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.

 

Trump's tariffs should be an affront to anybody claiming to support the freemarket

page: 6
16
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 12:35 PM
link   
@enlightened servent

I support free trade. However, I also think some regulations are required. I don't think anyone is for all out laissez faire anarchy. The issue is just what degree of regulation and for what purpose. The issue with regulations is that often times they don't do what they claim and invariably the regulations wind up being written with special interests involved. The end product usually helps no one and typically raises the cost of the goods being provided.

In regards to the tariffs, trade among countries is a good thing. However, the reality is that we aren't all equal, nor do we have the same cultural and social expectations. While global trade has certainly brought the average consumer cheaper goods, it was at the expense of many of our industries and in particular, the jobs those industries generated.

I generally don't want government involved, but sometimes it is necessary. Any argument we have on this issue, is really just about the degree of that involvement and for what purpose.
edit on 2-6-2018 by Edumakated because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

You make some good points and I agree that our main disagreements here will be about the degree of government involvement in a market. I think people see the "free" in "free market" and "free trade" and think they suddenly have to support it if they support "freedom" in general. But 100% free trade would have no regulations at all, meaning that there would be no "America first/Made in America" movements (because free trade doesn't care where a product is made). It would also mean that foreign countries could dump their cheap goods into overseas markets with no repercussions or legal protections for domestic businesses, which is one of the things that people here are objecting to.

The main point I'd add is that poor people and consumers usually don't write regulations. They don't hire lobbyists to draft bills for them and they aren't the special interest groups that get loopholes placed in regulations either. In other words, the ones making the laws & the loopholes are oftentimes members of the industry that's being "regulated"! If bankers get to shape banking laws through lobbyists and through lawmakers who have a stake in their industry, then of course those laws will favor those bankers instead of their customers.

That's the whole problem with the revolving door in politics. Businesspeople will run for office or get appointed to a position. Then they'll use their new legal powers to craft or reshape laws and regulations that benefit their former industry. Then they'll resume working in that industry once they've left office, and benefit from the changes they helped usher in. They they'll run for office again or be appointed to a new position and the cycle continues. And sometimes, they'll instead use their new connections from their time in office to become lobbyists and begin lobbying their former govt colleagues to get even more favorable legislation passed.

That cycle is mostly legal so it's not like I'm knocking them for doing it. After all, it's smart business. But I think that it raises a lot of ethical questions and can lead to the wrong kinds of legislation being passed.

(note: When I say "wrong kinds of legislation", I mean wrong for the consumer. That legislation is often "right" for businesses. And even when the overall legislation is meant to be good for consumers, influential politicians and lobbyists can often get carefully worded exceptions and loopholes that help their donors and clients. To make this related to the OP, many of the US's allies like Canada and the EU were expecting to get some of those carefully worded exceptions in regards to Trump's tariffs. But since they didn't get them, they're countering the tariffs with tariffs of their own.)



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Ain't no such thing as a Free Market , Never Was . All Smart Trading Partners Always Protect their Own.....



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Here's the thing: Schwarzenegger decided to plea to the ridiculous.

The reality: pushing new energy markets cannot simply be by forcing compliance to regulation. It needs some intellectual help, and that is typically the role of government.

There isn't a lot of meat on the bone for non coal and non oil options, unless we want to continue pretending nuclear is superior for safety. When you need wind the worst, windmills sit still. You could move the energy from other areas in, but our energy grids aren't designed to help Texas out with excess energy from New York or something. And integrating to that degree would be a huge liability, as it would only require pushing a single domino to stall the entire nation.

The sunniest places also tend to get their fair share of hail and wind.

There just isn't a good answer right now. It isn't Trumps fault. One thing that is obvious is our economy isn't what it was 20 years ago. The buying power of a dollar is far less, and wages have stagnated. Doing what we were doing got us here...so pretending that we need to continue that just ain't going to work.

I don't favor protectionism, as its proven to fail. That said..."free market" refers to our markets, not foreign markets. That little mixup is pure globalist claptrap being presented as some kind of argument for the stupid.



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Screw "the point". It was a good, important question (that is required to even fully put "the point" into perspective).

