- 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 8/20/23 at 6:49 am to MAADFACTS
Posted on 8/20/23 at 6:49 am to MAADFACTS
quote:
It’s not socialism to think you country owes more to its own people and it’s own security than the Chinese just because the Chinese can make a widget cheaper
No but it becomes socialism when you use "national security" for everything.
0
Posted on 8/20/23 at 6:53 am to MAADFACTS
quote:
substantial redistribution policies.
Tariffs, then. Thank you.
quote:
Protective tariffs are more nationalist than socialist.
They are "substantial redistribution policies", which was your definition.
quote:
They are based on the idea that the United States needs to produce some things here, and that certain industries are important for the well being of our society.
Sounds like the justification for socialist policies.
quote:
Socialism believes there is no difference between a worker in China and a worker in Brazil and a worker in Ohio, and that all of the differences that separate them are an accident of history and matter less than their class interest. A nationalist says the Chinese should look out for the interests of the Chinese, the Brazil is responsible for Brazilians, and our government owes allegiance to the American people.
Actual socialism has always been heavily tied to nationalism.
quote:
If anything Globalist economists are closer to the Marx in thinking religious, national, ethnic, and cultural identities are meaningless.
Now you're conflating things while ignoring your own definition.
You are declaring war on the concept of fungibility.
quote:
they are trying to get shite made for as cheap as possible so their bosses can fly their private planes to Epstein island
The biggest beneficiaries of low prices of free trade are poor and lower-middle class people
This post was edited on 8/20/23 at 6:54 am
Posted on 8/20/23 at 7:12 am to SlowFlowPro
Look I’m not a big proponent of tariffs. I think the ship has sailed on manufacturing jobs in the US. Those industries have been gutted, and if they came back they would be more automated and staffed with immigrants. But free trade destroyed the American middle class. It took productive jobs from millions of people and sent them overseas. The only free traders I see as honest in this thread are the psychos who keep demanding that the people they sold out should die. It’s what your worldview is at its core. You can call yourself conservative all you want, but you don’t care about this nation or its interest or its people.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 7:14 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
But but my unskilled, lower level union manufacturing jobs! We must devolve our economy to save them from adapting to modern life! Bootstraps don't exist for them!
Sorry, not everyone can have a paid online poster position like you and hail.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 7:17 am to SquatchDawg
quote:
Use them to build their military, build infrastructure and cities, stockpile commodities, buy foreign assets, pay off US politicians, invest in foreign countries to buy allegiance, etc.
Milton needs to peel the onion one more layer.
You people
Why do y'all keep making these dumb arguments and pretend like Friedman didn't understand them?
Of course bilateral trade will lead to bilateral potential for economic advancement of both parties. Why do y'all have this notion that it's somehow bad if our trade partners actually benefit (or, at least, are given the potential to benefit) from trade with us?
The entire concept of efficient free trade is that both parties will develop from it.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 7:22 am to MAADFACTS
quote:
I think the ship has sailed on manufacturing jobs in the US.
We are either #1 or #2 in manufacturing output in the world. We still have a TON of manufacturing jobs.
We are just losing the shittiest of the shitty manufacturing jobs. The ones that simply cost too much for our society. These jobs are only worth a couple bucks an hour, but minimum wage regulation and union bullshite makes the salaries 10x that if they're domestic.
quote:
But free trade destroyed the American middle class. It took productive jobs from millions of people and sent them overseas.
And we used the savings to develop a more successful middle class for more people, by using those dollars saved for spending and investment in more efficient, developed industries.
We cannot have both. You can choose advanced and developed industries that are able to scale (thus providing more opportunity for more people in time) or lower-level industries that cannot scale (except with population booms). I vote for freedom and development/scaling. MAGA wants to devolve our economy to that of a 3rd world country for socialist, political motives.
quote:
The only free traders I see as honest in this thread are the psychos who keep demanding that the people they sold out should die.
quote:
. You can call yourself conservative all you want, but you don’t care about this nation or its interest or its people.
So you want to redefine words?
Promoting socialism, union jobs, and redefining words. How is MAGA not leftism?
Posted on 8/20/23 at 7:23 am to Bulldogblitz
quote:
Sorry, not everyone can have a paid online poster position like you and hail.
I own my own companies and built them from scratch.
I still believe in bootstraps. I'm not a little socialist cuck.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 7:36 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I own my own companies and built them from scratch.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 7:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
And we used the savings to develop a more successful middle class for more people, by using those dollars saved for spending and investment in more efficient, developed industries.
How’s that working out for people?
Posted on 8/20/23 at 8:05 am to MAADFACTS
quote:
How’s that working out for people?
Very well
Have you seen our GDP numbers and per capita GDP compared to Europe and china?
And that's with handcuffs from Democrats on our oil industry and protectionism from the EU related to our tech
Posted on 8/20/23 at 8:29 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Very well Have you seen our GDP numbers and per capita GDP compared to Europe and china?
