Forum Post: Protective tariffs can be patriotic - attention libertarians
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 5, 2011, 4:30 p.m. EST by sudoname
(1001)
from Berkeley, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
A general feeling in OWS is to bring jobs home from foreign countries. Some propose lowering the minimum wage. The other main option is tariffs on imports, tariffs on money paid out to another country.
Many libertarians are against such tariffs. For the most fluid economy, you don't restrict anything and let the market decide how to organize itself.
The problem I see with a totally free market is that the US loses the ability to produce for itself. If we import ALL our oil, ALL of our electronics, etc., we won't have any factories left. What if we went to war? We'd scramble.
This is how I see it, at least. I'm all for a capitalism at home, but also want the US to be self-sufficient.
Every economy should first be run for the inhabitants of that country. Japan, Korea and the rest of the Asian Tigers find tariffs work well. If we don't get jobs back, the middle class disappears. That's what Wall St. and our elected officials who are paid by the banks want. The American middle class is the only party with power to stop the NWO, that's why it's a target.
Of course the NWO'ers and those who believe in dog eat dog social darwinism don't want tariffs. How can they know they are winners if they can't recognize the losers. Not only must they win but everyone else must lose.
The comments below are pathetic. They are anti-American, unpatriotic and stupid. Let's all race to the bottom.
Google the "American System." "Free traders" are really slavers.
Thanks. The sector I'm most afraid about now is computers. Some of the manufacture does still happen in the US (Intel CPUs), but basically every other part of the computer is made in china. Same with every other gadget, iphone, etc. There's no reason this has to be true - these things don't involve manual labor - I think some of these companies go offshore to avoid e.g. environmental taxes.
It's also a matter of national security. It is absolutely essential that computers and other hi-tech electronics be continued to be made here. Our country is so stupid that not only do we not have an industrial policy, we don't even have an industries essential for national security policy (from computers to steel). It is all left to corpoRAT greed and the reward/punishment whims of Wall St. Stupidity and greed rule America.
http://economyincrisis.org/content/taxation-trade-and-solutions-we-must-consider
I think the OWS movement should be global. Most of the 1% live in the US. Most of the 99% live in third world countries.
The US with 5% of the world's population is using 25% of the worlds resources.
The US has the largest carbon foot print.
If we are going to pass on a planet in working order to our grandchildren we need to think global.
The multinational corporations that are currently paying little tax need global regulation.
We must support the UN and international courts to bring justice to all.
You're still asleep. You've bought into the globalist propoganda. The fugures you quote are being pumped in to the heads of the young by an education system that is heavily run by the globalists. Watch Aaron Russo or Zeitgeist. The globalists have fraudulently beat environmentalism and global warming into our heads and will use this to control our every move. While looking after our planet is of course necessary. Educate yourself about the globalist (New World Order) agenda. Corporations need regulation, I agree, but not by the UN which is run by the same people that own the banks...as well as running the IMF ,Trilateral Commission, Nato, Amnesty International, EU, WHO, CDC, Most Foundations, High Judges, the Vatican and all the other alphabet soup organizations that we thought were there for our protection. They're ALL the same people. Please educate yourself and pass on the information to who ever will listen. Peace
Your fellow human being
Leynna
I believe we have to fight pollution as planet, because our air is shared by everybody. But that's the only thing that should be regulated globally.
I'm against any centralization of power besides this.
At this point, I think its unrealistic that we will remain sovereign. That is my wish as well. The Globalists have navigated us to the point of globalism in a way that has, at least on the surface looked like a natural progression or evolution, but it doesn't matter how we got here, the point is we're here and now we have to decide how we're going to go about the decision making process. To do it without centralization of power would be great. Any suggestions?
It's tricky, that's for sure. By the way, I made this post earlier regarding globalization/adbusters http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-are-being-co-opted-by-adbusters-and-supporters-/
Who will regulate multinationals if not a global organisation with global powers?
These companies are a law unto themselves it's only by global cooperation that we will gain control of their activities.
The companies can jump national borders and seek out tax havens to avoid tax.
We who live in the first world are greedy unless we make room for others less fortunate than ourselves.
I agree with you 100%...I'm just saying that most of OWS still don't know that this decline happened because of far worse reasons than a few greedy CEO's. Protesters need to be exposed to the real reasons this all happened, which is an agenda by the New World Order for an engineered crisis meant to bring us to our knees so that we'll accept any solution brought to us by the very people who perpetrated these crimes against us. All so they can control us...and what they have planned for us makes what is happening now look like a stroll in the park. The entire system is owned by the same megalomaniac people so what good would it do to have the corporations supervised by themselves? What I'm saying is, the WHOLE system needs an overhaul. From top to bottom. Its a monumental task, but unless these criminals are booted out of these powerful regulatory organizations, they'll do the same thing to us all over again.
Your fellow human being
Leynna
Thanks Leynna, it is a big task, I hope OWS is up to it.
I think we have taken a very small step on a very long journey.
It is great that we can discuss the issues, not sure how we find consensus on actions we need to take.
I am trying to make sure everyone understands that the issues are global and a nationalistic approach will not work.
