippyjuan]

Automation has replaced a lot of workers. Output up- jobs down. Competition encouraged businesses to get more efficient.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/25/most-americans-unaware-that-as-u-s-manufacturing-jobs-have-disappeared-output-has-grown/


Most Americans unaware that as U.S. manufacturing jobs have disappeared, output has grown


http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/07/24112214/FT_17.07.18_manufacturing_decline.png

Manufacturing jobs in the United States have declined considerably over the past several decades, even as manufacturing output – the value of goods and products manufactured in the U.S. – has grown strongly. But while most Americans are aware of the decline in employment, relatively few know about the increase in output, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

Four of every five Americans (81%) know that the total number of manufacturing jobs in the U.S. has decreased over the past three decades, according to the survey of 4,135 adults from Pew Research Center’s nationally representative American Trends Panel. But just 35% know that the nation’s manufacturing output has risen over the same time span, versus 47% who say output has decreased and 17% who say it’s stayed about the same. Only 26% of those surveyed got both questions right.

One reason Americans may be more familiar with the long-term decline in manufacturing employment than the increase in output is that the job losses have been highly visible, especially in traditionally manufacturing-intensive areas of the Midwest and South.

Manufacturing jobs peaked in 1979 at 19.4 million, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and by 1987 had fallen to 17.6 million. What had been a slow decline in employment accelerated after the turn of the century, and especially during the Great Recession. Manufacturing payrolls bottomed out at fewer than 11.5 million in early 2010, and even though more than 900,000 manufacturing jobs have been added since, overall employment in manufacturing is still at its lowest level since before the U.S. entered World War II.

As a share of the overall workforce, manufacturing has been dropping steadily ever since the Korean War ended, as other sectors of the U.S. economy have expanded much faster. From nearly a third (32.1%) of the country’s total employment in 1953, manufacturing has fallen to 8.5% today.

But that doesn’t mean Americans don’t make things anymore. Last year, U.S. manufacturers made about $5.4 trillion worth of goods and products (in constant 2009 dollars), according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The biggest categories were food, beverages and tobacco products ($817 billion), chemical products ($752 billion) and motor vehicles and parts ($670 billion).

After adjusting for inflation, manufacturing output in the first quarter of this year was more than 80% above its level 30 years ago, according to BLS data. But while U.S. manufacturing output has increased in absolute terms, it still represents a smaller share of the economy than it used to: Manufacturing accounted for about 23% of gross output in 1997 (the first year for which such data are available) but just 18.5% last year.


More at link.

[kahless]

No, the point is that free trade encourages economic development, while protectionism leads to the opposite.

We lost 95% of manufacturing in the region I live in the last 50 years. There used to be a time where a person could start a family and own a home here at an early age by working in one of these factories. Not any more. The end result of your trade policies has been a high taxes as a result of having to pay for the welfare state since people cannot make a living on service jobs. (not all this is due to offshoring but I would give it a good 80%)

Government is only going to grow larger and taxers higher with your globalism as we lose volunteer services. Since your globalism left us with low paying service industry jobs the young people are working multiple jobs and we lose them for volunteer fire and ambulance. So taxpayers will be footing the bill for that to.

The only people winning at this are the globalists while the rest of us get screwed.

[Superfluous Man]

It's not $#@!ing conjecture. I witnessed it with my own $#@!ing eyes, in my own $#@!ing lifetime. Jesus $#@!ing Christ. Those industries were DESTROYED. The local Technical Institute that used to teach these trades completely shut it down and turned to teaching people how to wipe other peoples asses in assisted living homes. Read the lies, damned lies and statistics all you care to. Until, you've lived and witnessed it just shut the $#@! up.

The comment you're replying to didn't ask about manufacturing jobs. It asked about manufacturing output.

What's happening is that the US is now manufacturing more measured in inflation-adjusted dollars than it ever has before, and it's using less labor to do it.

Both parts of that are good things.

As you point out, now we're so rich that we can reallocate some of that labor that we used to have to spend on manufacturing on people serving us in ways when we get old and can't take care of ourselves that we would otherwise not be able to hire people to do.

I fail to see the downside.

[Swordsmyth]

Automation has replaced a lot of workers. Output up- jobs down. Competition encouraged businesses to get more efficient.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/25/most-americans-unaware-that-as-u-s-manufacturing-jobs-have-disappeared-output-has-grown/



More at link.


