Equal tariffs: an essential part of the economic fix

[expat_panama]

...So far I haven't seen a strong case for unilaterally low tariffs, here or anywhere...

You may have misspoken and what you really mean is that you've never accepted the arguments that so many others consider strong.

Which is the fallacy of appealing to the popular...

No, I was trying to allow you a way to save face, let's set aside tact and go for clarity. The reason we're convinced you don't see any strong arguments is because you've closed your eyes to them. The reason we know this is the fact that you've not suggested the nature of any new logical theme, an unmentioned underlying value, a possible new analytical observation, some new discovery, or anything else that you could possibly accept as a compelling reason.

Enjoy your religious conviction.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

You may have misspoken and what you really mean is that you've never accepted the arguments that so many others consider strong.

Which is the fallacy of appealing to the popular...

No, I was trying to allow you a way to save face, let's set aside tact and go for clarity. The reason we're convinced you don't see any strong arguments is because you've closed your eyes to them. The reason we know this is the fact that you've not suggested the nature of any new logical theme, an unmentioned underlying value, a possible new analytical observation, some new discovery, or anything else that you could possibly accept as a compelling reason.

Apparently the royal "we" has been reading only what it wants to read. I have indeed stated the logical theme and its underlying value. Here they are once more.

The theme is equal tariffs. Meaning that when Country A levies a 10% duty on American imports of Product X, America places the same 10% duty on imports of Product X from Country A. 10% = 10%, hence the name "equal."

The underlying value is that equal tariffs, applied consistently, encourage countries everywhere to lower their tariffs on US imports, confident that America will do the same. It's exactly the same goal you want - no tariffs anywhere - but unlike you, it offers a logical approach to attain this goal.

You may now acknowledge this and be absolved of all past economic sins.

 

[The Rabbi]

As long as you're willing to admit that tariffs put in place by other nations restrict American production and consumption, sure.

Of course that happens, making foreign economies less efficient and more costly.

 

[expat_panama]

We're not communicating, but maybe someone else can succeed at conveying what Wiseacre began with--

...You're a bright guy too, but you don't seem to be able to respect a differing opinion. I'm done here.

I frequently respect different opinions, when the case for them is stronger than the one I've made. So far I haven't seen a strong case for unilaterally low tariffs, here or anywhere...

--and how I invited myself into the conversation--

...The reason we're convinced you don't see any strong arguments is because you've closed your eyes to them. The reason we know this is the fact that you've not suggested the nature of any new logical theme, an unmentioned underlying value, a possible new analytical observation, some new discovery, or anything else that you could possibly accept as a compelling reason...

What's happened is that Wiseacre and I are convinced that there is no argument contradicting your point of view that you could possibly accept, which is why I attempted to reword Wiseacre's above statement with which I had agreed. We all know you accept your own views, we all agree they have logic and merit and we all heard them the first time. What Wiseacre and I are saying is that we understand there's nothing anyone could ever say that you'd accept as meriting any reconsideration on your part, and that we understand your beliefs are absolute.

Regardless, don't get me wrong, there are many absolutes that I've adopted and will never be willing to renounce --examples include the value of improving humanity's general well-being, the imperative of justice as an end in itself, etc. I have my absolutes and you have yours. Free country.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

We're not communicating, but maybe someone else can succeed at conveying what Wiseacre began with--

...You're a bright guy too, but you don't seem to be able to respect a differing opinion. I'm done here.

I frequently respect different opinions, when the case for them is stronger than the one I've made. So far I haven't seen a strong case for unilaterally low tariffs, here or anywhere...

--and how I invited myself into the conversation--

...The reason we're convinced you don't see any strong arguments is because you've closed your eyes to them. The reason we know this is the fact that you've not suggested the nature of any new logical theme, an unmentioned underlying value, a possible new analytical observation, some new discovery, or anything else that you could possibly accept as a compelling reason...

What's happened is that Wiseacre and I are convinced that there is no argument contradicting your point of view that you could possibly accept, which is why I attempted to reword Wiseacre's above statement with which I had agreed. We all know you accept your own views, we all agree they have logic and merit and we all heard them the first time. What Wiseacre and I are saying is that we understand there's nothing anyone could ever say that you'd accept as meriting any reconsideration on your part, and that we understand your beliefs are absolute.

How can you possibly be so sure of this? I have often admitted to being incorrect in the face of an argument that's more compelling - both on this forum and elsewhere. The above appears to me to be just a weasely way of saying "Wiseacre and I can't come up with a stronger argument." You don't need to be afraid of being honest about it.

