Meanwhile, for the 3rd year in a row, the UK is blocking the EU which wants to put punitive tariffs on Chinese steel imports to the EU due to Chinese dumping prices (through state support).
----
“The fact is that the UK has been blocking this,” European Steel Association (Eurofer) spokesperson Charles de Lusignan told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “They are not the only member state but they are certainly the ring leader in blocking the lifting of the lesser duty rule. The ability to lift this was part of a proposal that the European commission launched in 2013, and the fact that the UK continues to block it means that when the government says it’s doing everything it can to save the steel industry in the UK and also in Europe, it’s not. It’s not true.”
----
Brits, how can you defend this? I wished the UK were gone out of the EU yesterday, so we could finally protect the EU from the evil Chinese and their state-sponsored dumping prices.
>>69775038
We're not.
Everyone's roundly shitting on Cameron for being such a cunt
>B-b-but it's not profitable!
>We need to compete globally!
>The free market!
Cunts forgetting that the US has a 266% tariff on Chinese steels, that the steel industry would be profitable if the Chinese dumping didn't occur (THE EXACT SAME WHICH OPEC HAS BEEN TRYING TO KILL OFF FRACKING, OIL SANDS, GAS AND NORTH SEA OIL)
It's just madness, absolute fucking madness!
>>69775038
Brexit when?
>>69775196
June 23rd, so two months and twenty days.
>>69775196
In this case the EU is right. European steel production is taking hits from competing with cheap crap coming from China
The tories just can't stop fucking around with steel.
>>69775038
>Brits, how can you defend this? I wished the UK were gone out of the EU yesterday, so we could finally protect the EU from the evil Chinese and their state-sponsored dumping prices.
My guess is that we're basically reliant on Chinese investment in the services and energy industry, and blocking these proposals is our way of appeasing China so that it doesn't pull out of its investments in the UK, and doesn't block the UK from investing in shit like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and similar.
It's a shitty situation to be in.
>>69775038
ETERNAL ANGLO SHOO SHOO
>>69775160
>We're not.
Your government is.
>>69775196
>Brexit when?
Unfortunately, even if they vote to leave on June 23, they only ACTUALLY fuck of in 2018. Until then, the UK will continue to shit all over Europe by blocking tariffs that the EU wants to put on Chinese steel to protect hundreds of thousands of European steel workers.
Fucking imbeciles.
>>69775343
Man up. The Chinese can't afford to pull out of the UK. If we man up and give them a big fuck you on steel, they will just take us more seriously.
The Chinese aren't pussies, they hate pussies. And they love people who are strong. If we show them we are strong, they will be much more reasonable.
>>69775038
UK wants out of the EU, still wants their opinion to be valid within the EU... I mean what the fuck... How arrogant can a country get?
>>69775038
> Brits own Australia
> Australia sells its coal to the Chinese
> Chinese use coal to power steel plants
> Sells steel to EU without tariffs
> Brits gobble up cheap steel
> Germany and France continue to cry
:^) It's a neoliberalists world lad, Keynesianism and socialism btfo once again
>>69775160
We have a 266% tariff and still buy their shitty made steel? Un fucking believable. It should be 500%
>>69775038
What's happening, can somebody explain? Who's blocking what and why ?
In the UK we enforce all the bad parts of Europe, and block all the good parts.
Our people are mostly very stupid, look at Rotherham. Despite a massive coverup by Labour MPs and Council, and local police. The local people voted for another Labour Police Commissioner.
You cannot save people from their own stupidity while giving them an equal vote.
>>69775495
>keynesianism has anything to do with this
confirmed dumb aussie poster
getting into tarriff wars and not just using this cheap steel to build a load of shit is dumb though, agreed
>>69775466
The UK is tying itself to China and Chinese growth, or at least attempting to. Our chancellor, Gideon, is a big China-boo.
>>69775597
British steel industries are failing because people can buy Chinese steel for a cheaper price.
The EU could impose tariffs on Chinese steel, making it more expensive, but the UK is blocking such action.
Meanwhile China puts tariffs on EU steel.
Obligatory:
>muh steel
Carry on chaps. :D:D:D:D
>>69775495
aus-tier post
>>69775494
The UK citizens who want out of the EU and the citizens who want their opinion to be valid within the EU are two completely different sets of people, dumbass. Hurrdurr, everyone in a country has the same opinion.
>Germany misrepresenting the facts and blaming the UK
Typical.
>>69775754
So the government a complete cucks and China the bull.
