http://www.libertyandcommonsense.com/?p=295 Trump says that imposing a 45% tariff on goods imported from Mexico and China would force companies to bring back American jobs. Nobody should believe this. If Trump were to impose a tariff on Mexico and China, then companies would just move manufacturing jobs to India, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Ethiopia, or countless other developing countries that offer the same tax, regulatory, and labor-cost benefits. Even imposing across-the-board tariffs on all countries would have little employment benefits, while increasing prices significantly. Just look to Brazil, where similar promises were made that 60% tariffs on imported electronics would mean more manufacturing jobs. But, the promised jobs never materialized, while Brazilian consumers pay over $1,200 for an iPhone that costs $600 in the U.S. and over $1,800 for a Sony PlayStation that costs $400 in the U.S. These and other anti-market policies have Brazil facing its greatest economic turmoil since the Great Depression. Trumps tariff would simply be a 45% tax on the American consumer, which would most devastate lower-income Americans who benefit most from lower-cost imported products. Indeed, a recent study estimated that international trade has raised the purchasing power of American households at the 10th percentile of the income distribution by 62 percent. Either directly through a tariff, or indirectly by forcing companies to engage in higher-cost production, Trump wants to raise the cost of goods for all Americans. Is that the kind of winning that we should expect under a President Trump?
Brazil was trying to attract manufacturing, the US is trying to keep it. Pre Trump, Carrier would have just moved their factory to Mexico, enjoyed a smaller per unit cost because of the lower cost of labor, and sold those A/C systems back in the US at a higher profit. Adding a tariff, increases the per unit cost to overseas manufacturing. Some companies will decide that it's cheaper to maintain their domestic manufacturing if the profit increase is either cut into or eliminated by overseas manufacturing.
No, you are wrong. Adding a tariff increases cost per unit TO THE CONSUMER! In your hypothetical post Carrier would have decreased cost per unit in Mexico and therefore American's would have access to cheaper air conditioners. Forcing Carrier to utilize expensive American labor means a relatively tiny percentage of citizens benefit at the expense of everyone else. Extrapolated to all imports, this type of policy is crushing to the poor and middle class. We save a relative small number of jobs at the expense of poor Americans standard of living across the board.
Carrier (or their parent company) is still moving 1000 jobs to Mexico....guess they need you running their business
Yep, the basic problem with all of those who oppose trade: they think it is a zero sum game and are terrified of being the "loser," ignoring the fact that most trade is actually win-win. It used to be mostly popular on the far left and a few paleo-conservatives, but Trump is taking it mainstream.
Trump's tariff would simply add to the price of items for anyone BUYING THOSE FORIEGN MADE ITEMS, which then gives American companies better opportunities to grow and add jobs, i.e. compete.
Please explain how you could possibly be happy about this? You do understand that this takes away the possibility to purchase cheap goods for the benefit of a small number of American jobs? You also understand that raising the cost of goods also eliminates other jobs (especially small mom and pop type businesses), right? Are you ok with that? I'm not.
So you're agreeing with me? Wait, wtf are you saying? If the conversation is over your head please feel free to skip this thread. If you having anything illuminating to say then by all means please share.
What kind of logic is that? We may as well have all American-made products manufactured overseas, because now we can have cheaper "American" products so that the poor can afford it? In the meantime, high quality products from Japan, Germany, and other Western European nations are sold in the US, and my guess is, many Americans - whether poor or middle class - manage to purchase those products.
I fully understand this and I'm conflicted about it. I'm not looking forward to a $3000 iPhone or even a $1500 iPhone made by Americans. I'm not sure what the balance is, if there is any.
I choose to respond anyway I feel like on this forum/thread and (if I so desire) will simply leave it as is. It's not my problem that you can not appreciate the act of sarcasm.
100% fallacy. Trump talks about a 35% tariff, not 45% so you are not telling the truth to begin with. But even so everyone knows this is just a bargaining tactic. If it does come down to putting a tariff on imported goods then so be it. Either way the US will benefit either in jobs or more money for the government. Saying this tax will be passed on in prices is another fallacy. Prices are determined by what people are willing to pay. Not wages or other costs. If people will pay higher prices then prices go higher. If these companies raise prices by 35% then they will lose customers. Also US companies can compete so this "prices will go up" is a silly argument made by those not smart enough to see globalists make this argument because they are getting rich off of off shoring jobs.
