Sure, a guy with business interest all over the world doesn't know anything about the world economics. But you sir an internet junkie feel qualified?
Protectionism ??
- Thread starter Humpy
- Start date
Sure, a guy with business interest all over the world doesn't know anything about the world economics. But you sir an internet junkie feel qualified?
It's the consumers who are going to pay this one. How much tariff is he going to slap on TVs. washing machines etc. ? It will be high to let the "start again industries" try and take root. Usually high tariffs make life so easy for the home producers that they skimp on R&D, quality etc. as they hide behind the tariff wall, so they become increasingly out of touch and less competitive.
It would be a big shock if wages, salaries and top bosses pay checks have to decline.
It would be a big shock if wages, salaries and top bosses pay checks have to decline.
My guess is the economically and resourcefully strong countries would collectively determine when to adopt what kind of policies that suit their best for the upcoming period of time in terms of decades rather than years. 
As financial traders, perhaps we would have to just love the dynamics!
As financial traders, perhaps we would have to just love the dynamics!
My guess is the economically and resourcefully strong countries would collectively determine when to adopt what kind of policies that suit their best for the upcoming period of time in terms of decades rather than years.
As financial traders, perhaps we would have to just love the dynamics!
imo, what the world needs is a global/cosmic economics policy. Without it, all the economic policies bu individual countries would be probably just sub-optimisation.
More arms and more competition on country-wide economic growth altogether does not serve the world's wellbeing well, imo.
The opposite could be also true. Less arms race, plus helping poor countries for their growth in economic/health terms, even gracefully accepting slower local growth for the developed countries, could be a better viable cosmic/global policy.
" Appropriation of caring-oneself and caring-others . A balancing act between self-serving and self-giving, depending on situations. ", that'd be always an issue never easy to resolve. lol
https://elitetrader.com/et/threads/...so-dirty-it-looks-like-chocolate-milk.309142/
My guess is the economically and resourcefully strong countries would collectively determine when to adopt what kind of policies that suit their best for the upcoming period of time in terms of decades rather than years.
As financial traders, perhaps we would have to just love the dynamics!
It is in the interest of nations to adopt policies which are beneficial for them. This idea that there should be constant flow of wealth from West to poor countries, which is what globalization has essentially done, is not sustainable.
As far as capitalism goes, purest form of capitalism is actual a mafia and criminal organization. In those organization, you are not allowed to even have a life if you are not economically viable. So, unless you have succeeded in such organization don't preach capitalism for protectionism.
Sure closing the doors will increase the cost of goods and services within the country. e.g. currently I might be paying $10 for a cheap jeans, later I will have to pay $15 as there is no cheap imports anymore. But at least due to job protectionism, people will have $12 saved to think about $15 jeans.
This map comparing decline of middle class in USA vs where the globalization labor landed just shows how spurious benefits of long term labor globalization is. Middle class doesn't even have $10 to buy a jeans anymore.
Would you care to back this statement up with numbers? From where I am sitting, free trade has mainly benefited the West with rare exceptions. It has, of course, destroyed countless livelihoods, but so did almost any big economic or technological shift.
It is in the interest of nations to adopt policies which are beneficial for them. This idea that there should be constant flow of wealth from West to poor countries, which is what globalization has essentially done, is not sustainable.
As far as capitalism goes, purest form of capitalism is actual a mafia and criminal organization. In those organization, you are not allowed to even have a life if you are not economically viable. So, unless you have succeeded in such organization don't preach capitalism for protectionism.
Sure closing the doors will increase the cost of goods and services within the country. e.g. currently I might be paying $10 for a cheap jeans, later I will have to pay $15 as there is no cheap imports anymore. But at least due to job protectionism, people will have $12 saved to think about $15 jeans.
This map comparing decline of middle class in USA vs where the globalization labor landed just shows how spurious benefits of long term labor globalization is. Middle class doesn't even have $10 to buy a jeans anymore.
*In case, your blinders caused you to miss it. Your clown and his daughter are still making their stuff in china and importing it to the US.
*They say “ignorance is a bliss” but in your case it is NOT bliss because you keep sharing it on the massage boards.
Last edited:
*In case, your blinders caused you to miss it. Your clown and his daughter are still making their stuff in china and importing it to the US.
*They say “ignorance is a bliss” but in your case it is NOT bliss because you keep sharing it on the massage boards.
Guys this how a child left behind looks like.
These kids are actually graduates but their IQ is of 8th grade child. His intellect was probably destroyed by the lead he was getting from the contaminated city water of the ghetto he grew up in.
Yeah the numbers are all over websites of various research organizations. Just look up the change in number of middle class Americans vs change in number of middle class in east. And only thing that stands out in last two - three decades is increased pace of globalization where the borders have been taken down, the trade tariffs have gone down, etc.