>>69775038
>Trump
>Wants to put a stop to China manufacturing dominance in the west
>UK Faggots and Leftists hate him and call him a racist etc
>British steel industry just been ruined by TATA
>China dumping steel here and putting taffifs on our steel exports to China
>British Government now insisting public councils and NHS etc buy British steel and not Chinas to save our industry etc
wew I want off this ride
You guys realise that our government is fucking US, right?
They don't want Brexit, they want to close all our steelworks AND they want us to buy shitty Chinese steel.
Fuck you for falling for their stupid game and being too short-sighted to see the full picture.
>>69775494
>Belgium
>Logic
kek
>>69776229
I studied trade law and was not impressed with what the media was saying about Trump's trade policy but today i went to his site and realised he's only trying to enforce the GATT, GATS and TBT.
it was naive of me but turns out the media lied
>>69776229
>British steel industry just been ruined by TATA
this is not true, they've pumped a lot of money into it
>>69776356
I really believe this. Our government for 20 years has been anti British
>>69775836
Where did you find this photo of me?
>>69776495
>GATT, GATS and TBT
I don't know much about those subjects to be honest
>>69776540
>this is not true, they've pumped a lot of money into it
That may be true but they're cashing out now, I should have said "ruined by sale of TATA plants" though China is the greater evil of the two in that respect
China is growing Stronger!
China Steel is BEST quality steel
yuropoor steel is deluded with impurities
just like their culture....
AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA
>>69776782
>>69776782
Did you forget your proxy, Poland?
Muh free market motherfuckers
>>69776815
Silly me, I have. :D
>>69776782
>>69776807
>ID
What's with the sudden influx of samefagging retards?
>>69776862
samefag zerging on the rise, stupid anglo
>>69776773
alright true, it does seem pretty clear they don't want to sell to a competitor, in which case our government should tell them to fuck off
but this has been going on for decades, we havent had capital investment into manufacturing, it's not just china - other european countries produce steel better than us as well, we had to buy steel from france for trident for instance because our own isn't good enough
Cameron is to the steel industry as Thatcher was to the coal mining industry.
Or at least that's what he wants.
Who gives a fuck about steel. It's fucking 2016 I can't believe yurop still even produces steel. What are you, third world?
>>69777030
True, the blind faith in the free market will see yet another vital industry ruined and dumped in the rubbish bin of history.
>>69777030
certainly what sajid 'my favourite film is the fountainhead' javid wants
>>69777044
get a load of this worst korean.
AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>69777044
Literally everything is made from steel you retarded migrant worker.
>>69777030
>>69777103
Coal and steel are nor profitable. They are best outsourced to the third world.
If you hate Thatcher, clearly you would have liked the UK to have gone bankrupt in the 80s?
>>69777044
What are we supposed to be using in construction, Rearden Metal?
>>69777044
All those korean cars are made from graphene, I heard.
>>69777151
VOTE TRUMP
>>69775038
The EU only imports a total of 6.2 million tonnes from China. Which is less than half the amount it imports from the CIS region
>pic related
Are there currently EU tariffs on CIS steel imports? Wouldnt it make more sense to tariff them before being all butthurt about chinese imports
>>69775038
Boy don't I know the pressure resulting from china's absolutely enormous steel production.
I directly tap out Australia's entire steel production in the furnace at my work. Australia's single steel making plant only produces a measly 2.5 million tonnes a year compared to china.
feelsbadman.jpg
>>69775038
Fucking hell, how long did it take them to progress from pig iron made by peasants given rudimentary instruction...
> Guess they are in the game now
Tariffs are pointless, if China can produce so cheaply they can dump then we'll never be able to compete on price. China sells steel at a loss to us to bankrupt and put our steel industry out of business.
What we should do is import seizure, basically for every tonne of steel China imports into our country we seize 1 tonne. This on paper is a 100% tariff but 1) China now lose double on each tonne sold 2) this doesn't increase the overall steel in circulation 3) the government can stockpile millions of tonnes of steel 4) this steel can either be used for government projects
>>69778124
>how long did it take them to progress from pig iron
>>69778181
Or, here's a though... dont put up tariffs and let a unprofitable business go bankrupt. Why the hell should the govenrment bail out a losing business model? It's the 2008 bank bail out all over again.
Unprofitable businesses should go bankrupt. Just reorient your economy to more profitable sectors, and import cheaply.
