- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 12,879
- Reaction score
- 2,707
- Location
- New England
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Paying more for the same product is not patriotic, it is idiotic, forcing ONLY U.S. consumers to waste money just to prop up an industry. Manufacturing is only 12% of U.S. GDP and only supplies 9% of the U.S. workforce with jobs. Trying to "grow" that is foolish, since the real way to make money, as a nation, is to EXPORT not to simply consume more internally.
I am for free trade INSIDE our national borders and Protectionism at worst and Isolationism at best when dealing with trade outside of our borders.
if high costs forced the company out of business and all of you were fired, would you as a group be buying more? or less?
Considering the wages Chinese workers make.23-37 cents an hour and 80 hour work weeks,about 75-110 a month, that number is way higher than 5000 jobs in China. If these workers in American were making at least minimum wage that would be 10-17 Chinese workers gaining jobs per American that lost his or her job due to outsourcing.
Then I must be an IDIOT, because I go out of my way to purchase AMERICAN products as much as humanly possible.
Then I must be an IDIOT, because I go out of my way to purchase AMERICAN products as much as humanly possible.
I think tarriffs should vary acording to how well the country invoved, has in place safety & health Regulations in line with our own. If they pay a living wage that would allow for a middle class. That they don't engage in dumping. That workers have the freedom to collectively bargain to better there situation.eace
Many do just that, and they are idiots. IMHO. A Toyota Tundra truck is made in the USA, in San Antonio, TX, and is a very good truck, yet many think that those non-union U.S. workers are "cheating" because they can make a better, cheaper truck than GM. Ford makes many of their trucks in Mexico. I get a kick out of that, when I see a Texan driving a Ford and saying how "patriotic" they are, for buying an "American" truck.
In the mean time, the U.S. borrows from China to spend foolishly. We now pay China enough interest, on their share of our national debt, to pay the entire Chinese military budget using U.S. tax money, yet complain that they are "dumping" products here. LOL If we did not pay for the entire Chinese military, then they would have to tax their OWN factories to do so.
I work in a regulated industry. If this company goes out of business, we're ALL in a lot of trouble.... when's the last time you saw an electric utility company go out of business?
2001? Am I to understand that your solution is to turn every sector of the economy into one partially run by the federal government like the utilities?
I don't even think there's been one that recently.
My solution is to remove the government from the equation entirely
My solution requires a full-scale change in the American lifestyle, which would not be popular with the masses in any form. It actually requires people to start living within their means and to return to worrying about Right and Wrong more than what is in their wallet's best interest.
teaser47401 said:Traditional protectionists, like America’s founding fathers, needed no other rational for imposing tariffs than that they benefited American companies. … We Neo-protectionists … believe that such tariffs, once agreed on in principle, may be implemented in a way which will benefit not only Americans, but the world as whole as we remove the incentives for exploitive business practices from American markets.
teaser47401 said:Even as America put unheard of limits on domestic industry for the purpose of protecting workers, consumers, and the American market, from the excesses of laissez-faire capitalism, free international trade was considered sacrosanct.
teaser47401 said:Free Trade became an axiom of economic science rather than a result. …
We argue that laissez-faire capitalism is no more appropriate for international trade than it is for domestic trade.
teaser47401 said:We point out that the Comparative Advantage theory which is the economic basis for free trade policy is itself based on two assumptions which are no longer true. The first assumption is that capital is immobile. … [The second] is the assumption of full employment.
teaser47401 said:The comparative advantage theory assumes that if a country does not have an advantage in producing a particular good or service, that country will take its capital and invest in another industry where it can be competitive.
teaser47401 said:Money, free of national boundaries, seeks absolute advantage regardless of nationalistic concerns. … and while that stored labor (money) may move freely across international boarders, a country’s population cannot.
teaser47401 said:Advances in Science, Agriculture and Engineering have made it unnecessary for the entire population to work in order to fill the material needs of mankind. Comparative Advantage and in fact economic theory in general, is based on the assumption that more is better.
teaser47401 said:The problem is no longer one of resource allocation. It is one of distribution and capitalism has no mechanism for distributing goods and services to those with nothing to barter.
teaser47401 said:Capitalism will insure the best and the brightest are rewarded, but capitalism has no need for the rest of the population. The gap between the rich and the poor will continue to widen as the middle class is pushed up or down the economic ladder, with the vast majority being pushed down.
teaser47401 said:Eventually the unemployed populace of our nation will demand the government provide for their needs. America will become a welfare nation paid for by the few who give the unemployed just enough to stave off revolution. The result will be socialist America with its populace dependant on its government to meet their basic needs.
