- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Searching for Capitalism in the Wreckage of Globalization. How we distorted free trade.
Posted on 3/28/25 at 11:46 am to Flats
Posted on 3/28/25 at 11:46 am to Flats
quote:Fair enough.
I pretty much stopped here:
We should add that "globalization" dates to origins of the cold war, the ultimate goal being to crush Communists economically.
Among western capitalist economies, the US was in a far better position to consume. Europe and Japan needed to rebuild industries. Western interests dictated that, rather than flooding those economies with US exports (something we were fully capable of as a completely intact and vast economy), we should allow competing economies to asymmetrically tariff US exports as a component of their rebuild. Unfortunately, 80yrs on, those countries continue to expect the favor.
With asymmetric tariffs, subsidies, and tax policy (e.g., VATs), the concept of free trade is farcical.
Posted on 3/28/25 at 12:13 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
With asymmetric tariffs, subsidies, and tax policy (e.g., VATs), the concept of free trade is farcical.
I don't think I've ever mentioned "free trade". I don't know how you would even achieve it, because nations are going to figure out the best tax strategy to fund their government. That may or may not include tariffs.
Ideally you could at least get a reciprocal policy for certain products or governments, but you're never going to achieve it globally.
Posted on 3/28/25 at 12:25 pm to BCreed1
I just don’t see how the math changes if the bounded economy is the US AND Canada. And if it works for that, then it should work for the US, Canada, and Mexico. And you can keep adding countries until you have the entire world.
I also don’t believe Adam Smith meant that we should literally trade some of our products for another country’s without using currency. When we use currency, or gold, or any such thing, to buy foreign made products we are in effect trading our products, because selling our products is how we got the currency.
I also don’t believe Adam Smith meant that we should literally trade some of our products for another country’s without using currency. When we use currency, or gold, or any such thing, to buy foreign made products we are in effect trading our products, because selling our products is how we got the currency.
Posted on 3/28/25 at 12:33 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
With asymmetric tariffs, subsidies, and tax policy (e.g., VATs), the concept of free trade is farcical.
If other countries want to tax their own people via tariffs, let them.
The only argument I’ve seen that I can agree with in favor of tariffs is to artificially prop up key manufacturing sectors that would be necessary for defense production in a wartime scenario involving China.
There is no realistic scenario where placing huge tariffs on imported cars from Europe, Japan, Canada or Mexico results in a lasting buildup of manufacturing jobs in the US. If everyone got on the same page to build up that capacity tomorrow, it would take 3-4 years to get new factories up and running (at best), and by then it will be election season, presumably following three more years of inflationary economic policy with the incumbent party at a major disadvantage.
Nevermind the foolishness of putting significant tariffs on Canadian lumber in the middle of a housing affordability crisis.
This post was edited on 3/28/25 at 12:37 pm
Popular
Back to top


2