>>69775038
It's said China produced more steel in the past two years than the UK ever has since 1870
>>69778181
>government projects
>tories
>>69775038
fucking anglos, they're no better as kikes
>>69778434
>It's the 2008 bank bail out all over again
no it isn't, losing steel wouldn't have an impact anywhere near to what letting banks collapse would have
>>69775946
>>Germany misrepresenting the facts and blaming the UK
>Typical.
Explain what is being misrepresented.
1. EU wants tariffs on China steel because China isn't playing by the rules.
2. UK blocks EU to do so.
3,. China puts tariffs on EU steel.
4. UK steel industry in trouble, steel mills are closing.
5. German steel workers angry at Brits for blocking tariffs.
>>69775038
Chinese steel is shit!!!
We get this tin wrapped shit in at work sometimes it's usually fucking damaged in some way. The coils always have edge wave and burrs fucks everything up.
>>69776824
>Muh free market motherfuckers
China is using state money to support steel jobs which leads to dumping price - this is called 'unfair' trade and the reason the US reently but 266% tariffs on Chinese steel.
>>69777251
>Coal and steel are nor profitable. They are best outsourced to the third world.
Germany employs close to half a million people in the steel and coal and coal power industry. The German machining and car and construction industry relies on close cooperation with steel and coal.
Also, it is important to keep these things as an insurance policy in case of total war.
>>69778818
>Also, it is important to keep these things as an insurance policy in case of total war.
is there nuke proof steel?
>>69777514
That is not the issue.
The issue is that global steel market prices are low due to Chinese dumping prices. Slap tariffs on their steel and they might change massive state support for it, which increases global prices and preserves the European steel industry.
Same as with the Saudis' oil strategy. America is currently not importing oil any more. But Saudi Arabia still artificially keeps oil between 20 and 40 USD in order to weaken Russia, Iran and the American oil frackers long term (they then buy the assets of American oil and gas companies which go insolvent for cheap).
>>69778434
>>69778534
>It's the 2008 bank bail out all over again
jesus christ anyone that things that the bank bail out was optional is a deluded fuck that should be permabanned
>>69778534
>no it isn't, losing steel wouldn't have an impact anywhere near to what letting banks collapse would have
50,000 British steel workers jobs gone, whole British cities devasted.
No problem, at least the banks in London are safe.
Fuck you, Nigel.
>>69779001
It was completely optional. You could have bailed out people's savings and safe investors, and let the banks themselves and risk investors go bankrupt. New banks would take their place.
>>69778994
so you want to end EU agrarian dumping and open markets for 3rd world grain and US beef?
>>69775607
>>69775038
Why is this bad. The chinese are actualy going out of their way to make their steel as cheap as possible, /pol/ should be salivating at the fact that money is coming out of the chinese taxpayer's pocked and into european companies, why pass up this opportunity to make the chinese poorer?
>>69778936
>is there nuke proof steel?
Terrorist Islamists do not use nukes.
>>69779162
Germany is doing the exact same to artificially increase its own exports, so it is no surprise that Germany (read, the German elites) would have a problem with that.
>>69779001
>jesus christ anyone that things that the bank bail out was optional is a deluded fuck that should be permabanned
it was not only optional, it should have happened,
We would have a completely different finance industry and society today if we let the fucking financial system go belly up and out of the dust and ruins build a new world without globalized finance.
>>69779148
>so you want to end EU agrarian dumping and open markets for 3rd world grain and US beef?
absolutely. the agribusiness subsidies are costing us hundreds of billions and kill millions in the developing world
>>69779148
Yes. We are ruining the African economy, amongst others, by subsidizing agriculture. They cant compete so we have to keep helping them out with food aid.
We're also promoting unprofitable, non-competitive industry like rice production in Portugal and a lot of French agriculture. If there were demand for food to the extent of making it profitable, there would be no need for subsidies. Let the excess agricultural business go bankrupt.
>>69779172
>Terrorist Islamists do not use nukes.
neither do they wage total war. Also your shit EU is one of the reasons why they are here in teh first place.
>>69775038
as a small businessman who buys lots of steel, fuck you. Britain wants sensible tarrifs on Chinese steel, we want to protect our steel industry without putting all our other industries that purchase steel in the ground as well.
By the way, the Chinese tariffs are not punitive, there are only on specialist steels and go up to 45% or something, nothing like the 266% the americans have introduced and the EU wants too
>>69779277
east german detected
>>69779162
>, why pass up this opportunity to make the chinese poorer?
It creates jobs there while we lose jobs and capabilities.