A US company that manufactures in Mexico will be able to make a product at reduced cost. This reduced cost results in increased profits. Being a US company, the tax on these increased profits results in increase of income paid to the US treasury. These products can also be exported to countries other than the US which means greater income to the US treasury. Tariffs placed on these items sold in the US gives rise to less profits to the company meaning less tax income to the treasury however the treasury will receive the income from the tariff. So it is a balancing arrangement. What situation gives most profit to the company?. Selling to the rest of the world from Mexico or manufacturing in the US tariff free. Any goods manufactured inside the US would not be able to compete in selling outside the US
So do you suggest continuing down our current path? I realize that Americans are addicted to having lots of cheap stuff. Kids have Iphones and Playstations. Us grown ups have big TVs and computers, Ipads, notebooks, etc. 3-5 years from now, those items will be obsolete and will have to be repurchased. (And so on) Families don't even have to sit together to watch TV any more. Everyone has their own big screen in their room. What are the Chinese doing with the money? Are they buying cheaply made goods over and over again? No! They are investing and becoming stronger every day. They invest in real estate right here in the US. We are buying shiny beads and fire water and, well, you know the rest. Its not difficult to predict what things will be like 10 years from now if we don't take measures to reverse the damage. We can argue how severe these measures should be, but we cannot argue the need for them.
You seem to be assuming that the entire cost savings of manufacturing in a country with a low wage rate is reflected in the price back in the US. If there was no additional profit involved, why would the company go to the extra capital expense of building a foreign factory? For the type of air conditioners that Carrier builds, the housing market probably has a bigger influence in what they can charge then simple price. But as far as the overall policy goes, are "Good Jobs" better to have in the US than "Good Prices," I think we're just on opposite sides of that. You sound like you accept the libertarian view that cheap crap at Wal-Mart, paid for with unemployment and welfare, is better than more expensive crap at Wal-Mart, paid for with wages.
Considering that Carrier already built a manufacturing center in Mexico, keeping any jobs here is a victory. Why do you hate that some jobs were saved? Because some were not?
Yes, the best plan is to reduce people to $0 income for the purpose of making what they can't buy because they have no income less expensive. Better a person can't buy anything at all than pay to much for what they can buy.
Asian imports are mostly cheap crap you have to buy over and over and over and over. There was a study done a few years ago of the spending of the wealthy on furniture versus the average person. It found the wealthy pay less in the long run - because their furniture while costly lasts basically forever, while the average person buys cheap imported crap made out of particle board they have to replace every 2 or 3 years because it is falling apart. I know 1 quality American drill bit will cost 4 times as much as the Chinese crap at Home Depot, but will last 25 times longer and actually get it done quickly.
Which would you prefer: Paying $2000 for an American made IPhone OR having ZERO income? Pick one. A person with a job/income can buy that IPhone. The person with $0 income can't buy anything at all regardless of the price. It comes down to that for millions of Americans.
Personally I'd buy a $400 Android phone but that's just me. There are basically no standards for many chinese products. Many of which have already been shown to spy on US citizens. We aren't beholden to China, in fact, it's the other way around if you know how to negotiate.
You know, I can't help but find the irony in this post. Here, we have a topic, that was obviously started by some new Progressive who simply despises the fact that we have Trump as our president-elect. Now you would think - if you look at the history of American jobs and American labor - that actual, real Democrats were always strong supporters of the American workers, workers' unions, and keeping jobs here. And now, Progressives are concerned because a president wants to bring American jobs back to where they originated from. I think they are also offended that the quality just might be improved by 200%, as opposed to the sh*t we get from China, India or Ethiopia.
You're not nearly as smart as you think you are, and you're wrong on almost all counts. I'm neither a dem nor a "new progressive" (whatever the fvck that is). I'm a republican. Do I despise Trump? Yeah I guess, but I'm willing give the benefit of doubt that he was the lesser of two a$$hats. Having watched him during the campaigns I've come to the conclusion that he's not a card carrying mensa member. Therefore, I'm hoping he surrounds him with smart and qualified conservatives. What I won't do is blindly defend whatever nonsense he spews. Now that my intentions are clear do you care to discuss the OP? In case it was too subtle for you here are the main points: 1. Imposing tariffs will cost Americans a lot of $$ to "protect" a relative few American jobs 2. Imposing tariffs will "protect" American jobs at the expense of other American jobs 3. Imposing tariffs will lower most Americans standard of living