However, if you can think of a more logical, more meritorious position, I would love to hear it. That's what discussion is supposed to be for.

 

[Hum Dinger]

Differing tariffs are irrelevant. The only question to be asked is whether or not you are better off making the trade. Trades don't have to be equal, all that matters is whether or not you benefit from it.

Agreed, and I've just demonstrated why we're not benefiting.

Pinqy can correct me if I'm guessing wrong, but my take is that he's talking about the individual and not the collective, and that the only person who can decide if an exchange is good or not is the person making the exchange --not the state. That's pretty much my view too, that people are good and can run their own lives. The people tell the state what to do and not the other way around.

What fantasy world do you live it?

The preamble of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that one of the very purposes for the existence of the U.S. government is to provide for the General welfare of the American people. Later it cites the responsibilty of the federal government to set tariffs.

I gotta admit...your logic certainly is a good match for your picture...good choice!

 

[Wiseacre]

Okay, one more foray into this topic. The OP is bascially talking about retaliatory protectionism, mostly tariffs, against another country who has tariffs against our products coming into their country. The idea is that we should raise our own tariffs in response, perhaps matchng theirs. But there are issues with this:

1. There are political consequences to such actions. Whether against one country or several or everybody, it is not as cut and dried as just looking at the present trade imbalance. These things can escalate, causing resentment that might bite us in the ass at some point in the future. To blow this off is to be very foolish IMHO.

2. When you raise tariffs against somebody or somebodies, there's going to be a response. They're going to hit back in some way. So aside from the political harm, there are also economic consequences too. There are many who believe that the Smoot Hawley bill passed back in the late 20s led to a world wide breakdown to intnational trade, which in turn made the depression harder to dig out of. Not caused it, but exasperated the situation.

3. If you raise a tariff against a foreign country's products coming into the USA, you are raising prices here that the consumer has to pay. And that is detrimental to our economy, cuz now the consumer has less money to buy other things and the industries that make those other things will suffer. So maybe you help out the specific companies who produce the tariffed products, but you hurt the rest of the economy.

Seems to me there is something to be said for reciprocity. If another country is screwing us over, then we should address the situation. We are no longer in a position to be that generous, not with our current trade imbalance. But there are factors to be considered, as I laid out. Sometimes just the threat will do the trick, but if necessary various forms of protectionism should be used if it makes sense to do so and negotiations have failed. But make no mistake, there is a cost if you raise a tariff against somebody.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Want to know one of the top reasons that so many jobs have gone overseas? In the US, tariffs on manufactured goods (where they exist at all) average anywhere from 2-5%. In China, that rate is about 22%. In India, it’s 40%. Why aren’t patriotic Americans talking about this?

Genuine free trade, by definition, and its resulting benefits can’t exist unless both trading partners are playing by the same rules. Because "trade" is a two way street, "free trade" can exist only with equal tariffs – whether the rate is 0% or 50%. Without the balance, a much lower American import tariff just contributes to the erosion of our borders (and sovereignty) and an open door for the world to plunder our economy. The result would be, and has been, an exploding trade deficit that, if left unchecked, will eventually, maybe rapidly, destroy what’s left of the economy.

When other countries have much higher import tariffs than we do, here’s what happens:
First, their industrial base gains advantages from its protectionist tariffs if we don't match theirs. These manufacturers enjoy reduced or zero competition from their US counterparts. They can take the resulting increased profits and use them for R&D, better manufacturing equipment, and so on. Then, their products become even better and cheaper, making it difficult if not impossible for American manufacturers to compete in our own market as well as in the global market. All Americans suffer from this.

Second, lower import tariffs in the US don’t encourage the reduction or elimination of tariffs by other nations. They simply have no incentive. The purest model of free trade will only be achieved through the imposition of matching tariffs. The unilateral imbalance of US tariffs works against the pursuit of global free trade.

Free market absolutists will counter these arguments by claiming that any restrictions on trade impoverish those who are restricted. What they don’t realize is that this rule only applies to the consumer from the country with the high tariff and not to the manufacturer from the country with the lower tariff. You can’t ignore either one.

Because we know trade wars always have great results.

I know you are an idiot, why do you have to work so hard to prove it?

 

[Wonky Pundit]

Okay, one more foray into this topic. The OP is bascially talking about retaliatory protectionism, mostly tariffs, against another country who has tariffs against our products coming into their country.

You keep clinging to a straw man that we already established is not part of the argument.

Tariffs are not retaliatory when:
1) They are not higher than those of the country against which they're being levied, and
2) There is an explicit promise to lower them when the trading partner does the same.

