“Who the hell cares if there’s a trade war?” with China

[ETcallhome]

n

Of course. Do also suggest we let the government decide what is inefficient and what is not? At the same time we are promoting inefficient companies, lets shut down efficient companies. The efficient companies have a smarter, harder working workforce and having them compete against losers is just not fair. Lets shutdown Google and give money to Yahoo, because Yahoo was dumb and its not fair that Google kicked their ass.

not exactly, we just make rules which allow people who under pure capitalism will never reach the middle class because there will be no middle class. Like in sports, where it is pure competition (except in that other league with their DH) there is no place for a middle class athelete. We can set up the rules of the game anyway we want.

 

[jem]

1. there is a difference between contracting the money supply by 30 percent and expanding it by trillions and trillions.

2. There is also a need for recessions once in a while to wash out the excess so you can build on a strong foundation.

3. I was an advocate for free markets for many years until I saw that our market was getting destroyed anti free market forces. Its like believing in commerce and owning a store but keeping the doors open at night. Its to the point where we just can't let other countries steal our economy by bribing our politicians and making deals with the cronies.

Even the union leadership woke up to the reality they members know they are being screwed by the democrat establishment.

n

So it is the Feds fault they contracted the money supply and today it is the Feds fault because they are increasing the money supply according to the same people. We invent new rules for new times. I am not impressed.

However, Wildchild has only advocated free market capitalism and the US Constitution. I never changed. I believe in an idea that works. Its what I was about 10 years ago, its what I am about today. Its what made this country great in the first place, its what will make this country great again. Unfortunately, no one on the national stage wants to practice it.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Protectionist policies have a rich history in the republican party. To wit:

"But when did free trade become dogma in the Party of Lincoln?

As early as 1832, young Abe declared, “My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank … and a high protective tariff. These are my sentiments and political principles.”

Campaigning in 1844, Lincoln declared, “Give us a protective tariff and we will have the greatest nation on earth.” "

...

"
In the 1895 “History of the Republican Party,” the authors declare, “the Republican Party … is the party of protection … that carries the banner of protection proudly.”

Under protectionist policies from 1865 to 1900, U.S. debt was cut by two-thirds. Customs duties provided 58 percent of revenue. Save for President Cleveland’s 2 percent tax, which was declared unconstitutional, there was no income tax. Commodity prices fell 58 percent. Real wages, despite a doubling of the population, rose 53 percent. Growth in GDP averaged over 4 percent a year. Industrial production rose almost 5 percent a year."

...

"
When the GOP returned to power after President Wilson, they enacted the Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922. For the next five years, the economy grew 7 percent a year.

While the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, signed eight months after the Crash of ’29, was blamed for the Depression, Nobel laureate Milton Friedman ferreted out the real perp, the Federal Reserve."

...

"Every Republican platform from 1884 to 1944 professed the party’s faith in protection. Free trade was introduced by the party of Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

Our modern free-trade era began with the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Among the eight no votes in the Senate were Barry Goldwater and Prescott Bush."

" Ronald Reagan slapped a 50 percent tariff on Japanese motorcycles being dumped here to kill Harley-Davidson, then put quotas on Japanese auto imports, and on steel and machine tools."


"The economic nationalism and protectionism of Hamilton, Madison, Jackson, and Henry Clay, and the Party of Lincoln, McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, and Coolidge, of all four presidents on Mount Rushmore, made America the greatest and most self-sufficient republic in history.

And the free-trade, one-worldism of Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama enabled Communist China to shoulder us aside us and become the world’s No. 1 manufacturing power."


http://buchanan.org/blog/whos-conservative-heretic-125260

 

[wildchild]

n

not exactly, we just make rules which allow people who under pure capitalism will never reach the middle class because there will be no middle class. Like in sports, where it is pure competition (except in that other league with their DH) there is no place for a middle class athelete. We can set up the rules of the game anyway we want.

