Do you support the removal of all trade barriers with other nations?

[ProIndividual]

Amen 3d!

Here is a video of Stefan Molyneaux describing how many Trillions of dollars we lose a year to regulations (it isn't just that companies leave, it's that we make them wholly inefficient as well through pre-emptive, as opposed to post-action, regulation). Also, a graph seen on "Stossel" that shows the irrelevance of OSHA in reality...not the liberal union statist myths we hear about the glory and goodness of OSHA. And a chart to show unions are also irrelevant.

Technological advance is corollary to advances in safety...the less men do, the less we can be hurt by doing it. Unions are obviously not at all causal or corollary to woker fatality decreases.



Regulation may be the easiest and best option, with spending cuts coming in a close second. But raising taxes is NOT an option. Last time I checked, if I spend too much the solution is NEVER to demand more money from my boss, but to cut my spending habits. Raising taxes is essentially demanding more money from the boss...it's economic nonsense unless you're a tyrant.

 

[ProIndividual]

Unless the capitalist protectionists come back, it looks like we're left debating with liberals...lol.

One of which is a troll, most obviously.

This is why libertarians are not taken seriously.

No, what you wrote, after all the info and graphs I posted on this thread, is why libertarians don't take YOU, or your arguments, seriously.

Please read my posts, and the articles I linked too on Statist Economic Fallacies and Externality Fallacy....they address, answer, and generally destroy your apprehensions. Although, you do need to take the time to READ them before you can try and attack them...

...sometimes I think I'd be better off arguing with a wall.

 

[Dr.3D]

Cheapness = Superiority. All other factors...irrelevant.

Well, let's see.....

Factory #1 is in the United States, it makes parts that are painted with solvent based paint and has to spend millions of dollars for equipment to clean the solvent out of the exhaust air before it released back into the environment.

Factory #2 is in China, it makes the same parts as factory #1 but doesn't have to spend the millions of dollars to clean the exhaust air.

Which one can make the product cheaper?

Of course the company owning factory #1 can't compete with it's Chinese counter part and thus decides to move it's manufacturing to China.

Free trade sure does work fine for the people in the country where the same part can be made cheaper because of less government regulations.

 

[romacox]

These large global businesses exist only because of government subsidies (a creation by the very government that seeks to regulate them).

 

[josh b]

Shame on workers for wanting more money.

Cheapness = Superiority.

I take it that you missed the marginalist revolution, and all of economic theory that followed it. Prices, profits, and wages are not arbitrary numbers that evil capitalists create from thin air. The structure of production is not mystical and otherworldly.

So how does this change benefit you? Tons of people are out of work and when you go to the store, the product (MAYBE) becomes .50 cheaper, you see .25 of the savings for one product. The owner keeps .25 for a million transactions. Whose living standards have improved more? I'm pulling numbers out of thin air, but you can see my point, yes?

“The whole of economics can be reduced to a single lesson, and that lesson can be reduced to a single sentence. The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.”
~Henry Hazlitt

Have you been paying the slightest attention to what we have said so far? You are ignoring the secondary consequences of the tariff. Where is all the money not spent on that particular product going to go? Are the consumers going to use it as toilet paper? You are the one ignoring 'reality and facts'. While that poor unfortunate industry is not being propped up by the tariff other industries will expand as a result of people having more money to spend. Tariffs do not create employment they simply rearrange it. It redistributes capital in a less efficient way than the distribution under free trade.

Also, when China and India become first world nations with great living standards....what makes you think they'll let you come over to work? They have more than enough people. Why would they not simply allow America to fall into abject poverty and laugh at the irony? Explain.

I take it you did not read ProIndividual's link. Immigration restriction is technically another form of protectionism, which we oppose. Also, what does 'more than enough people' mean, exactly? I was unaware that there was a limited amount of work to be done in the world. I did not know that scarcity could be completely done away with.

Wait, why am I responding to trolls? Go read some books on the topic.

 

[ProIndividual]

joshb...this is why protectionism was loved by mercantilist society and the State and monopolists that benefited from it...

...protectionism redirects capital at the expense of the consumers to the oligarchy, plain and simple.

 

[josh b]

joshb...this is why protectionism was loved by mercantilist society and the State and monopolists that benefited from it...

...protectionism redirects capital at the expense of the consumers to the oligarchy, plain and simple.

