A fool-proof plan for economic recovery: [modified]

Mustafa Ismail Mustafa · modified on Friday, March 6, 2009 9:01 PM

Chris Austin wrote:

You want manufacturing back into this country? Then be willing to pay for it. Don't complain when you have to pay an extra $200 for a computer monitor.

Jordan doesn't have any manufacturing to speak of, but I would happily pay more to get some decent quality products. I was positioned in China for 1.5 years and I know exactly what you're talking about and exactly what trash quality is.

Oakman

Stan Shannon wrote:

But I think that almost any society working its way from a primitive pre-industrial state, to a modern free market society has to pass through a period of some form of slave labor.

Perhaps so, but we do not have to give them the money to buy the whips and chains. We do not have to beggar our own work force by encouraging China to destroy its agrarian settlement in favor of slave labor camps. And we do not have to pretend that it isn't happening so they'll loan us some more money.

Stan Shannon wrote:

And I think all we have to do to give homegrown industry a fighting chance is to get government and labor unions off their backs.

You're right. Eliminate the 13th and 14th Amendments and we're all set.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Synaptrik

Would you agree that we do need a balance of reasonable tariffs though? I guess what I'm trying to get at is: Is it possible we've lowered the bar too far when calling something protectionist?

This statement is false

Synaptrik

Chris Austin wrote:

What you are refusing

I ignored the first attempt, but I'm not sleeping through economics nor am I refusing to see your point. I'm quite open to the prospect that I have it wrong. But I feel that this is worthy of discussion, so I'm persisting.

Chris Austin wrote:

We siginificantly lower our way of life/cost of living. or

The current market is forcing this.

Chris Austin wrote:

Once we stop consuming throw away products US based manufacturers will need to step up and outperform the competition. It's not something that can happen quickly.

I agree. But I don't see any real viable alternatives. A balancing factor is required and historically and currently in other countries this has been done through tariffs. And I should clarify that I'm discussing punitive tariffs but tariffs on par with the rest of the industrialized world, such as China, since they are mentioned earlier in this thread. They have more punitive tariffs against us than we have against them, so currently we are out of balance with our trading partners. I'm just suggesting that we return to a level playing field.

This statement is false

Synaptrik · modified on Saturday, March 7, 2009 12:05 PM

Chris Austin wrote:

Can we level the playing field with tariffs?

Can we do so without tariffs? We're competing with countries that have tariffs. This isn't a level playing field. Case in point, the EU just added some for bio diesels against us.

This statement is false

Rob Graham

Oakman wrote:

He was, and you are, absolutely correct.

So, does that mean that instead of tariffs, what we really need is national health care to level the playing field?

Lost User

The United States have a number of tariffs in place. As does the European Union. As do many other countries around the world. That is fact.

Synaptrik wrote:

Can we do so without tariffs?

Only by being super-efficient in your manufacturing and re-introducing industry for products that you presently need to import. By that I mean, there is no one answer but you will need to put into practice the best traditions of systems analysis to assess probable solutions industry by industry, company by company, it can't be left to government. But if you want government to act in a particular way, remember the concept of an eye for an eye. Retaliation will happen, in fact, it is guaranteed, and a right royal mess with ensue.

Lost User

It is best to do away with all forms of protectionism. Tariffs, reasonable or not, is most likely to be matched by overseas countries.

Oakman

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

Thank you John. You have confirmed what I said in a thread below.

You continue to talk in terms of academics, I am afraid. In the real world, no country does not already have tariffs in place, and few if any countries have as few or as forgiving tariffs as does the US. Hardly any if we exclude the other English-speaking countries. Meanwhile we have repressive regimes which allow no free market within their borders, produce their goods using indentured labor in a manner resembling Nazi Germany's use of concentration camp inhabitants, spew deadly chemicals into the air without any scrubbing and export products that should be covered in blood to show what has been spent instead of money in their manufacture. And somehow, you talk as if the two are equals. :confused:

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Oakman

Rob Graham wrote:

does that mean that instead of tariffs, what we really need is national health care to level the playing field?

Why can't we have both? It's not like the US economy is just a little bit in trouble.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Lost User

A National Health Service based upon the British model will still costs employers money but nowhere near as much as it costs for your employers for their present healthcare costs.

Rob Graham

I am inclined to believe that tarrifs will hurt rather than help. What would you place tarrifs on? We already have tarrifs on things that seem to hurt rather than help (Sugar, ethanol, etc.)

Lost User

Nothing wrong with introducing some academic aspect to our discussions. Sometimes I agree they can be a distraction. But, as a thought, one of the main causes of this debacle could be attributed to what was/is still an incessant march of capitalism's industrial globalization policies. And because of that, within the company free trade will happen, but not necessarily between the country of origin and destination where other considerations are relevant. So how should global entities be treated? What should their responsibilities be? How should governments treat them? Many questions, but no easy answer in what is another aspect of the troubles.

Oakman

Rob Graham wrote:

What would you place tarrifs on? We already have tarrifs on things that seem to hurt rather than help (Sugar, ethanol, etc.)

How about steel, toys, clothing - just off the top of my head.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Oakman

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

So how should global entities be treated

Tax their entire income in every country in which they do business.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Lost User

That might possibly be a way of making certain imports more expensive all without the formal use of tariffs. But there is a problem, differentiating between home made and imported where the product make/model is identical in every respect as this company, as many do, operates a production line in the USA as it does in, say, the Far East producing identical stuff. If you were to insist that taxation for foreign made items to be different from home brew items, who is going to pay the company to redesign either the home grown stuff or the imported stuff, after all, you must have a way of telling them apart. Certainly you will need to advertise what is essentially the same product at two or more different prices. It could possibly be disastrous.

Rob Graham

Steel- Do you really think the mills in Pittsburgh or Birmingham will start back up? Is there anyone willing and able to work in them? Does either city want the pollution back? Do we really want the energy cost? I would propose instead a tax subsidy for recycling steel in country (today it's cheaper to ship it to Japan for re-manufacture). Instead of taxing it's importation, lets make internal recycling competitive. Toys - were we ever a player in that business? Clothing - The return of the double-knits? The NYC sewing sweatshops. Who besides (mostly illegal) immigrants worked in the clothing (not fabric manufacture) side of things?

Rob Graham · modified on Saturday, March 7, 2009 2:06 PM

Stan Shannon wrote:

Just about any thing could trigger the implosion of massively overpopulated urban centers in the modern world. I think human civilization could be reduced to cannibalism in a matter of weeks.

Like a really big solar flare that mucks up the electrical grid for months instead of just days.

Oakman

Rob Graham wrote:

Like a really big solar flare that mucks up the electrical grid for months instead of just days.

Never thought of that - I keep waiting for the Big One in California. But, hell, if Krakatoa was to blow its top again, we could end up with one year of world-wide bad harvest.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Oakman

You could, I think, end up proving that the best thing we could do would be to eliminate any stateside production of anything.

Rob Graham wrote:

Is there anyone willing and able to work in them

I caught this on the news this afternoon: A medium-sized city announced a single opening for a school janitor's position. There were 700 applicants in 24 hours. No, that's not nearly as tough as a steelworker's job, but it doesn't pay as well either.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.