Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
CODE PROJECT For Those Who Code
  • Home
  • Articles
  • FAQ
Community
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. A fool-proof plan for economic recovery: [modified]

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

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
question
106 Posts 11 Posters 5 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • 7 73Zeppelin

    Richard A. Abbott wrote:

    Yet, if that occurs the loser will be the domestic marketplace. There are other downsides as well. Such as, the efficiency of an organization will be much reduced if they are compelled to work with sub-quality objects irrespective if that object is an item of machinery or a poorly educated worker, which will increase their costs in a non-specific way. And I don't necessarily mean their costs in terms of dollars. But Dollars, Pound Sterling, Euro's etc., the bottom line counts.

    Exactly. Which is why protectionism is not a good economic policy.

    S Offline
    S Offline
    Synaptrik
    wrote on last edited by
    #79

    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

    L 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • C Chris Austin

      Synaptrik wrote:

      Which really brings us back to my main point. That an economy is driven by demand, which equates to labor, which needs a manufacturing base to really thrive.

      What you are refusing to see is that in order for a retail manufacturing base to thrive once again in this country one of two things need to change. 1) We siginificantly lower our way of life/cost of living. or 2) Consumers, have to demand higher quality goods and be willing to pay for them. You or I may want to pay for quality goods. But, I submit that the success of stores like BigLots, Dollar Tree and, Walmart paints an entirely different picture of the American Consumer's demand for goods. 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.

      Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?

      S Offline
      S Offline
      Synaptrik
      wrote on last edited by
      #80

      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:

      1. 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

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • C Chris Austin

        Oakman wrote:

        1. We establish trade barriers that provide the competition for the comsumer's dollar with a level playing field.

        Can we level the playing field with tariffs? For me, I see it as more of a break down of ethics. A lot of the walmart shoppers and nike buyers know that they are supporting near slave like sweatshops but they have managed to rationalize it somehow. Before instituting tariffs we would need to have a serious national discourse for there to be any real and lasting support. I can just imagine the propaganda and counter-propaganda coming from CNN and FOX.

        Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?

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

        S Offline
        S Offline
        Synaptrik
        wrote on last edited by
        #81

        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

        L 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • O Oakman

          Rob Graham wrote:

          He argued that the real problem was that all our competitors governments subsidized the cost of employee health care, while US firms are expected to provide that subsidy, thus making the cost of doing business not a level playing field.

          He was, and you are, absolutely correct. Along with with the workplace regulations, environmental requirements, health care is a cost of business only in the US (and possibly Japan). Of course nothing beats having a throughly cowed labor force unable to protest against 7 day, 12 hour shifts and afraid to stay out sick.

          Rob Graham wrote:

          Clearly, China does not subsidize it's citizens health care costs at present, but it seems to be clearly moving in that direction

          I'm sure it subsidizes all party member's costs. It only the 90% of their population that qualifies for the term, "peasant," that they let die from what would be minor problems over here.

          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.

          R Offline
          R Offline
          Rob Graham
          wrote on last edited by
          #82

          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?

          O L 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • S Synaptrik

            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

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #83

            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.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • S 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

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #84

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

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • L Lost User

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

                O Offline
                O Offline
                Oakman
                wrote on last edited by
                #85

                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.

                L 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • R 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?

                  O Offline
                  O Offline
                  Oakman
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #86

                  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.

                  R 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • R 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?

                    L Offline
                    L Offline
                    Lost User
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #87

                    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.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • O 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.

                      R Offline
                      R Offline
                      Rob Graham
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #88

                      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.)

                      O 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • O 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.

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Lost User
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #89

                        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.

                        O 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • R 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.)

                          O Offline
                          O Offline
                          Oakman
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #90

                          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.

                          R 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • L 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.

                            O Offline
                            O Offline
                            Oakman
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #91

                            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.

                            L 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • O 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.

                              L Offline
                              L Offline
                              Lost User
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #92

                              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.

                              O 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • O 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.

                                R Offline
                                R Offline
                                Rob Graham
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #93

                                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?

                                O 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • S Stan Shannon

                                  Rob Graham wrote:

                                  You are assuming that the cause of the collapse will be war. I think it is much more likely that worldwide famine and epidemics will be the cause. The current economic problems raise the likelihood of a new pandemic, as hunger and starvation increase in places like China. Given the rapidity with which disease is spread in today's world, it is unlikely that the next great pandemic will be confined to the continent it begins on.

                                  I agree with that. But war, famine and pestilence usually all go together. I simply do not believe that it is possible to effectively manage an international economy with anything less than an international government. And the only alternative to an international economy is no economy at all which means no real government at all. 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.

                                  Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                  modified on Saturday, March 7, 2009 2:06 PM

                                  R Offline
                                  R Offline
                                  Rob Graham
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #94

                                  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.

                                  O 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • R Rob Graham

                                    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.

                                    O Offline
                                    O Offline
                                    Oakman
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #95

                                    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.

                                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • R 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?

                                      O Offline
                                      O Offline
                                      Oakman
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #96

                                      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.

                                      R 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • L 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.

                                        O Offline
                                        O Offline
                                        Oakman
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #97

                                        Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                        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.

                                        Seems like that would be the company's problem. However, for the what seems like the millionth time, I am not in favor of tariffs between trading partners who have a free market, including in labor, at home, and who are not irresponsible when it comes to the environment or product safety. If theses mthologically identical products are manufactured under the same social circumstances, there is no need for taxing the entry of either product into either country. If one of them has been produced by 12 year olds chained to the production line 12 hours a day and the other produced by willing and well-paid adults, then we should impose a tariff, not only to protect our own businesses, but to eliminate at least some of the profit in slaveholding.

                                        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.

                                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • O Oakman

                                          Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                          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.

                                          Seems like that would be the company's problem. However, for the what seems like the millionth time, I am not in favor of tariffs between trading partners who have a free market, including in labor, at home, and who are not irresponsible when it comes to the environment or product safety. If theses mthologically identical products are manufactured under the same social circumstances, there is no need for taxing the entry of either product into either country. If one of them has been produced by 12 year olds chained to the production line 12 hours a day and the other produced by willing and well-paid adults, then we should impose a tariff, not only to protect our own businesses, but to eliminate at least some of the profit in slaveholding.

                                          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.

                                          L Offline
                                          L Offline
                                          Lost User
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #98

                                          Oakman wrote:

                                          However, for the what seems like the millionth time...

                                          Sorry.

                                          Oakman wrote:

                                          slaveholding

                                          What generally is public opinion in the USA on this subject. How much influence does this public opinion, including any adverse publicity, have on such retailers. How ethical is the United States towards these impoverished foreign based workers. There was a time when our prestigious Marks & Spencer's sold items of clothing made in such sweatshops. But no more after the company was humiliated on national TV.

                                          O 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups