- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Milton Friedman quotes on protective tariffs
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:23 am to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:23 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
They have almost entirely empty cities
I have posted on these at length for the last few years. My family is in that business. At one point, that included building numerous large scale buildings in China.
This post was edited on 8/19/23 at 8:24 am
0
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Has nothing to do with the premise.
Live action version
quote:Are those Friedman's words? If so, it may be the first thing I've heard from him I wouldn't agree with.
Cartoon version
Monopoly or limited competition is generally disadvantageous for the consumer. It is far worse if the monopolizer is also a national adversary. I'd be stunned if Friedman got that wrong.
This post was edited on 8/19/23 at 8:26 am
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I haven't for like, 2 months
I forgot you are back to supporting JB
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:31 am to jimmy the leg
quote:
They are correct. Trade with China has been a net negative for the US overall.
Which has been extremely beneficial for the USA.
The USA is advancing into the tech economy, not the mfg economy.
Its the people of this country who need to evolve.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:32 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
The one ridiculous flaw in the argument of them "putting greenbacks in the bank" along with its a balance sheet stupid it always has to balance, which is the same premise.
Those greenbacks dont "stay" in the bank. They are used to buy US companies, buy our politicians so they can buy even more US companies, so they can spend enormous amounts of money hacking our systems for trade secrets, for influencing our children to let them think its okay to pay a few dollars to our Universities for billions we have paid for govt research in those institutions.
The second major flaw. Never confuse free trade with fair trade. We want FAIR FAIR trade. Using state run companies to produce predatory pricing and destroy an industry is not fair trade. Forcing US companies to open all their books, not just financial (which would be fine) but R&D, customer lists, etc is not fair trade.
Those greenbacks dont "stay" in the bank. They are used to buy US companies, buy our politicians so they can buy even more US companies, so they can spend enormous amounts of money hacking our systems for trade secrets, for influencing our children to let them think its okay to pay a few dollars to our Universities for billions we have paid for govt research in those institutions.
The second major flaw. Never confuse free trade with fair trade. We want FAIR FAIR trade. Using state run companies to produce predatory pricing and destroy an industry is not fair trade. Forcing US companies to open all their books, not just financial (which would be fine) but R&D, customer lists, etc is not fair trade.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:33 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
1. A more educated and skilled population who has adopted to advanced industries. 2. A less educated and skilled population who devotes an inordinate amount of its population to lower-level industries.
That’s like asking if I want a steak from Ruth’s Chris or Logan’s steakhouse.
Of course I want the first but I’m also realistic to the demographic and intellectual realities of our populace. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed but the further down the road we get in tech, we seem to be rotating backwards on the spread within wealth distribution and subsequently general common intelligence as many move away from intellectualism and rely more on technology and continuing to AI..
The economy as viewed by Friedman even with his brilliance will have to evolve as all economies have throughout history
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:40 am to TROLA
quote:
but I’m also realistic to the demographic and intellectual realities of our populace
Force them to advance or die out.
These nanny government policies have created a dependent, incapable population. The only way to correct that is to force the population to improve, educate and learn skills.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:47 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
These nanny government policies have created a dependent, incapable population. The only way to correct that is to force the population to improve, educate and learn skills.
Good luck doing that and having an open border
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:49 am to RogerTheShrubber
Today’s China is not unlike 1970’s USSR paper Tiger. Though it has a strong export economy the inefficient top down command economy is unsustainable long term. Chinese history is isolationist and is now sitting on a demographic time bomb Land and residency programs have propped up a false economy set to implode.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:49 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
The USA is advancing into the tech economy, not the mfg economy.
Why not both.
Reasearch “Magnequench.”
The CCP basically owns that company. It WAS an American company. While its “headquarters” are still in the states, make no mistake, it is CCP owned.
Jobs…lost.
Magnets drive much of the tech industry. It was a moronic decision to allow one’s enemy to empower themselves at your expense.
It isn’t just IP theft either. It is how that theft is weaponized against the company that was victimized .
Go scope out the story of Segway.
China is fricking is over, and it is to our detriment overall…period.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 8:50 am to TROLA
quote:
The economy as viewed by Friedman even with his brilliance will have to evolve as all economies have throughout history
Again, this should be up to the individual to advance and keep skills that benefit them.
Instead of allowing the population to drag along with no skills or education, offer opportunities to grow.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 9:00 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Force them to advance or die out.
An unrealistic answer and a simple retort…. They vote
Posted on 8/19/23 at 9:06 am to TROLA
quote:
An unrealistic answer and a simple retort…. They vote
Not really. Youre dealing with unskilled, uneducated people.
Probably the lowest participation rate of all groups.
The job of the nation is to help equip its people, not provide easy solutions to things they can do themselves.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 9:13 am to RogerTheShrubber
They absolutely do vote and it’s a broad spectrum bc people ultimately vote for selfish reasons and you’re banking on the altruistic virtues of Americans voting for the greater good. I’m just a realist who understands that..
Posted on 8/19/23 at 9:17 am to TROLA
quote:
I’m just a realist who understands that..
I understand, but its a race to the bottom if you placate the lower levels without providing opportunity for individual improvement.
As much as people hate it, we moved from mfg to high tech in the 70s and 80s and we benefitted greatly.
Without protectionism, these companies die. We are just propping them up. Youre better off subsidizing low wage workers than you are propping up dead industry.
This post was edited on 8/19/23 at 9:19 am
Posted on 8/19/23 at 9:40 am to SDVTiger
quote:
I forgot you are back to supporting JB
Never have
Posted on 8/19/23 at 9:48 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Sure there are negative externalities and the market can work in response to correct them. You don't need the government to do so.
The biggest externality as I see it in our evolved economy, is that we are subsidizing (via government, of course) huge swaths of our population to do essentially nothing, while we have offshored all the un-evolved menial jobs such people used to do in the name of “free trade.”
I don’t think any of Friedman’s theories took that into account or the overall societal damage such a massive shift might create.
But for such governmental input, does such an evolution occur?
This post was edited on 8/19/23 at 11:32 am
Posted on 8/19/23 at 9:50 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
is that we are subsidizing (via government, of course) huge swaths of our population to do essentially nothing, while we have offshored all the in-evolved menial jobs such people used to do in the name of “free trade.”
The current labor shortages pretty much prove they aren't going back to work.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 10:10 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
The current labor shortages pretty much prove they aren't going back to work.
Correct. We’ve destroyed the incentive to do so.
Posted on 8/19/23 at 10:11 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Correct. We’ve destroyed the incentive to do so.
I absolutely agree with this. Has happened since the 60s.
I don't think you can fix it, were better off letting those bloodlines die out
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News