First of all, there is no pure capitalism. Second of all, what are you talking about "will never reach the middle class"? America for the better part of its history was the closest to pure capitalism as you can get and people came from around the world with little to no money and worked themselves beyond the middle class. I guess people can't do that anymore and we need central planners from the government to work everything out for all of us stupid people.

 

[wildchild]

Protectionist policies have a rich history in the republican party. To wit:

"But when did free trade become dogma in the Party of Lincoln?

As early as 1832, young Abe declared, “My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank … and a high protective tariff. These are my sentiments and political principles.”

Campaigning in 1844, Lincoln declared, “Give us a protective tariff and we will have the greatest nation on earth.” "

...

"
In the 1895 “History of the Republican Party,” the authors declare, “the Republican Party … is the party of protection … that carries the banner of protection proudly.”

Under protectionist policies from 1865 to 1900, U.S. debt was cut by two-thirds. Customs duties provided 58 percent of revenue. Save for President Cleveland’s 2 percent tax, which was declared unconstitutional, there was no income tax. Commodity prices fell 58 percent. Real wages, despite a doubling of the population, rose 53 percent. Growth in GDP averaged over 4 percent a year. Industrial production rose almost 5 percent a year."

...

"
When the GOP returned to power after President Wilson, they enacted the Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922. For the next five years, the economy grew 7 percent a year.

While the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, signed eight months after the Crash of ’29, was blamed for the Depression, Nobel laureate Milton Friedman ferreted out the real perp, the Federal Reserve."

...

"Every Republican platform from 1884 to 1944 professed the party’s faith in protection. Free trade was introduced by the party of Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

Our modern free-trade era began with the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Among the eight no votes in the Senate were Barry Goldwater and Prescott Bush."

" Ronald Reagan slapped a 50 percent tariff on Japanese motorcycles being dumped here to kill Harley-Davidson, then put quotas on Japanese auto imports, and on steel and machine tools."


"The economic nationalism and protectionism of Hamilton, Madison, Jackson, and Henry Clay, and the Party of Lincoln, McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, and Coolidge, of all four presidents on Mount Rushmore, made America the greatest and most self-sufficient republic in history.

And the free-trade, one-worldism of Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama enabled Communist China to shoulder us aside us and become the world’s No. 1 manufacturing power."


http://buchanan.org/blog/whos-conservative-heretic-125260

Hey everybody, lets try this again. This was passed by a successful businessman who made a bunch of money. His first elected position was President of the United States. Successful businessmen who made a lot of money really know how to make some great deals, don't they.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot–Hawley_Tariff_Act

The Tariff Act of 1930 (codified at 19 U.S.C. ch. 4), otherwise known as the Smoot–Hawley Tariff or Hawley–Smoot Tariff,[1] was an act sponsored by Senator Reed Smoot and Representative Willis C. Hawley and signed into law on June 17, 1930, that raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods to record levels.[2]

The dutiable tariff level (this does not include duty-free imports—see Tariff levels below) under the act was the second highest in the U.S. in 100 years, exceeded by a small margin by the Tariff of 1828.[3] The great majority of economists then and ever since view the Act, and the ensuing retaliatory tariffs by America's trading partners, as responsible for reducing American exports and imports by more than half.[4] The extent of Smoot-Hawley's negative effect on the Depression-era economy remains debated by economists. According to Ben Bernanke, "Economists still agree that Smoot-Hawley and the ensuing tariff wars were highly counterproductive and contributed to the depth and length of the global Depression."[5] Alfred E. Eckes argues, however, that the tariff had little effect on the severity of the Great Depression,[6] as does Douglas A. Irwin in The Review of Economics and Statistics: "Smoot-Hawley ... probably did not contribute significantly to the economic downturn.".[7]

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Wildchild, I think we can agree that these tariff wars took place a long time ago under very different conditions. I would also say that my experience has led me to distrust the consensus of historians or economists. As we can see very clearly from our current experiences, they have a tendency to see things in line with their political leanings and/or who is paying them.