What if China did this not just with steel, but also cars, machining, ships, trucks, mobile phones, etc. They are trying already. That Europe has massive unemployment is a result of these tactics by foreign countries like China.
4% unemployment and people having to pay 10% for a car is the better alternative to 20% unemployment and many people not affording a car.
>>69775160
>OPEC HAS BEEN TRYING TO KILL OFF
well saudi arabia can sell oil this cheaply and still turn a profit.
>>69778994
Ah I see.
This still makes no sense though. Given that:
>China = current massive oversupply and worldwide domination of steel production
>For a tariff to pass an EU vote it would realistically end up as low % tariff
>EU exports account for 6.5% of China's total steel exports.
Do you honestly believe this will stop them dumping prices?? It seems like such a pointless move, and definitely not one which result in a change in their trading policy
>>69779502
Even Alan fucking Greenspan, former director of the Fed, is now of the opinion the banks should have gone bankrupt.
Krugman and Simon Johnson argue banks need to be broken up.
You are an economically illiterate retard.
>>69779365
>neither do they wage total war.
wtf are you talking about? They only wage total war. It is the only thing they know.
>>69779474
>Britain wants sensible tarrifs on Chinese steel, we want to protect our steel industry without putting all our other industries that purchase steel in the ground as well.
And yet the UK blocks an attempt to put any tarrifs at all on Chinese dumping price steel. We have 0% now. How about we put 45% on their steel?
>>69779502
>east german detected
BS, the point is that the global financial industry does not act in the interest of the people but only in its own interest. Try to deny that.
>>69778434
>force companies to pay their employees a minimum wage
>expect them to compete and be profitable against companies who don't have to pay employees a minimum wage
>complain and say they deserve to fail because they aren't competitive enough
>>69779642
>>For a tariff to pass an EU vote it would realistically end up as low % tariff
Only so long as the UK is part of the EU.
>>69779698
>wtf are you talking about? They only wage total war. It is the only thing they know.
nonsense, some 30 deads in Belgium mean no total war
>>69779698
You clearly dont know what total war is, you retard. You dont need a massive coal and steel industry to support a war against a bunch of guerrilas.
>>69779536
China cant compete on quality with us. Who's going to buy some sort of Trabant 2.0 off China? No one. They can compete on steel, because it's low tech manufacturing.
>>69779114
i support temporary nationalisation if we must and in general much more investment in manufacturing for a more diverse economy
the two are still not comparable, letting the banks go would have crippled the entire economy
>>69778181
This still would undermine the steel industry in the rest of the world because the government wouldn't be buying it for their projects. If the goal is to help the steel industry in Europe the steel the government claims would have to just sit in a warehouse until they no longer want to help the steel industry
>>69779729
>>69779729
>>expect them to compete and be profitable against companies who don't have to pay employees a minimum wage
That is the problem right there.
We should not be allowing goods to come into the EU from countries which have not a comparable wage level as Europeans.
Or in other words, China should be importing to the EU, no problem, but as long as they do not have same labor standards, we should slap tariffs on their products. Same for all other countries who try the same shit.
Europeans first. European jobs first. There is no "fair competition" between countries if one country pays a worker 1 Euro per hour and another country pays 20 Euros per hour.
>>69779758
But still:
>EU = 6.5% of total chinese steel exports
They will not give a single fuck about your tariff
>>69779729
Well they arent. One of the reasons Europe has barely any manufacturing jobs left is because of our socialist system. You get payed 2 years of salary if you're sick, its extremely difficult to fire people, minimum wages are too high, employers are forced to pay for their employees pension and healthcare costs.
Its just plain too expensive. You want to have manufacturing and compete? Get rid of this socialist system. You want a social security net? Deal with being uncompetitive for manufacturing. Invest in finance and shit I guess.
>>69775038
Because the UK is not a true democracy, whilst I suspect the vast majority of us would favour increased tarriffs on Chinese goods we have little to no say in the actual economic policy of the country.
>>69779801
>They can compete on steel, because it's low tech manufacturing.
Pretty much all mobile phones and a shitload of other electronics are producted in China and exported here. They have tens of millions of jobs there for this kind of shit.
Meanwhile, the European plebs, the uneducated and less skilled, are out of a job. 30 million Europeans have no perspective or hope, because the jobs they can do, are now done in China.
How does that help Europe in any way? I rather have all Europeans work and pay 10% more for a mobile phone than import that shit from China and have massive unemployment, bankrupt Southern countries and riots in the street... all of which we have right now.
>>69779905
Or we could cut your commie crap and stop being such a bunch of uncompetitive socialists. You want to put a tariff on Chinese steel? Okay, they'll just export elsewhere. Meanwhile we end up paying 5x times as much for our domestically produced steel, reducing our growth and competitiveness.
Fuck you and your communist protectionism.
> if one country pays a worker 1 Euro per hour and another country pays 20 Euros per hour.
Then the country that pays 20 euros should maybe think of dropping its wages. Because a 20 eur minimum wage just results in companies importing immigrants to work for half the price.
>>69779922
>They will not give a single fuck about your tariff
America has also put tariffs on their steel.
At some point they care. And if not, at least we have made a point that fraudsters and cheaters cannot do whatever they want.
>>69776229
>>69776540
>>69776773
>>69776915
>british economy cucked by pooinloos
Can't even make it up right
>>69779347
Letting the market decide prices for food results in starvation before prices go up if growing food isn't profitable enough. Then the prices will shoot way up before the market overcorrects and prices shoot way down then all the farmers go out of business until some more people starve to death.
>>69779536
>war breaks out with china
>europe can't make steel
>china wins
>>69780019
Wrong. They are assembled in China (not actually, more like Taiwan and S. Korea, but sure "china"). All the parts are manufactured elsewhere, namely Silicon Valley, Tokyo, Eindhoven and a bunch of other places. Its then shipped to the east and assembled there, because its cheaper.
We refuse to let them use our patents, they cant compete.
Europeans are out of a job because its so expensive to hire them, its more profitable to hire some shitskin immigrant who cant speak the language. The issue is excessive government regulation. And your solution is tariffs i.e. more regulation? Retard.
>>69779934
>One of the reasons Europe has barely any manufacturing jobs left is because of our socialist system.
You have it the wrong way around.
If we only compete with other countries (the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia etc.) which have a similar level of wages and social systems, there is no need to get rid of social welfare and minimum wage to compete on a world stage.
The idea that we need to compete with China or Vietnam or India on wages, is absolutely insane. We do not have to, we should not and we also shouldn't have jobs go to these low cost countries. It doesn't help us at all if we have 30 million+ unemployed, while they have record employment. If we have low unemployment, we pay less welfare, which means taxes can go down, and we are all better off, even if we cannot import cheap Chinese steels or cheap other shit.
UK being incompetent as fuck. Blaming others for the problems they created.
>>69780136
yea UK has been cucked by it's former colonies for a long time, they just haven't realized it. biggest one being USA cucking UK since ww2.
>>69780188
lel
>>69780163
Because extremely Laissez-Faire Brittain of the 19th century suffered constant famine, am I right?
Sure there will be boom and bust cycles. That happens in capitalism, regardless of how much you try and regulate it. But to suggest there would be constant famine is retarded. Demand would be fairly consistent, and grow parallel with population growth.
>>69780188
Correction
>China becomes a nuclear wasteland
>>69780089
And what has happened as a result of that huge American tariff?
They are currently the worlds biggest net importer of steel. The idea of tariffs being able to completely level the playing field in worldwide trade are so outdated
>>69779698
we don't have 0 now, the EU already imposes a 16% tariff but wants a 70% tariff
>>69775038
I pledge allegiance to the anti-Jewish state of China.
>>69780080
>Or we could cut your commie crap and stop being such a bunch of uncompetitive socialists. You want to put a tariff on Chinese steel? Okay, they'll just export elsewhere. Meanwhile we end up paying 5x times as much for our domestically produced steel, reducing our growth and competitiveness.
What do you think the world would look like, if it only existed of Canada, the US, Europe, Russia, Japan, South Korea and Australia?
Do you think everyone would be poor or could not grow because there is no slave labor in China any more???
We would all be better off if free trade would only be done among countries with somewhat similar labor laws and wages.
>Eurozone devaluing their currency + massive wage dumping
>but China steel is too cheap guise
Full retardation.
>>69780163
Price setting for agriculture products and massive oversupply due to subsidies have, in Europe, caused immense market distortion. As of 2015 and 2016.
I cannot see how this helps anyone.
>>69780239
>less welfare
How about no welfare? How about we cut that entirely, lower our wages and we can actually compete.
You cant win with tariffs. The massive tariff wars in Europe from 1870 to 1914 proved that. It only drives up prices and keeps unsustainable businesses afloat. It drives innovation down. After all, why innovate if you can just receive subsidies for your unsustainable business? This is happening in Southern Europe, where agricultural technology lags massively behind because farmers can just subsist on subsidies, no need to invest or improve. Your produce will be subsidized and half will be given away to Africa to drive prices down on the actual market.