The comment you're replying to didn't ask about manufacturing jobs. It asked about manufacturing output.

What's happening is that the US is now measuring in inflation-adjusted dollars than it ever had before, and it's using less labor to do it.

Both parts of that are good things.



Because you think they tell the truth about the inflation numbers?

[r3volution 3.0]

The sanctions do tend to backfire, low tariffs are the ideal but it is safer to err on the side of self sufficiency and production than on the side of dependency and consumption.

D.C.'s sanctions against Iran are most certainly forcing the Iranians to be more self-sufficient.

Of course, this means that they're massively poorer than they otherwise would be, because the division of labor makes for greater productivity.

But, we're doing them a favor, evidently...


While not ideal we would be better off that way, there is a reason our enemies attack us with tariffs and subsidies rather than sanctions, we are capable of supplying our own needs and building wealth on our own unlike some nations with insufficient resources.

We'd be better off if the world sanctioned us like we're sanctioning Iran...

http://www.shrinktank.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/jump-the-shark.jpg

Incidentally, here's what people living wholey without the horror of the division of labor and trade look like:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Yqzrt-eviU/maxresdefault.jpg

I'll bet he's glad foreigners aren't taking his jerbs.

He's got all kinds of jerbs: primarily relating to trying to not starve or be eaten by bears.

But he's self-sufficient, yes sir...

[Zippyjuan]

Because you think they tell the truth about the inflation numbers?

Not adjusting for inflation the increase in output is even higher.

[r3volution 3.0]

It is by virtue of the division of labor that man is distinguished from the animals. It is the division of labor that has made feeble man, far inferior to most animals in physical strength, the lord of the earth and the creator of the marvels of technology.

I don't think the matter could be explained more succinctly.

[Swordsmyth]

D.C.'s sanctions against Iran are most certainly forcing the Iranians to be more self-sufficient.

Of course, this means that they're massively poorer than they otherwise would be, because the division of labor makes for greater productivity.

But, we're doing them a favor, evidently...



We'd be better off if the world sanctioned us like we're sanctioning Iran...

http://www.shrinktank.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/jump-the-shark.jpg

Incidentally, here's what people living wholey without the horror of the division of labor and trade look like:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Yqzrt-eviU/maxresdefault.jpg

I'll bet he's glad foreigners aren't taking his jerbs.

He's got all kinds of jerbs: primarily relating to trying to not starve or be eaten by bears.

But he's self-sufficient, yes sir...

I'm in favor of low tariffs and trade but America has enough people and resources to do division of labor and specialization within our own group, losing our freedom and independence and ending up on UBI with the government telling you what you have to do if you want to keep getting it might just make you envy that guy:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Yqzrt-eviU/maxresdefault.jpg

[Swordsmyth]

Not adjusting for inflation the increase in output is even higher.

And if the true inflation numbers were used it would be much lower or even nonexistent or negative.

And that is just one way the numbers are manipulated.

[nikcers]

And if the true inflation numbers were used it would be much lower or even nonexistent or negative.

And that is just one way the numbers are manipulated.
It's not really like those numbers matter as much as the monetary inflation, we don't get to see those numbers, unless Trump signs audit the fed.

[Zippyjuan]

And if the true inflation numbers were used it would be much lower or even nonexistent or negative.

And that is just one way the numbers are manipulated.

What are the "true inflation numbers"?

[Swordsmyth]

What are the "true inflation numbers"?

If you look you can find estimates but they do their best to hide them through manipulation of the methods for determining inflation.

[nikcers]

What are the "true inflation numbers"?
95-98% depending on if you use the CPI numbers or compare it to gold.

[r3volution 3.0]

I'm in favor of low tariffs and trade

Right, except that you're not; you're cheering protectionism and autarchy.


but America has enough people and resources to do division of labor and specialization within our own group

https://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/shaking_head_breaking_bad.gif

Maybe you'll figure it out eventually.

[Zippyjuan]

If you look you can find estimates but they do their best to hide them through manipulation of the methods for determining inflation.

So you don't have any idea or evidence other than you think they are "different".

[kahless]

I'm in favor of low tariffs and trade but America has enough people and resources to do division of labor and specialization within our own group, losing our freedom and independence and ending up on UBI with the government telling you what you have to do if you want to keep getting it might just make you envy that guy:


^This