My basic point is that we as a country have a lot of leverage in bilateral, ie country to country,trade negotiations. The reason is obvious: we have the biggest and richest market, so other countries will make plenty of concession to gain unfettered access. We throw away this leverage when we enter into multinational trade pacts however.

Our best interests are clearly served by negotiating individual trade deals rather than entering into large pacts like NAFTA or the WTO. They erode our sovereignty and advance the rule of unelected international bureaucrats.

I think Trump understands this. He also understand that our trading partners have far more to lose than we do from a trade war, and he will use that leverage ruthlessly. Or we can continue the current path and hand over the rest of our industry to China.

 

[achilles28]

China, Japan and South Korea built their economies on exports, tariffs, and currency debasement. Wake up, folks. Real simple.

So what if there's a trade war? America will profit handsomely. Even if we get half the jobs back, that's like 15 million++ jobs we'll get back. China loses hard. Fuck them.

This is about Nationalism. America first. If you don't like paying marginally higher prices for keeping Americans employed and the American economy strong, go fuck yourself and move to China. I don't give a fuck who you are.

Clearly those who want cheap prices at the expense of Americas economic security and a teetering national debt do not give a fuck what happens to this country.

It's all about allegiance now. If you have none for America, then find a new country to live in.

Peace.

 

[ETcallhome]

First of all, there is no pure capitalism. Second of all, what are you talking about "will never reach the middle class"? America for the better part of its history was the closest to pure capitalism as you can get and people came from around the world with little to no money and worked themselves beyond the middle class. I guess people can't do that anymore and we need central planners from the government to work everything out for all of us stupid people.

no, we need a government and society that is devoted to restoring the middle class to it's former glory. And that means a government that is pro family/pro business. And accomplishing that may mean a hit in our stock earnings. It's really simple. Just an attitude that says yes buying from China is cheaper but that may hurt our workers. Cheap is not always the best.

 

[achilles28]

no, we need a government and society that is devoted to restoring the middle class to it's former glory. And that means a government that is pro family/pro business. And accomplishing that may mean a hit in our stock earnings. It's really simple. Just an attitude that says yes buying from China is cheaper but that may hurt our workers. Cheap is not always the best.

Thank you. You're coming around.

 

[wildchild]

Wildchild, I think we can agree that these tariff wars took place a long time ago under very different conditions. I would also say that my experience has led me to distrust the consensus of historians or economists. As we can see very clearly from our current experiences, they have a tendency to see things in line with their political leanings and/or who is paying them.

My basic point is that we as a country have a lot of leverage in bilateral, ie country to country,trade negotiations. The reason is obvious: we have the biggest and richest market, so other countries will make plenty of concession to gain unfettered access. We throw away this leverage when we enter into multinational trade pacts however.

Our best interests are clearly served by negotiating individual trade deals rather than entering into large pacts like NAFTA or the WTO. They erode our sovereignty and advance the rule of unelected international bureaucrats.

I think Trump understands this. He also understand that our trading partners have far more to lose than we do from a trade war, and he will use that leverage ruthlessly. Or we can continue the current path and hand over the rest of our industry to China.

Whats all this fear mongering with handing the country over to China? Its absurd. We have seen this show before. In the 1980s it was the Japanese. People were running around scared shitless about the Japanese taking over because they had a supposed unfair trade advantage. How well have the Japanese done over the last 20 years and where was this big take over? It was a bunch of hype and a lot of bullshit. Wildchild doesnt like hype and bullshit whether it be global warming, swine flu, zika virus, zombie invasion or protectionism. None of these things cut in my book.

Ever hear that song Allentown by Billy Joel? It is about steel factories closing down. The song came out in 1982 so blaming NAFTA or the WTO for the lose of manufacturing jobs in the US is pretty much bunk.

This Trump is a master manipulator and I don't buy into it.

Want to make America great again? Lets start by kicking the sensationalism to wayside and stop acting like that happens in the Twitterverse actually matters.