We need to share the planet with 7 billion people.
The first world needs to make space for others to grow.
If the first world asks for more it takes it from the mouths of starving children.
If we continue to increase our carbon foot prints we are taking the air from our children and grand children.
Protective tariffs in the 30's brought about WW II. That's one sure-fire way to generate patriotism, at the mere cost of millions of lives!
I doubt they were a direct cause. If they crippled the economy, then yes, they helped lead to war. I'm not proposing some insane taxes to be an isolationist, just some incentive to keep factories, etc. going in the US.
Read your history. They led to a breakdown in trade, and the embargo against oil to Japan was the culminating factor that caused Pearl Harbor. As global trade diminished in the 30's, more and more people were laid off. Trust me, you don't want tariffs.
You confuse an embargo on exports with tariffs on imports. you have it backward. As people were laid off global trade diminished, because demand diminished. Domestic consumption tanked as well.
No, I'm sorry, you have it backwards. As demand diminished due to higher prices (thanks to tariffs on goods) , manufacturers had to cut their costs by laying off workers. The government screwed things up by trying to control the exchange of goods. It's really quite simple.
I agree embargoes are universally a bad idea - including the ones going on today. For a big country like the US to issue an embargo, it's basically an economic assassination and is unfair.
I will read more on this now that you've mentioned it - here is one from google: http://www.newdeal20.org/2010/10/08/how-war-debts-high-tariffs-and-competitive-devaluation-led-to-war-22945/
we lost more jobs to technology than foreign countries. are you proposing we ban or put some major taxes on using technology too?
how about we only buy american, and reward a product based on geography rather than price/quality/value. that did wonders for the american car industry and its reputation too right?
protectionism... i'll pass
What do you mean in regards to technology? Like using iphones, or outsourcing technical jobs to other countries? I'm not proposing any tax on simply using technology - just trade.
I know what you mean about the car industry but I think that's an exception due to cheap oil, marketing and other stupidity.
the car example had nothing to do with oil, we just bought a product until we could no longer resist the competition because they were so much better than us. that is what rewarding a product not on its merits will get you. the product has recovered in quality, but to this day the reputation that others are better is still there.
no not using iphones; technology in regards to replacing people. for one example, go to youtube and look up the term "flex picker"
That flex picker is freaking cool! I think I heard of using that to sort recyclables - definitely a job no human wants to do.
Re tariffs, I'm purely speaking of stuff coming in and out of our country. So I mean "protectionist" as "protecting the country", not "protecting jobs". I think it is dumb to protect specific jobs because that makes people lazy. I don't know weather or not tariffs had something to do with the car industry's failings.
that was just a result of people rewarding the uncompetitive product - regardless of tax twiddlings. the price/value of the domestics got to a point where they were simply no longer worth it.
the tariffs are for job protection, not country protection. you need not worry about that. if we really needed to do it there is a bunch of oil and other energy we could tap. we are a military hyperpower anyway, no one came close to us. no one will ever invade this country either. if they could even get to it in the first place, they'd be met by american citizens, the most armed population on the planet, by far.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_gun_ownership
there is little risk of us not being able to fight a war - in fact we're geared up to be able to win a war that no country on earth is even capable to start against us.
Damn, I thought we had 3 guns per person.. or was that cars. We'd certainly be able to fight off infantry.
I realize that we have the biggest military and our geography is easy to defend. If it came to a war in our peak condition, I think we could take on any single, or any two countries.
I would worry about embargoes and a war of attrition, though. Like what if china suddenly stopped trading with us? The price of computer would go way up. If everyone in the world, in a concerted effort, decided they'd had enough of the US, I think we would have problems. If china, taiwan, and the most of the oil producers united against the US, I think we would have some problems. Perhaps this is far fetched. It's hard to think of every possible way the US could be attacked.
meh no biggy. the price of happy meal toys would go up. the US last i read (2009?) was still the #1 manufacturer; it may still be, both in terms of creating items from the ground up as well as added value (making something out of foreign parts)
Just keep in mind we have an overall trade deficit. Meaning almost all of our partners make more money from us than we do from them.
Here are the exceptions: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/top/dst/current/surplus.html
Very true as well.. in china's view, they are sending us goods our way, and at the same time, they are lending us money. On the macro scale, it looks like the US is taking out a huge loan for a bunch of made in china electronics. BTW, do you have the equivalent link for the deficits?
Here you go:
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/top/dst/current/deficit.html
Thanks.
Biggest Deficit: to China, YTD = $189 billion
Biggest Surplus: to Hon Kong = $19 billion
(of course these numbers ignore the long tail.. but it's clear we are sending way too much money out of the US)
also, werent protectionist tariffs what really caused the south to want to leave the union?
wouldnt this idea hurt consumers because it would drive prices up?Tariffs that protect only end up creating high prices for products that would be much cheaper otherwise. The poor will hurt the most.I never liked the idea of patriotic economics.
Yes, it would make things more expensive - at least at first. The hope would be that after awhile, things operate more efficiently. If we raised the tax on this, income tax could be lowered, so it's not like more tax on everything.
No, it would provide jobs for many who are now poor.
[Removed]