Anyone who says they support free trade, but only if other countries adhere to American labor standards, doesn't actually support free trade at all.
To highlight the absurdity of this demand, let's consider a hypothetical situation: Suppose we discovered a previously-unknown island nation which was fabulously wealthy. In this country, the GDP per capita is $500,000 and people work an average of 10 hours per week. When they see our backwards American civilization, they take pity on us...they refuse to trade with us until we fix our inhumane work conditions (40 hours a week is just cruel), and pay our workers a living wage (at least $200,000 per year). Would their self-righteous finger-wagging benefit us in any way whatsoever? Of course not. We just wouldn't be able to trade with them at all, and it would do absolutely nothing to bring our standard of living up to match theirs.
You can look at the flip side too. If a pair of Chinese shoes costs $20, and the U.S. shoes cost $100, then you can either go barefoot for a year and "save up" or buy Chinese shoes and be happy. This is the Walmart argument, in a nut shell. Sure, a few more U.S. jobs would be guaranteed by blocking global competition, but at what cost to ALL U.S. consumers?
That $80 extra that you spent buying those "patriotic", made in USA, shoes is $80 that you will not spend on other goods and services, and for very, very little gain in U.S. employment.
Anyone who says they support free trade, but only if other countries adhere to American labor standards, doesn't actually support free trade at all.
To highlight the absurdity of this demand, let's consider a hypothetical situation: Suppose we discovered a previously-unknown island nation which was fabulously wealthy. In this country, the GDP per capita is $500,000 and people work an average of 10 hours per week. When they see our backwards American civilization, they take pity on us...they refuse to trade with us until we fix our inhumane work conditions (40 hours a week is just cruel), and pay our workers a living wage (at least $200,000 per year). Would their self-righteous finger-wagging benefit us in any way whatsoever? Of course not. We just wouldn't be able to trade with them at all, and it would do absolutely nothing to bring our standard of living up to match theirs.
Yeah...how many bombs does that island have?
Poor people put things in layaway, use Fingerhut catalogs, buy at second hand stores, buy b-grade shoes, go to closeout stores, go to second hand stores. Poor people have been doing this as for as long as these things have existed. Many of those US consumers work in factories and as such have money to go buy many American made products. I do not know about but every 20 dollar pair of shoes I have ever bought are wears out a lot faster than 80 dollar shoes.20 dollar shoes wear out so much easier than 80 dollar should you could have bought a 80 dollar pair of shoes that will last a whole lot longer than 20 dollar shoes. So I do not buy 20 dollar shoes anymore.
Buying outsourced products is very little gain for US employment. So its a help one American company or a dozen or so Chinese companies.Buying American products doesn't help the Chinese Strengthen it's military.
Precisely how would restricting economic relations with said country improve the living conditions of the aforementioned impoverished and underprivileged workforce? Improving the living conditions and economic stability of said country can be accomplished quite effectively through economic diplomacy. South East Asia is living proof of this particular phenomena.
I think tarriffs should vary acording to how well the country invoved, has in place safety & health Regulations in line with our own. If they pay a living wage that would allow for a middle class. That they don't engage in dumping. That workers have the freedom to collectively bargain to better there situation.eace
The ethnocentrism, paternalism, arrogance, and subtle racism in this thread are truly sad. Some people are inclined to view foreigners from developing countries as silly little people who just don't understand what they "should" be earning, so they need some white Americans - in our infinite wisdom of THEIR needs - to stand up for them by making unreasonable demands and putting them out of work.
If your attitude is "**** them all," as one person in this thread stated, that's one thing. Trade barriers don't benefit us either, but at least that person was being honest about his attitude. Much more annoying are the people who pretend to CARE about living conditions in developing countries, then proceed to frame policies that hurt them as victories for the little guy.
Are you aware that many govts. and people in the Third World consider environmentalism and global warming as a form of white imperialism?
They see it as just another haggard attempt by white people to continue their domination of the world. That's why the Copenhagen Global Warming Conference of December 2009 failed.
Btw, I like Brown people. I married one. And now I have Brown sons.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?