Still Not Sure How I Will Vote

Quote from jem:

Ok... how about one of the most succesful hedge fund guys ever... talking about structural change...

Paul Tudor Jones knows something about econ... he wrote
http://dealbreaker.com/2010/10/ten-...jones-had-an-acute-case-of-plantar-fasciitis/
...

Any serious attempt to address the structural imbalance is met with a chorus of boos from financial industry pundits who rail against “protectionism.” In discussions involving the Ryan Bill, these pundits have few qualms with lobbing into the mix, like grenades, those most dangerous of words: “Trade War.” They often invoke the specter of Smoot-Hawley, the infamous US tariff act that triggered a trade war in which American exports and imports were slashed by half, leading a number of economists to argue that its passage contributed significantly to the Great Depression. But what they fail to see, or neglect to acknowledge, is that in modern times there never has been free trade with China; the US has already been in a trade war for nearly two decades; and it is the only time in this nation’s history it surrendered without ever firing a shot.
The United States lost six million jobs, indebted itself to China by $1.4 trillion, and received in return a host of consumer goods, many of which now reside in landfills across the country.
“Trade War” is a very dangerous phrase. Clearly, China and the US are commercial competitors and not enemies. There is no reason for “combat” in any sense of the term. The Chinese have set the RMB/USD peg artificially low
because they believed it was necessary in order to shift from an agrarian to an industrial-based economy. The United States also protected its nascent industrial sector when it did the same thing in the 19th century. Developing a significant export-oriented manufacturing base was part of an ambitious plan to relocate hundreds of millions of rural Chinese to cities where they could obtain manufacturing jobs and pursue a better life. It worked. China’s coasts now burst with export-dependent factories and cities. But now and going forward, China’s export strategy is completely unsustainable. In the intermediate term, much less the long term, it is becoming clear that the main buyer of China’s exports—the United States—can no longer foot the bill. A much better policy would be finding the right balance between domestic demand and exports through a stronger currency. Brazil did this brilliantly between 2005 and 2007. Their currency appreciated 34% against the dollar yet the economy grew 2% more than the prior
three years and above what was thought previously to be the speed limit. The incoming Chinese administration of 2012 will be forced to contend with a population that has been relocated and retrained for jobs that may one day
disappear, much as they did in the United States, all because China engaged in a futile attempt to avoid an inevitable re-equilibration of exchange rates. After all, one way or the other, the real US and Chinese exchange rate will find equilibrium– either through nominal movement or through relative inflation rates.
Just as the Chinese elite have become dangerously wed to an unsustainable export-driven manufacturing model, the US elite have become indifferent to mercantilist assaults on the global trade framework. In mid-September, when the Bank of Japan intervened to suppress the value of the yen against the dollar, there was no response from America’s political, financial and media leaders. While these interventions might have been understandable six years ago, when Japan’s economy was relatively less well off than that of the United States, they are far from necessary today: Japan has an unemployment rate that is half that of the United States and it still runs a trade surplus. Nonetheless, Japan intervened to protect its export industry, and the United States, incomprehensibly, responded with not even a whimper, let alone a bang.
More...

1) The fact that the above from tudor is complaining about people selling us their labor and goods too "CHEAPLY" IS A FUCKING JOKE.

2) Tariffs? Okay lets suppose china govt subsidizes a certain industry.
If we place high tariff prices on those import goods all the govt has done is place the burden on US consumers to bear that cost.

Govt protecting an industry is the surest way to getting a crappy product, political kickbacks,and graft,: innovation will be replaced by evermore govt cost to the taxpayer and consumer.

I say it's better to beat them on an Uneven playing field than have politicians running our economy through managed tariffs.

A managed economy does not work and pretending it will through the sleight of hand of managing tariffs won't either.
 
I think you are confusing the effect of quota with a tariff.
Quotas suck and allow the foreign manufacturer charge more and make more profit.

If a country is manipulating the currency why would we not put a tariff on their goods.

I do not get the argument against?


Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

1) The fact that the above from tudor is complaining about people selling us their labor and goods too "CHEAPLY" IS A FUCKING JOKE.

2) Tariffs? Okay lets suppose china govt subsidizes a certain industry.
If we place high tariff prices on those import goods all the govt has done is place the burden on US consumers to bear that cost.

Govt protecting an industry is the surest way to getting a crappy product, political kickbacks,and graft,: innovation will be replaced by evermore govt cost to the taxpayer and consumer.

I say it's better to beat them on an Uneven playing field than have politicians running our economy through managed tariffs.

A managed economy does not work and pretending it will through the sleight of hand of managing tariffs won't either.
More...
 
Quote from jem:


If a country is manipulating the currency why would we not put a tariff on their goods.

I do not get the argument against?
More...
All tariffs do is penalize the consumer for the benefit of the protected industry.
currency manipulation... You're kidding right?
Once again all that complaint boils down to is "waa they're selling us their stuff too cheap!"

Then they turn around and buy our bonds.
You think we're getting screwed by this?:D :D
 
Quote from L-Kabong:

Anyone believing that propaganda is idiotic.
More...
during election year it is quite interesting

we have one network msnbc which is entirely devoted to propaganda for the democrat party and has lost all sense of reason

and another, fox, which is devoted to propaganda for the republican party

they use to give the Libertarians an hour each night, but they took that off because he kept saying bad things about Romney

So when making up your mind, you really have to decide who has the stupidist propaganda.

It's kind of a backass way of arriving at a conclusion, but if you are a trader, you are use to coming in the back door.
 
If you have any family members that plan on living to an old age or if you plan to live to an old age vote against the party that proposes vouchers for medicare.

This issue alone should win the election for Obama. Will it? We will find out soon.
 
Quote from bigarrow:

If you have any family members that plan on living to an old age or if you plan to live to an old age vote against the party that proposes vouchers for medicare.

This issue alone should win the election for Obama. Will it? We will find out soon.
More...
I'm going to vote for the party that will end medicare once and for all

it was a bad idea to begin with that has only gotten worse
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top