Go. To. Fucking. North. Korea. You commie scum.
>>69779346
>absolutely. the agribusiness subsidies are costing us hundreds of billions and kill millions in the developing world
then why not promoting the only logical consequence: the break up of the EU common market as such. There is no reaon why Finns and Portuguese have to be under the same regulations.
>>69775594
>We have a 266% tariff and still buy their shitty made steel? Un fucking believable. It should be 500%
Gotta vote Trump pal.
>>69780206
>All the parts are manufactured elsewhere, namely Silicon Valley, Tokyo, Eindhoven and a bunch of other places. Its then shipped to the east and assembled there, because its cheaper.
Ok, that takes the cake. You are insane.
No, the "parts" are not manufactured in "Silicon Valley" (you mean Palo Alto? or what?) or Eindhoven or Tokyo. All parts are made and assembled in Taiwan and China. Design work, software and marketing is done in the US, Europe and Japan, but not the actual manufacturing.
Foxconn has 1.5 million employees, they make pretty much all of Apple's products in conjunction with subcontractors in Asia which manufactuer batteries, screens, chips etc.
>>69780384
We would quite simply go bankrupt. Yes, we need cheap labour. Do you have any idea what kind of a limitation on growth it would be if we had to pay everyone $15 an hour? Investments would plummet. Our cash reserves would evaporate. Prices would shoot up immensely.
It might stabilise after a while, but the entire world economy would have gone belly up by then.
>>69779905
That would result in massive unemployment all over the world. And a huge gap between people who can manage to get a job and people who can't, followed by a bunch of civil unrest, then a new wave of rich vs poor socialism, this time working class vs not working class.
>>69779934
This I can agree with. It would still probably kill the steel industry in europe unless there were massive amounts immigration, which know European leaders they might actually choose to do to try to save the steel industry and effectively ruin all the EU countries in the process. It could be done well, but probably wouldn't be done well.
I think they should just go with something in the middle like letting the UK opt out of the tariffs then let the UK steel industry fail while the rest of Europe saves their steel industry.
>>69780702
Jew detected.
Not sure what your problem is, m8. But Europe existed for thousands of years without having cheap Chinese dumping prices. That only started a few years ago and coincided with the massive rise in unemployment across Europe.
Pretty much everyone agrees, Europe was better off in the 1960s and 1970s before the globalists said "we need to import from dictatorships with slave labor".
>>69780722
putting tarriffs on just fucks over the rest of the economy who use steel to make things, forcing them to pay more for steel and making their products more expensive
this is comparative advantage 101, china india etc have an advantage on wages because their cost of living is dirt cheap, europe, the us etc has comparative advantage with higher skills etc
industries have been dying and shifting to different parts of the world for a long time, it is not as though we haven't replaced jobs with something else - then all the 'muh manufacturing' types might have a point
but the dutch guy is a retard if he thinks removing minimum wages will suddenly make us able to compete in manufacturing with china and india
>>69780329
Constant famine in Africa is better than ant famine in developed countries.
>>69780468
An oversupply of food is better than an undersupply of food.
Sure finding a middle place is ideal, but I would rather have more food than I need than not have enough food.
>>69780697
>No, the "parts" are not manufactured in "Silicon Valley" (you mean Palo Alto? or what?) or Eindhoven or Tokyo.
Oh shit, would you look at this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASML_Holding
http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_25477373/chips-still-one-valleys-top-industries
Chips and semi condusctors are still produced in the west. Good luck building a PC without a motherboard or GPU, faggot.
>>69780722
>That would result in massive unemployment all over the world. And a huge gap between people who can manage to get a job and people who can't, followed by a bunch of civil unrest, then a new wave of rich vs poor socialism, this time working class vs not working class.
Look at the 1960s. Back then global trade was principally done between Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia and the US. Everyone had jobs, everyone was happy.
The most notable problem advanced countries have these days is that stupid and unskilled people (we have a lot of those) cannot get any jobs. Why? Because we only have high skilled jobs, because all the low-skill and mid-skill jobs are done cheaper in China, India, Vietnam etc.
Again, how is global trade helping us right now? I do not see how. We are all worse off than just 25 years ago around here in Europe.
>>69780927
>An oversupply of food is better than an undersupply of food.
Then we should also massively subsidize steel production, car production, the real estate industry, the clothing industry (if it still exists) etc. Plus slap tariffs on foreign goods that compete.