In addition, Smoot Hawley made no attempt to follow a strategy even remotely like this.

You say (correctly) that the US can't afford to be generous with its markets, and yet you are advocating exactly that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

An open policy of mirroring another nation's tariffs is not the same thing as a tariff war. When there's a clear incentive for another country to reduce its tariffs - because of a clear commitment from the US - tariffs will start to go down, possibly even to the ideal rate of 0%.

That is, by definition, exactly what a trade war is. You raise tariffs, we do it back.

Trade war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your policy is that we threaten other countries with higher tariffs if they do not reduce theirs. Only an idiot would think that would induce them to lower their tariffs simply because we say we will do so.

Intelligent people usually understand that someone has to go first, and the United States generally considers itself to me a nation that blazes trails and sets examples. Instead, you want to turn us into a third world nation that pouts and insists that the other guy go first.

I know you have me on ignore, now everyone can see why. It is not because you are civil and want to be treated with respect, it is because you are 3 years old.

This is fallacy because it takes into account only the consumer variable, leading to an inaccurate conclusion. You have to look at what happens to American manufacturers when American tariffs are lower. As I said in the OP, when American manufacturers have competition that their foreign counterparts have the luxury of avoiding, our industrial base gets weaker.

Look at it like this. Entrepreneurs who risk a great deal of their own money to create a new manufacturing business do not do it so that people can buy product X for less money. They start businesses to make a profit for themselves. When the ability to profit is negatively affected by unbalanced tariffs, guess what happens. They decide not to start the company - or to close a company that used to be profitable. Those who depended on that company for a job no longer have the income to buy product X. THAT is what results in fewer jobs and a lower standard of living, not the other way around.

Don't keep ignoring such an obvious component of the equation, either you or panama.

You are ignoring something else.

Even when Chinese steel was a fraction of the price of US steel we were able to compete with them in the rest of the world because we delivered a vastly superior product. They could deliver it cheaper, but we delivered a product that could do anything.

I do not understand why anyone thinks that price is the only factor people consider when making a purchase, or why they think there are only two countries in the entire world.

If we start a trade war it will eventually cripple the entire ******* planet. It is the 21st century. It is possible to take something from design to finished product in a fraction of the time it used to take, and we can now print parts in garages. I do not understand why people who think they are being progressive insist we should concentrate on the way things were done in the 19th century.

• Trains
• Factories
• Local farming
• Organic fertilizer
• No pesticides
• Reduce the use of oil and electricity

Why not just kill off 5 billion people and make the process faster?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We're not communicating, but maybe someone else can succeed at conveying what Wiseacre began with--

...You're a bright guy too, but you don't seem to be able to respect a differing opinion. I'm done here.

I frequently respect different opinions, when the case for them is stronger than the one I've made. So far I haven't seen a strong case for unilaterally low tariffs, here or anywhere...

--and how I invited myself into the conversation--

...The reason we're convinced you don't see any strong arguments is because you've closed your eyes to them. The reason we know this is the fact that you've not suggested the nature of any new logical theme, an unmentioned underlying value, a possible new analytical observation, some new discovery, or anything else that you could possibly accept as a compelling reason...

What's happened is that Wiseacre and I are convinced that there is no argument contradicting your point of view that you could possibly accept, which is why I attempted to reword Wiseacre's above statement with which I had agreed. We all know you accept your own views, we all agree they have logic and merit and we all heard them the first time. What Wiseacre and I are saying is that we understand there's nothing anyone could ever say that you'd accept as meriting any reconsideration on your part, and that we understand your beliefs are absolute.

Regardless, don't get me wrong, there are many absolutes that I've adopted and will never be willing to renounce --examples include the value of improving humanity's general well-being, the imperative of justice as an end in itself, etc. I have my absolutes and you have yours. Free country.

Exactly.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Okay, one more foray into this topic. The OP is bascially talking about retaliatory protectionism, mostly tariffs, against another country who has tariffs against our products coming into their country. The idea is that we should raise our own tariffs in response, perhaps matchng theirs. But there are issues with this:

1. There are political consequences to such actions. Whether against one country or several or everybody, it is not as cut and dried as just looking at the present trade imbalance. These things can escalate, causing resentment that might bite us in the ass at some point in the future. To blow this off is to be very foolish IMHO.

2. When you raise tariffs against somebody or somebodies, there's going to be a response. They're going to hit back in some way. So aside from the political harm, there are also economic consequences too. There are many who believe that the Smoot Hawley bill passed back in the late 20s led to a world wide breakdown to intnational trade, which in turn made the depression harder to dig out of. Not caused it, but exasperated the situation.

