It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Revisiting tariffs and subsidies.

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:16 AM
link   
I was struck by the articles regarding Carriers' announced manufacturing move out of the U.S.. They apparently had recently received a grant(?) of 5 million from the Federal gov't(?) and then stated they were leaving the U.S. with resulting job losses.

A possible solution came to mind that would place a tariff on imports in that specific industry-air conditioning and tractor-trailer refer units- to protect local manufacturing. This would offer them either a compensation for departing OR a penalty if they did leave the U.S..

No, nothing new in the idea, yet, the very subject seems to have disappeared having been trumped by the near religious tenet of 'free trade'. so called 'free trade' has been a boon for pervious third world nations and I have no problem with that. What we have now goes far beyond that. Not getting into the conspiracy side of this, the bottom line is the U.S. is in dire straits economically. It is time to return some balance and competition into the equation.

I see no realistic way to achieve that other than Tariffs and subsidies. If that requires the negotiation based on threats to withdraw from the WTO and selected free trade agreements then that's the place to start. If 'no joy' in those negotiations then withdraw from those agreements. As a large net importer, we would be on the winning side of a so-called trade war. Our tariffs would more than cover our subsidies and in the long run, we would see a stop in the over-all job loss and a return of a significant number of those jobs to the U.S..

Perhaps avoiding specific nations and directing the tariffs and subsidies to individual industries would mitigate the negatives connected to these acts.

If the trend continues, we are going to end up in a third world status and economy. That is obvious. I see no other solution.

Thoughts?




posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

I think the reason they move these businesses out of the US is so they can avoid paying taxes, pay less wages to slave labor, lower employee insurance, real estate costs, permits, licensing, etc.

It costs to much to live and operate in the US, we all know that. Companies are acting in self defense to cut regulations (red tape) and exorbitant cost of operating here. Thats because our government is to big, bureaucratic, and got their snouts too buried in the feed trough to care about a few employees.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr


I'd agree with those points. I also believe there was the view that 'we'- U.S. Corporations- had better move into that market and take advantage otherwise foreign/European companies would beat us and now reap the profits of out-competing with the U.S. Corporations.

To some degree, I can live with that. Now toss in the U.S. laws which taxes returning profits from out of country 30% and zero taxes if they stay out of country and to some degree the laws are forcing this current situation. In other words, it's back to gov't forcing this situation, at least in part.

I believe it was the CEO of Coca-Cola that ranted about this as he was forced to invest 4 Billion-if I recall correctly- in outside U.S. development because he wasn't allowed to return those profits to the U.S. without taxation.

That rant reached the net, was ignored by the MSM and was never heard from again.

Irrespective of original motivations, a solution must be found. I'd rather not emigrate to China......



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker


I believe it was the CEO of Coca-Cola that ranted about this as he was forced to invest 4 Billion-if I recall correctly- in outside U.S. development because he wasn't allowed to return those profits to the U.S. without taxation.

That rant reached the net, was ignored by the MSM and was never heard from again.

I bet he was so upset he didn't have to pay all that tax. And you're right, they are forced to invest elsewhere. That can't bode well for US in the future. They will always need truckers, though.

Need a partner? I'd love to be from nowhere for a change.



posted on Mar, 12 2016 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Thanks for the offer. I'd have taken it up a few years back.

I'm semi-retired these days. it's taken a toll on the old body. Mostly stay in Washington St., a little British Columbia and Oregon.

One gets a pretty good feel for the people when you've repeatedly travel 49 States 7 provinces and a territory. Getting 'home' was half the fun.



posted on Mar, 12 2016 @ 01:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
I was struck by the articles regarding Carriers' announced manufacturing move out of the U.S.. They apparently had recently received a grant(?) of 5 million from the Federal gov't(?) and then stated they were leaving the U.S. with resulting job losses.

A possible solution came to mind that would place a tariff on imports in that specific industry-air conditioning and tractor-trailer refer units- to protect local manufacturing. This would offer them either a compensation for departing OR a penalty if they did leave the U.S..

No, nothing new in the idea, yet, the very subject seems to have disappeared having been trumped by the near religious tenet of 'free trade'. so called 'free trade' has been a boon for pervious third world nations and I have no problem with that. What we have now goes far beyond that. Not getting into the conspiracy side of this, the bottom line is the U.S. is in dire straits economically. It is time to return some balance and competition into the equation.