Yep. Many Republicans today are mercantilists posing as free marketers. I always called them that because it sounds better than 'corporatist'. I can't stand to listen to some of them attack leftist ideas about interventionism and then turn around and make such a blatant fallacy. Oh well, Ron Paul supporters are usually better than the average Sean Hannity or Bill Oreilly style Republican. Most of them know better than this I hope.

 

[Southron]

Seriously this stuff goes all the way back to Adam Smith. It should be common knowledge by now. Economics does not look kindly on you my friend. Now, no offense intended, but are you going to answer my question about why violent interventions in the market to subsidize American industries somehow produces prosperity? I would like to see a good economic reason.

My economic reasons are based on what I have witnessed in the area of NC that I live. Manufacturing has disappeared and has been replaced by service (fast food) jobs or nothing at all.

I think you all put entirely too much faith in the market. Ending regulations would certainly help some but if we can't bring manufacturing back, then we are never going to have a true economic recovery.

 

[mtj458]

For all the talk of there being no jobs left, can anyone give me any evidence that OUTSIDE of a recession, our job numbers are any worse than they have been historically? Unless you are naive enough to blame the recession on free trade, I just don't understand the argument. I mean, I want my children performing manual labor in a textile factor rather than having a lousy service job in technology or medicine just as much as the next guy, but give me a break.

 

[Dr.3D]

For all the talk of there being no jobs left, can anyone give me any evidence that OUTSIDE of a recession, our job numbers are any worse than they have been historically? Unless you are naive enough to blame the recession on free trade, I just don't understand the argument. I mean, I want my children performing manual labor in a textile factor rather than having a lousy service job in technology or medicine just as much as the next guy, but give me a break.

Well, we have been losing industry for at least the past 30 years. I doubt the loss of those jobs has had much to do with the current recession. As government regulations picked up, the loss of jobs accelerated.

 

[mtj458]

Well, we have been losing industry for at least the past 30 years. I doubt the loss of those jobs has had much to do with the current recession. As government regulations picked up, the loss of jobs accelerated.

Government regulations are not the same as trade restrictions. But regardless, look at the unemployment rate over the last 15 years- obviously our society can support a stable amount of jobs.

Seems like a lot of people here have a weird obsession with manufacturing jobs over service jobs and it doesn't make sense. Comparative advantage says poor countries should be doing the manufacturing. If we have economic growth for 500 years, it's hard to imagine there being any service jobs left.

 

[tpreitzel]

Absolutely not. In fact, the US needs to form a veritable trade barrier around the union of states. Multi-national corporations need to become multi-state corporations or leave the union.

 

[Fox McCloud]

Absolutely not. In fact, the US needs to form a veritable trade barrier around the union of states. Multi-national corporations need to become multi-state corporations or leave the union.

You do realize this will only crush our current standard of living even more, right?

 

[Dr.3D]

Government regulations are not the same as trade restrictions. But regardless, look at the unemployment rate over the last 15 years- obviously our society can support a stable amount of jobs.

Seems like a lot of people here have a weird obsession with manufacturing jobs over service jobs and it doesn't make sense. Comparative advantage says poor countries should be doing the manufacturing. If we have economic growth for 500 years, it's hard to imagine there being any service jobs left.

Mark my words, the country with the most heavy industry is going to come out way ahead in the end. Yeah, those service jobs will be taking care of those who work in heavy industry.

Hey mister, do you want fries with your shake?

 

[josh b]

My economic reasons are based on what I have witnessed in the area of NC that I live. Manufacturing has disappeared and has been replaced by service (fast food) jobs or nothing at all.

I think you all put entirely too much faith in the market. Ending regulations would certainly help some but if we can't bring manufacturing back, then we are never going to have a true economic recovery.

This debate appears to be winding down now.

I also believe that your use of the political means as a way to bring manufacturing back is based on false pretenses. Propping up businesses is not an effective means to speed up economic recovery, it just sweeps underlying problems under the rug. It's similar to how the stimulus bills and quantitative easing as solutions actually make the problem worse. I'll leave it at that.

I hope I wasn't too harsh in this thread. At least people should leave with an awareness of the secondary consequences of economic policies.

 

[tpreitzel]

You do realize this will only crush our current standard of living even more, right?

You do realize that "our current standard of living" is based on a mirage, i.e. debt, so your question is meaningless. Furthermore, since the better paying jobs have been purposely exported overseas, I can't pay my portion of accumulated debt. While still possible, maybe, I could apply for a loan and start another local McDonalds' franchise. Thanks to "free trade", please welcome the US as one of the newer members of the third world.