Because apparently more steel, more houses, more cars, more everything is good.
>>69780870
Europe also never had this level of prosperity for those thousands of years. Our current level of development and GDP relies on third world cheap labour. Sure, we could return to production inside Europe, but not with our current socialist system. Its too expensive, we'd rapidly get out competed by countries who do use 3rd world labour. And our standards of living would also drop fast.
And by the by, Europe has relied on Chinese labour for shit like porcelain and silk since the Roman Empire. We never produced that shit ourselves. Half the silver the Spanish took from the Americas ended up in China over the silk route.
>>69781001
>Look at the 1960s. Back then global trade was principally done between Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia and the US. Everyone had jobs, everyone was happy.
And most people were, compared to today, fucking poor. Hardly anyone could afford a car. A TV was a luxury item. You wouldnt even purchase a watch, you'd inherit it from your grandfather. You had just about enough money to spend on booze after all your expenses were paid. Most people didnt own their own house, they rented. Social mobility was nonexistent. Harldy anyone was able to accumulate capital and move up in society.
You want to go back to that? Thats up to you, but I suggest you move to Ukraine or something if you want to live in poverty.
>>69775355
>brit
>anglo
Brit=/=English
>>69780702
stupid jew.
>>69781153
Eat shit kike.
>>69781360
>>69781377
Commie faggot, please. Just because I understand economics and dont want to go back to reducing the lower classes to absolute poverty, doesnt make me a kike.
You're the one wanting to implement all kinds of government regulation and other such commie fuckery.
>>69781274
>And most people were, compared to today, fucking poor. Hardly anyone could afford a car. A TV was a luxury item. You wouldnt even purchase a watch, you'd inherit it from your grandfather. You had just about enough money to spend on booze after all your expenses were paid. Most people didnt own their own house, they rented. Social mobility was nonexistent. Harldy anyone was able to accumulate capital and move up in society.
NEWS : EU ECONOMY Last Updated: Jan 15, 2014 - 7:03 AM
Eurozone living standards could fall to 60% of US levels by 2023 - a mid-1960s ratio
By Michael Hennigan, Finfacts founder and editor
Jan 14, 2014 - 7:34 AM
The European Commission has warned in its latest quarterly economics report on the Eurozone that per capita living standards could fall to 60% of US levels by 2023, which would be a ratio comparable with the mid-1960s.
In 1995, hourly labour productivity was almost 90% of the US level (the US population was growing faster); the gap widened a further 10% by 2013 and will widen to 73% by 2023 while "the euro area is forecast to end up in 2023 with living standards relative to the US which would be lower than in the mid-1960's. If this was to materialise, euro area living standards (potential GDP per capita) would be at only around 60% of US levels in 2023, with close to 2/3 of the gap in living standards due to lower labour productivity levels, and with the remaining 1/3 due to differences in the utilisation of labour (i.e. differences in hours worked per worker and the employment rate)."
>>69781429
faggot kike.
>>69781429
There is no "need" for cheap labor, saving a couple of bucks does not mean your economy is good.
>>69781470
UK living standards drop to lowest level in a decade
By Sarah O’Connor and Sarah Neville
The incomes of those in their sixties and seventies have continued to rise since the recession while those in their twenties suffered the largest fall in median income of any age group, a study has shown.
The latest evidence of a growing economic divide between the generations came a day after official figures showed that UK living standards had dropped to their lowest in a decade after average real incomes fell a further 3 per cent last year.
FirstFT is our new essential daily email briefing of the best stories from across the web
The findings underline the challenge for policy makers as they try to craft a response to what the Institute for Fiscal Studies called “profound changes to patterns of low incomes”.
In its report Living Standards, Poverty and Inequality in the UK: 2013, the IFS said median income for people in their twenties had not grown in the six years between 2001-02 and 2007-08. Pensioners, on the other hand, had experienced faster income growth than other family types and age groups over the past three decades.
David Phillips, a senior research economist at the IFS, said: “Whereas in the 1960s and early 1970s the poverty rate for pensioners was around six to eight times as high as for working age adults without children, by 2011-12 the risks had near enough equalised”.
While this development in many ways represented “a triumph of social policy”, the figures confirmed that young people had sufered most from the recession and now risked falling further behind, he said.
While rates of child poverty had fallen since the late 1990s, poverty among those in work had become “an increasingly important component”.
>>69781470
And your argument is that this would be caused by lack of tarrifs and protectionism?