I see no realistic way to achieve that other than Tariffs and subsidies. If that requires the negotiation based on threats to withdraw from the WTO and selected free trade agreements then that's the place to start. If 'no joy' in those negotiations then withdraw from those agreements. As a large net importer, we would be on the winning side of a so-called trade war. Our tariffs would more than cover our subsidies and in the long run, we would see a stop in the over-all job loss and a return of a significant number of those jobs to the U.S..

Perhaps avoiding specific nations and directing the tariffs and subsidies to individual industries would mitigate the negatives connected to these acts.

If the trend continues, we are going to end up in a third world status and economy. That is obvious. I see no other solution.

Thoughts?



Tariffs and subsidies have nothing to do with the relocation of industry out of America, Australia and whomever. the transfer of jobs out of the 1st world into the 2 - 3rd world has everything to do with Agenda 21 and evening out of living standards to (2-3 world levels)

The evidence of this is in the Sustainable Development document or whatever its called, that came out in 199x?

Maurice Strong, the $4.5 Billionaire behind agenda 21 says that heating and cooling in workplaces and homes is "unsustainable' and has to be deleted.'

Agenda 21 also explains why high rises are becoming the primary source of accommodation for the masses but I digress. The lesson is learning about this agenda 21 topic will help in better understanding of the context of tariffs and subsidies in international socio economic environment.



posted on Mar, 12 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker


One gets a pretty good feel for the people when you've repeatedly travel 49 States 7 provinces and a territory.

Try living under bridges, riding rails and dumpster diving.

A whole other perspective gained form Americas obsolete, throw away society.

You want to learn about people, go through their garbage.



posted on Mar, 12 2016 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue


OK, if true, what do you propose as a 'solution' to repair/restore, to some degree, the U.S. economy and jobs?

Tariffs and subsidies may not have anything to do with industries leaving and I don't believe I suggested that they did. I do see the potential so slow, perhaps even stop further drain and an incentive to return some of those industries.

Especially if a U.S. owned, foreign based Corporation has to pay a tariff to bring their products back to the U.S..



posted on Mar, 12 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr


I will leave that discovery process to you. I referred to 'people', not one segment's financial situation. It was the feeling of general goodwill of those people that stood out to me.


I will take a hand-shake, eye to eye communication over digging through somebody's garbage to assess any day of the week...sheesh....LOL


edit on 12-3-2016 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker


I will take a hand-shake, eye to eye communication over digging through somebody's garbage to assess any day of the week...sheesh....LOL

Peoples discard reveals much more about them than a handshake and eye contact. But then some people give more weight to appearance. That can be faked.

Garbage can't.



posted on Mar, 12 2016 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr


Like I said. Your choice.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Azureblue


OK, if true, what do you propose as a 'solution' to repair/restore, to some degree, the U.S. economy and jobs?

Tariffs and subsidies may not have anything to do with industries leaving and I don't believe I suggested that they did. I do see the potential so slow, perhaps even stop further drain and an incentive to return some of those industries.

Especially if a U.S. owned, foreign based Corporation has to pay a tariff to bring their products back to the U.S..



The people of the united states, and the people of all the other western countries for that matter, have to defeat the NWO types who want to own the world and everybody and everything in it.

They have to be replaced by politicians and industry leaders whose loyalties lie with their own people and their own country.

Australia is a good example. Australia is a self sufficient country. It has all the raw materials it needs, it can grow all its own food, it can produce all its own energy and it has a skilled and educated workforce.

Despite these success factor, under the Lima Declaration, the manufacturing industry has been transferred (or off shored as Paul Craig Roberts would say) to China just like the American manufacturing industry has been.

In an environment of global strategic decision making and with such high level agreements being struck, the biggest trarrifs or corporate welfare payments is unlikely to rock the boat to any meaningful level that would result in any serious review of such strategic decisions and deals.

When something like the TPP is going to be a government above government, what chances has any tariff or corporate welfare payment of over coming that?

Mind you, corporate welfare is likely to dramatically increase but its unlikely to result any change at national economy level.

My apologies if I have disheartened you and not enlightened you

cheers



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue


Of all the candidates for president, I hold Trump as the most likely to affect such a move as withdrawing from the WTO, or at the least, using the threat of withdrawing as a negotiation leverage to improve the U.S.'s lot.


At a loose, uneducated guess, somewhere between 5 and 15% chance. The rest? Zero.

edit on 13-3-2016 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
2

log in

join