 

[Dr.3D]

While still possible, maybe, I could apply for a loan and start another local McDonalds' franchise. Thanks to "free trade", please welcome the US as one of the newer members of the third world.

Welcome to the reverse of the Industrial Revolution. Seems TPTB believe it is now time for China to have theirs.

 

[Fox McCloud]

You do realize that "our current standard of living" is based on a mirage, i.e. debt, so your question is meaningless. Furthermore, since the better paying jobs have been purposely exported overseas, I can't pay my portion of accumulated debt. While still possible, maybe, I could apply for a loan and start another local McDonalds' franchise. Thanks to "free trade", please welcome the US as one of the newer members of the third world.

What? This doesn't even make any sense. The average family does have a mortgage and some credit card debt, but that's hardly what the economy is built on---the massive debt the US has it accumulated by the Federal government, not individual citizens---it has little to do with standard of living or anything----the case could be much better made that the debt has reduced or is holding down our current standard of living, not sustaining it.

You also engage in a complete strawman, equating service with purely McDonalds (or other low paying service sectors)---and that industrialization/manufacturing doesn't exist at all....I'll leave it to my fellow free trade brethren, but there's a chart around here somewhere that shows that manufacturing has actually gone up, over the years--it's just far more efficient now and we require far less workers to do the same job it took 2-3 men to do 30 years ago.

Your argument is a moot point, even if our economy was almost totally service---take a look at Hong Kong; they have ultra minimal government almost TOTAL free trade with practically no restrictions, and they thrive---they're very wealthy...and guess what? They don't have gobs of manufacturing, either--IIRC, they're something like 90% of their GDP coming purely from "service".

 

[tpreitzel]

What? This doesn't even make any sense. The average family does have a mortgage and some credit card debt, but that's hardly what the economy is built on---the massive debt the US has it accumulated by the Federal government, not individual citizens---it has little to do with standard of living or anything----the case could be much better made that the debt has reduced or is holding down our current standard of living, not sustaining it.

LoL ... yeah right ... Let's return to a strictly constitutional currency based on gold and silver coinage if debt has "little to do with standard of living or anything" ...

You also engage in a complete strawman, equating service with purely McDonalds (or other low paying service sectors)---and that industrialization/manufacturing doesn't exist at all....I'll leave it to my fellow free trade brethren, but there's a chart around here somewhere that shows that manufacturing has actually gone up, over the years--it's just far more efficient now and we require far less workers to do the same job it took 2-3 men to do 30 years ago.

LoL again ... "Over the years", shouldn't one expect manufacturing to increase, at least a tad? Talk about "a complete strawman" .... What does "gone up" over the years mean in comparison with likely manufacturing levels if such jobs weren't exported overseas? Answer: zilch. Lastly, in a healthy economy, increased efficiencies should simply mean the reallocation of resources to other industries within the US.

Your argument is a moot point, even if our economy was almost totally service---take a look at Hong Kong; they have ultra minimal government almost TOTAL free trade with practically no restrictions, and they thrive---they're very wealthy...and guess what? They don't have gobs of manufacturing, either--IIRC, they're something like 90% of their GDP coming purely from "service".

Guess what? Hong Kong is a recipient of business transferred from other nations under the guise of "free trade". In other words, if other nations still retained their manufacturing capability, Hong Kong might not be so wealthy, eh?

 

[Cutlerzzz]

What? This doesn't even make any sense. The average family does have a mortgage and some credit card debt, but that's hardly what the economy is built on---the massive debt the US has it accumulated by the Federal government, not individual citizens---it has little to do with standard of living or anything----the case could be much better made that the debt has reduced or is holding down our current standard of living, not sustaining it.

You also engage in a complete strawman, equating service with purely McDonalds (or other low paying service sectors)---and that industrialization/manufacturing doesn't exist at all....I'll leave it to my fellow free trade brethren, but there's a chart around here somewhere that shows that manufacturing has actually gone up, over the years--it's just far more efficient now and we require far less workers to do the same job it took 2-3 men to do 30 years ago.

Your argument is a moot point, even if our economy was almost totally service---take a look at Hong Kong; they have ultra minimal government almost TOTAL free trade with practically no restrictions, and they thrive---they're very wealthy...and guess what? They don't have gobs of manufacturing, either--IIRC, they're something like 90% of their GDP coming purely from "service".