3. If you raise a tariff against a foreign country's products coming into the USA, you are raising prices here that the consumer has to pay. And that is detrimental to our economy, cuz now the consumer has less money to buy other things and the industries that make those other things will suffer. So maybe you help out the specific companies who produce the tariffed products, but you hurt the rest of the economy.

Seems to me there is something to be said for reciprocity. If another country is screwing us over, then we should address the situation. We are no longer in a position to be that generous, not with our current trade imbalance. But there are factors to be considered, as I laid out. Sometimes just the threat will do the trick, but if necessary various forms of protectionism should be used if it makes sense to do so and negotiations have failed. But make no mistake, there is a cost if you raise a tariff against somebody.

We are a member of the WTO, which means that we have treaty obligations that actually prevent us from using retaliatory trade tariffs just because another country imposes tariffs on something made in America. We are actually bound by treaty, and federal law, from doing what Wonky is suggesting because some very smart, educated, people got together and convinced others that it is a bad idea.

 

[expat_panama]

...Exactly.

Oh hi, didn't realize you were here. It's good to know I'm not the only adult here, I was beginning to feel like a baby sitter. I'll start paying attention again just in case the discussion switches from name-calling back to trade policy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

...Exactly.

Oh hi, didn't realize you were here. It's good to know I'm not the only adult here, I was beginning to feel like a baby sitter. I'll start paying attention again just in case the discussion switches from name-calling back to trade policy.

Probably won't, Wonky has me on ignore because he doesn't like the way I express my opinion of his posts.

 

[Hum Dinger]

We are a member of the WTO, which means that we have treaty obligations that actually prevent us from using retaliatory trade tariffs just because another country imposes tariffs on something made in America. We are actually bound by treaty, and federal law, from doing what Wonky is suggesting because some very smart, educated, people got together and convinced others that it is a bad idea.

Those treaties were made at a time when it seemed that America was an invincible economic power. They were also made with the political purpose of spreading capitalism into China and undermining communism.

Now, America is nearing economic devastation - and the communists still rule China.

The problem with free trade is that whenyou merge 2 dissimilar economies, one suffers. In this case that one is America.

The standard of living in China, until very recently, was abismal compared with the U.S., BUT the Chinese people were used to it. That standard has sky-rocketed. Meanwhile, the standard of living has dropped like a rock for most Americans and we are NOT used to it.

American workers are responsible for winning the cold war, protecting capitalism, out producing every other country in the world. We are (in the words of GWB) the hardest working people in the world.

WTF is going on!

Our own capitalist class has betrayed us beyond imagination!

Now, they're further attempting to destroy the American working class by promoting extreme free liberatarian economic policies for the purpose of destroying the American federal Government - our only real protection against economic totalitariansim.

We have to do something and a real good place to start is by reversing the policies that have led us into this mess. Imposing protectionist policies is a real good start.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We are a member of the WTO, which means that we have treaty obligations that actually prevent us from using retaliatory trade tariffs just because another country imposes tariffs on something made in America. We are actually bound by treaty, and federal law, from doing what Wonky is suggesting because some very smart, educated, people got together and convinced others that it is a bad idea.

Those treaties were made at a time when it seemed that America was an invincible economic power. They were also made with the political purpose of spreading capitalism into China and undermining communism.

Now, America is nearing economic devastation - and the communists still rule China.

The problem with free trade is that whenyou merge 2 dissimilar economies, one suffers. In this case that one is America.

The standard of living in China, until very recently, was abismal compared with the U.S., BUT the Chinese people were used to it. That standard has sky-rocketed. Meanwhile, the standard of living has dropped like a rock for most Americans and we are NOT used to it.

American workers are responsible for winning the cold war, protecting capitalism, out producing every other country in the world. We are (in the words of GWB) the hardest working people in the world.

WTF is going on!

Our own capitalist class has betrayed us beyond imagination!

Now, they're further attempting to destroy the American working class by promoting extreme free liberatarian economic policies for the purpose of destroying the American federal Government - our only real protection against economic totalitariansim.

We have to do something and a real good place to start is by reversing the policies that have led us into this mess. Imposing protectionist policies is a real good start.

We should go back on our word because you think things are going bad.



There are actually studies that prove that free trade leads to lower unemployment for everyone. Until you can provide something besides rhetoric about how free trade has destroyed America I will stick with the facts.