GDP per capita does not measure return on investment from the individual, it is a very macro measure and would not normally be used to measure the success of any individual class or wage group.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 8:49 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
MAGA wants to devolve our economy to that of a 3rd world country for socialist, political motives.
So the socialists, are not the socialists.
In this thread you have tried to align yourself with some of the most analytical economic minds in modern history. The problem is, you can’t drop your addiction to provocation long enough to demonstrate you actually believe a word you say, or worth engaging in such theoretical topics. You seek arguments, not debate.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 8:55 am to MAADFACTS
quote:
But free trade destroyed the American middle class.
Nope. People not evolving with the tech economy hurt the middle class.
Government holding back natural progress is a key element of socialism.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 9:35 am to RogerTheShrubber
I'm not reading all 9 pages. But i didn't see this point made yet....
Of course free trade is best for America. Every economist should be vocal against tariffs. Every libertarian principle should be against tariffs.
But the argument for tariffs as a punitive measure against Bad Actors in the world argument is a good one. And one that I initially support despite my libertarian nature.
That said... if the goal of tariffs is to dissuade bade behavior, then it should be tested. Does the tariff actually work in dissuading illegal behavior?
If not, would it not make sense if the tariff is removed?
And if the purpose of the tariff is not to dissuade bad behavior but is to punish bad behavior... there still needs to be a test.
Is the stated goal of the punishment short term? Or long term? What measures are in place to determine that the end result punishments are working? What does a short term win look like and how do we remove the tariff?
What does a long term win look like and how do we remove the tariff?
One of the keys to negotiating is to "not remove anything from the negotiating table". And that is the only principle which allows me to stomach threatening tariffs and passing tariffs.
But it can't just stop there. There needs to be oversight to adjust and remove tariffs if they are not completing their stated mission (preventative or punitive measures).
Of course free trade is best for America. Every economist should be vocal against tariffs. Every libertarian principle should be against tariffs.
But the argument for tariffs as a punitive measure against Bad Actors in the world argument is a good one. And one that I initially support despite my libertarian nature.
That said... if the goal of tariffs is to dissuade bade behavior, then it should be tested. Does the tariff actually work in dissuading illegal behavior?
If not, would it not make sense if the tariff is removed?
And if the purpose of the tariff is not to dissuade bad behavior but is to punish bad behavior... there still needs to be a test.
Is the stated goal of the punishment short term? Or long term? What measures are in place to determine that the end result punishments are working? What does a short term win look like and how do we remove the tariff?
What does a long term win look like and how do we remove the tariff?
One of the keys to negotiating is to "not remove anything from the negotiating table". And that is the only principle which allows me to stomach threatening tariffs and passing tariffs.
But it can't just stop there. There needs to be oversight to adjust and remove tariffs if they are not completing their stated mission (preventative or punitive measures).
Posted on 8/20/23 at 9:37 am to RogerTheShrubber
Basically, tariffs should never be used to nationalism, populism, labor, or redistribution policies.
They hurt more than they help.
But international negotiations and diplomacy is different. And that is where I allow my eyes to stay on a strategy or goal and allow behavior that I generally dislike.
They hurt more than they help.
But international negotiations and diplomacy is different. And that is where I allow my eyes to stay on a strategy or goal and allow behavior that I generally dislike.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 9:40 am to WinnPtiger
Let me see, in your mind I am Ibchinaman because I support investments in the US economy over investment elsewhere???
How does that logic work?
How does that logic work?
Posted on 8/20/23 at 9:56 am to I B Freeman
quote:
support investments
The free trade absolutists are similar to the libertarian absolutists who always fail to take human nature into account.
The CCP buying up our farmland and buying up land around our military installations. Sure, what could go wrong?
This same absolutist thought process is how a lot of libertarians defend pedophilia.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 9:57 am to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
who always fail to take human nature into account.
Human nature is fairly predictable and the "dollar vote" is the most Democratic method every conceived.
Policy must allow for human excellence, not continue to reward those who refuse to grow or advance.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 10:14 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Policy must allow for human excellence, not continue to reward those who refuse to grow or advance.
I don’t disagree with this statement at all, which is why I suggested that the free trade absolutists should focus their efforts in ending the welfare state.
Posted on 8/20/23 at 10:18 am to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
which is why I suggested that the free trade absolutists should focus their efforts in ending the welfare state.
It has been a focus. But you and I both know that welfare is power to the politician so that will not happen.
Continuing to grow the underclass is the official govt position. They are not going to work, regardless of jobs brought back overseas.
Thats why even left wingers changed their opinion on immigration, they used to be the ones who pushed the hard border. Now, they understand the lower third of this country are lost, and will not work.
this may seem harsh, but these unproductive people will kill themselves with drugs or guns soon enough, just legalize drugs and let them die off.
This post was edited on 8/20/23 at 10:19 am
Page 9 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News