New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
Consoom tariffs (youtube.com)
posted 1 year ago by Dps1879 on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +8Score on mirror )
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
AshenWyvern on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 1 child
Take a scenario to the extreme of countries A and B. A and B place infinity percent tariffs against each other; thus, no trade. Specialization is reduced by definition. This adversely affects the purchasing power of both country's citizens, both governments makes nothing in tariffs, supply chains are restricted, and economy of scale is diminished.

Tariffs should only be used as a "negotiating tool" of "tit for tat" to keep other countries in check with their dumb tariffs and pseudo-tariffs.

A "strong internal industry" does better with the supplement of actually being able to export.

If one supports America raising tariffs against countries with lower tariffs, one either thinks America is incompetent at competing or tacitly admits the American worker is paid too much.

E: To go even more absurd, why stop at countries? Shouldn't US states apply tariffs against other states? Cities, townships, and counties can jump in too. Perhaps even families so that father has to make all the products for his family so that we can have an extremely strong "local economy" everywhere.
Butttoucha9k on scored.co
1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
Thats completely false and flawed in the extreme. Your silly example doesn't stop specialization at all, and a NATION shouldn't be hyper specialized to the point it can't survive without export and import anyways. You also forget the simple market pressures of SUPPLY AND DEMAND. Oh, you want my widget? I make it in China and it's ten bucks. It costs me 7 in manufacturing and shipping. I make 3 dollars profit. Oh, you want to put a 100% tarrif on it? That's 20 dollars and I make three bucks, OR I move my manufacturing to your country, which is where my DEMAND is, it costs me 9 bucks to make it there, and I sell it for 12, maintaining my profits, undercutting my Chinese competitors prices, and creating jobs in the local economy. Or better yet, I sell it for 15 and DOUBLE my profits while generating tax revenue and economic growth for the nation.

This is 5th grade level economics. It isn't hard to understand. Companies move SUPPLY production to the most ECONOMICALLY PROFITABLE PLACE, and can only sell where DEMAND is. They don't care if it's made in Taiwan or Toledo Ohio, as long as it makes the best fiscal sense. If you don't have high demand, then you don't matter, but WE DO. No company in the world wants to lose America as a customer, and if they do decide to maintain foreign production, then a new company WILL be founded domestically to compete because there will be DEMAND for their SUPPLY.
deleted 1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
Butttoucha9k on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 1 child
You just used a non trading country to try and make an argument for trade. And you're wrong about their specialization. 90% of north Korea is agriculture.
deleted 1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
Butttoucha9k on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 )
North Korea exists specifically because it doesn't rely heavily on trade. They are also super communist = NOT A FREE MARKET which was a key point to my original statements.l, so not a good comparison. Britain is a GREAT example of failure of a nation to enact trade protections and you're making my point with it. If they enacted good protections now it would hurt for a while but it WOULD drive domestic industry which is needed. If they wait 10 years it will hurt much worse. Their decline is 30 years ahead of ours. We DONT WANT TO GET TO THAT POINT. If we enact strong good tarrif policy now it will hurt for 2 years, not a decade.
Toast message