 

[The Rabbi]

Don't let facts get in the way!


The truth is that free trade is good for both parties, even when one has more restrictive policies. Our living standards have gone up over the last 20 years, not down. WHo had a cell phone 20 years ago?
The job loss we see is from increased efficiency, not outsourcing. We are a net beneficiary of outsorucing from other countries.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

We are a member of the WTO, which means that we have treaty obligations that actually prevent us from using retaliatory trade tariffs just because another country imposes tariffs on something made in America. We are actually bound by treaty, and federal law, from doing what Wonky is suggesting because some very smart, educated, people got together and convinced others that it is a bad idea.

Those treaties were made at a time when it seemed that America was an invincible economic power. They were also made with the political purpose of spreading capitalism into China and undermining communism.

Now, America is nearing economic devastation - and the communists still rule China.

The problem with free trade is that whenyou merge 2 dissimilar economies, one suffers. In this case that one is America.

The standard of living in China, until very recently, was abismal compared with the U.S., BUT the Chinese people were used to it. That standard has sky-rocketed. Meanwhile, the standard of living has dropped like a rock for most Americans and we are NOT used to it.

American workers are responsible for winning the cold war, protecting capitalism, out producing every other country in the world. We are (in the words of GWB) the hardest working people in the world.

WTF is going on!

Our own capitalist class has betrayed us beyond imagination!

Now, they're further attempting to destroy the American working class by promoting extreme free liberatarian economic policies for the purpose of destroying the American federal Government - our only real protection against economic totalitariansim.

We have to do something and a real good place to start is by reversing the policies that have led us into this mess. Imposing protectionist policies is a real good start.

Just a little advice: dealing with Quantum Witless is a waste of time; that's why I have him on ignore. Having a discussion with him is like trying to teach Zen meditation to a colicky infant.

 

[The Rabbi]

We are a member of the WTO, which means that we have treaty obligations that actually prevent us from using retaliatory trade tariffs just because another country imposes tariffs on something made in America. We are actually bound by treaty, and federal law, from doing what Wonky is suggesting because some very smart, educated, people got together and convinced others that it is a bad idea.

Those treaties were made at a time when it seemed that America was an invincible economic power. They were also made with the political purpose of spreading capitalism into China and undermining communism.

Now, America is nearing economic devastation - and the communists still rule China.

The problem with free trade is that whenyou merge 2 dissimilar economies, one suffers. In this case that one is America.

The standard of living in China, until very recently, was abismal compared with the U.S., BUT the Chinese people were used to it. That standard has sky-rocketed. Meanwhile, the standard of living has dropped like a rock for most Americans and we are NOT used to it.

American workers are responsible for winning the cold war, protecting capitalism, out producing every other country in the world. We are (in the words of GWB) the hardest working people in the world.

WTF is going on!

Our own capitalist class has betrayed us beyond imagination!

Now, they're further attempting to destroy the American working class by promoting extreme free liberatarian economic policies for the purpose of destroying the American federal Government - our only real protection against economic totalitariansim.

We have to do something and a real good place to start is by reversing the policies that have led us into this mess. Imposing protectionist policies is a real good start.

Just a little advice: dealing with Quantum Witless is a waste of time; that's why I have him on ignore. Having a discussion with him is like trying to teach Zen meditation to a colicky infant.

Translation: He eats my lunch in every discussion.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Those treaties were made at a time when it seemed that America was an invincible economic power. They were also made with the political purpose of spreading capitalism into China and undermining communism.

Now, America is nearing economic devastation - and the communists still rule China.

The problem with free trade is that whenyou merge 2 dissimilar economies, one suffers. In this case that one is America.

The standard of living in China, until very recently, was abismal compared with the U.S., BUT the Chinese people were used to it. That standard has sky-rocketed. Meanwhile, the standard of living has dropped like a rock for most Americans and we are NOT used to it.

American workers are responsible for winning the cold war, protecting capitalism, out producing every other country in the world. We are (in the words of GWB) the hardest working people in the world.

WTF is going on!

Our own capitalist class has betrayed us beyond imagination!

Now, they're further attempting to destroy the American working class by promoting extreme free liberatarian economic policies for the purpose of destroying the American federal Government - our only real protection against economic totalitariansim.

We have to do something and a real good place to start is by reversing the policies that have led us into this mess. Imposing protectionist policies is a real good start.

Just a little advice: dealing with Quantum Witless is a waste of time; that's why I have him on ignore. Having a discussion with him is like trying to teach Zen meditation to a colicky infant.

Translation: He eats my lunch in every discussion.