So after decades of getting railroaded by our trading "partners", yeah we'll just go ahead and be the pragmatists while they push on with their tariffs on US. Uh huh.

I remember watching a PBS sort of program back around 2001ish. In it they said that in Japan a single apple goes for like $20. All because they had import tariffs on US. $20 for a freaking apple. I make freaking compost out of them!



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 08:41 PM
link   
This global "free market" nonsense is just that, nonsense. Only global banks benefit from it. A nations livelihood/existence depends on it's ability to produce it's own goods.
This "free market" ideology was founded by globalist on the principal, if you distribute the wealth, work, prosperity, politics, education,..so on and so forth ther'd be "global peace". Which is nonsense also.
Do Americans realize if this country ever had to "gear up" as we did in WW1 or 2. That we're in for a world of hurt?
We don't have machine shops anymore that can go from making street lights to pistols. We can't go from making coffee cans to shell casings. We don't have tailors, seamstress, metal workers, welders.. etc. Now days a vast majority of it is built, by a country you'll probably be at war with. How has that ever made sense?
Personally I wouldn't panic about it. Tariffs? So what? Most of these countries have more "skilled labor" than the U.S. has. Thus, a better "home front" . Pres. Trump is putting America first. At least he's trying to do what he said he'd do. It took a lot of hurt, agony and year to cut the U.S. of A's n*ts off. It'll be a little painful, short term to put them back in. Then "men" will be back to working for a living instead of the public paying for their "liberal arts" degree. Heck! They may even get a job as a welder. Instead of a "barista". ... Trump's unf,ing America. Watch the man buns fall! Go Trump!
edit on 2-6-2018 by murphy22 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-6-2018 by murphy22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit


Ain't no such thing as a Free Market


I agree with you. The idea of a true freemarket is pure pixie fantasy pushed by supporters of Reagan and Ayn Rand. The point of the OP is the sudden turn on this philosphy by self proclaimed freemarket supporters.


edit on 2-6-2018 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

The point was dull and coated in horsecrap. You have intentionally conflated national free markets with global, something only the RINOs support.. but, you already knew that.



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 10:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Zanti Misfit


Ain't no such thing as a Free Market


I agree with you. The idea of a true freemarket is pure pixie fantasy pushed by supporters of Reagan and Ayn Rand. The point of the OP is the sudden turn on this philosphy by self proclaimed freemarket supporters.



The point of the OP is to proxy the global markets for the US market in the dishonest argument for "anything but Trumps" economics.

What that point proves to me is when you have to be dishonest you have no point.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

My post was short and it included a part that addressed your question. Here, I'll quote it a second time:

Now, if you think that our trade partners are exploiting us, that's one thing. But a pro-free trade, pro-free market approach would be to negotiate for them to reduce their taxes, tariffs, etc on our goods, not to increase the taxes, tariffs, etc on their goods (since the goal is allegedly to have a tariff-free and burden-free global economy). And the political concept of "reciprocity" just means that they'll impose additional taxes and tariffs on our goods that match the value of our new taxes and tariffs, which is again against the concepts of free trade and free markets.


So what are you still complaining about?



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 05:03 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I agree with Zanti. There's no such thing as a freemarket. It's make belief.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 06:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian


What's so great about a free market if it impoverishes 99 percent of the population? The price of a "free market" for the US is no industrial base and poverty for the vast majority of its citizens. I would rather see tariffs imposed. I have seen the jobs in the particular tech industry I work in decimated, because Chinese labor has an unfair advantage over the US. These were jobs that just a few years ago paid a living wage and had decent benefits and due to nothing less than GREED they are gone forever. In China the average labor cost is 10 percent of ours because they have very low overhead from no environmental regulations, no safety regulations, no healthcare for workers, and very low wages. That fact is destroying jobs and lowering the standard of living of our country as a result and the average Chinese worker reaps no benefit from it really. The Wall street crowd is reaping huge profits while deconstructing our job base and destroying our industrial base and up to this point have been able to buy whatever politicians they needed to do so, including presidents. Ever notice every president since Clinton has pushed through some trade deal that screws American jobs? We cant compete with slavery in effect. A presidents job is to provide for the common good of AMERICANS. If the free market comes into conflict with that, then I have no problem with him doing whatever it takes to fix it. The only people benefitting from the "Free market" is the ruling class in China and America. Until this is fixed, we dont live in a democracy, its more like feudalism. I don't want to see just tarrifs imposed, I think it should be considered an act of TREASON if you take any action that results in jobs being sent out of this country. No politician should keep their job if they are caught selling out the American people, in fact some prison time should be in order for such people. And there is another consideration that I dont hear any champions of the free market considering. When you lose skilled labor in a technical field, it takes a very long time to get it back. Once a skillset is lost to outsourcing, we can no longer produce that product. TVs are a perfect example, 30 years ago they were almost exclusively made in the US. Now none are made here and you would be very hard put to find someone with the skillset to do it even if you wanted to. Fine for TVs , but what happens when components that are defense related are all made overseas? You can CNC aircraft parts, but electronics are gone and optics are going away. This is a serious threat to national security. In effect we are giving up key elements of our defense industry to a foreign state, that happens to be communist. How do you think that will work out in the long run? We are losing our base of technically skilled people, and once they are gone, we wont be any more advanced than a 3rd world country and certainly as poor as one. Enjoy that future if you want your free market so much.

edit on 3-6-2018 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

It's not a free market when other countries subsidize their products to drive prices down and drive American companies out of business.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

There is no such thing as a free market and never has been. It is the responsibility of each countries gov to protect its countries industries from unfair trade practices such as using slave labor to make goods much more cheaper than competitors. Years ago textile plants used to be decent paying jobs in my area but then China started making textile with basically free labor local us textile mills could not compete and thus went belly up not because of innovation on the Chinese side . The us gov should have stepped in and imposed a tariff on Chinese textiles that would have countered the Chinese advantage of basically free labor but instead they did nothing and and plants here went out of business.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Libertarians have long been against tariffs and any other economic hurdle to doing business. And both free trade and the free market are all about reducing legal hurdles and obstacles to doing business globally.

Free Market (definition):

The free market is an economic system based on supply and demand with little or no government control.




Then it is not a free market by the very definition when we trade with nations that use government control.
China has a Communist Government that has major control over the markets.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 11:51 AM
link   
We regulate predatory pricing domestically, but don't recognise the same issues in international trade. It's pennywise and pound foolish.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

And when they ignore requests to drop the tariffs they've held on US for decades despite US giving them all that nice free trade idealism (you INSIST on keeping this entire discussion framed around), what negotiating tactic do you say ought to happen? Anything but counter-tariffs, right?

Are these "tariffs" not 'counter-tariffs'? My impression is they are and and that's why I dont give a snip.
edit on 3-6-2018 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: murphy22
If you believe the USA is lacking in any of those professions or production capacity, you dot explore your city enough.
I believe these tariffs are step one of mobilization for war without having to say it. You soon will notice an increase in the buildup of all those industries and manufacturers as well as the professions. It has already begun in fact. Contracts for domestic metal goods Are already being penned.

Meanwhile shell companies of shell companies will be advertising for specific professions soon discreetly in newspapers, magazines, and late night infomercials for particular types of specialists that may even have training and education subsidized.

This kind of activity has precedent in history. It happens prior to a major global conflict between large empires.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: worldstarcountry

This kind of activity has precedent in history. It happens prior to a major global conflict between large empires.


So kick off the 21st Century with a World War?

How very backwards primate 50th Century BC of us United Statesians.




posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Edumakated



The main point I'd add is that poor people and consumers usually don't write regulations. They don't hire lobbyists to draft bills for them and they aren't the special interest groups that get loopholes placed in regulations either. In other words, the ones making the laws & the loopholes are oftentimes members of the industry that's being "regulated"! If bankers get to shape banking laws through lobbyists and through lawmakers who have a stake in their industry, then of course those laws will favor those bankers instead of their customers.




Excellent Point
We have the foxes guarding the hen house.
edit on 3-6-2018 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
16
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join