Hardly. I'd argue it's because we are just pricing ourselves completely out of the market with our ridiculous labour costs. Because why would the USA's be better? BECAUSE THEY ARENT COMMIE HOMOS LIKE YOURSELF! They dont have the extensive, lavish subsidies and high labour costs we do.
>>69781597
Correct, lack of protectionism let production and jobs not be domestic.
>>69781595
Born after 1960? Then you're probably poorer than your parents
The political row over falling living standards was stoked on Tuesday as it emerged that earnings-squeezed and pension-poor Britons born in the 1960s and 70s need inherited wealth to be better off in retirement than people born in earlier decades.
After an autumn in which the cost of living has dominated Westminster debate, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said its research showed the days when each generation could expect to be better off than their predecessors might be ending.
The in-depth survey of people born between the Battle of Britain in 1940 and the arrival of Margaret Thatcher in Downing Street in 1979 found that a decade in which real incomes have stagnated – coupled with changes to pensions and high house prices – has made life tougher for people currently in their 30s, 40s and early 50s than those born earlier.
The IFS said living standards for those currently considered to be in the prime of their working lives were now dependent on wealth passed down the generations, and that this was heavily skewed towards the already better-off.
Andrew Hood, a research economist at IFS and an author of the report, said: "Since the second world war, successive cohorts have enjoyed higher incomes and living standards than their parents. Yet the incomes and wealth of those born in the 1960s and 70s look no higher than the cohorts who came before them. As a result, younger cohorts are likely to have to rely on inheritances to be better off in retirement than their predecessors."
Hood said the IFS had not yet studied what sort of retirement might be expected by those born in the 80s and 90s, but there was nothing to suggest the outlook had improved.
>>69781522
Yeah, there is though. If you keep your labour too expensive, businesses move to countries that are cheaper. Kinda like what happened over the last 2 decades. And then you end up with high unemployment.
>>69781101
While that's clearly a straw man, the difference is you don't die without clothes. You do die without food. I would rather have other industries suffer slightly from higher taxes than have those same industries suffer slightly because a few of their employees starved to death.
>>69781429
you understand economics better than him, but you are stupid if you equate regulation to communism, go back to wanking over mises
>>69781673
tariffs.
>>69781597
Wages are actually far too low, especially in Germany.
>Anglos allying with the Chinese against ARYAN nations again
Who would have expected this?
ETERNAL
T
E
R
N
A
L
>>69781651
Nope. Expensive socialist labour laws made it impossible for businesses to compete in the west.
What, you think you can solve unemployment with tariffs? If you keep minimum wage at $15, and the chinese can do it for $1.50, they can still turn a profit unless your tariffs are raised to 1000%.
>>69781771
people would not work for 1.50 an hour in the eu
>>69781688
Taxation is slavery, dontcha know, my dear anglo friend.
>t. libertarianism
>>69781730
Please explain to me why higher minimum wages would benefit anyone? You'll have heard of the concept of inflation, no? I suggest you keep up with the discussion around Bernie Sanders suggestions around raising minimum wage here on /pol/. General conclusion: it's a bad idea, and basically wont help lower class people much, as it results in both higher unemployment and raised prices, effectively evaporating the higher wages through inflation while simultaneously making more people unemployed.
>>69781771
You are a special kind of retard aren't you?
>>69781771
Yes, having all the factories and farms being built here will bring those jobs here.
>>69781597
>And your argument is that this would be caused by lack of tarrifs and protectionism?
Exactly.
We need work. Unemployed people do not contribute anything to society. They take away through welfare. So, overall we are getting poorer. This problem is getting worse and worse. Meanwhile, due to the great globalist agenda, wages are suppressed as well, squeezing the middle class. Only the top 1% get richer. But politics shouldn't be made for the top 1%, but for everyone, especially the middle class.
----
The Death of the Great American Middle Class
If the typical single person in America were making $52,952 a year and the typical married couple were making $105,904 a year, the United States really would be a very rich country. The problem is that most people actually make much less than this. The typical American adult makes just $26,134.[7] Half of all Americans make less than this.
How can it be that the typical American adult makes just $26,134 when America is the richest nation on Earth? The answer is that a few high-income Americans gain the lion’s share of America’s national income. As illustrated in the figure below, the top 5% of American households made as much money in 2009 as the entire bottom 50% combined.[8] That’s amazing. Out of about 120 million households in America today, the richest 6 million make as much money as the poorest 60 million.
FORTY YEARS OF STAGNATION FOR AMERICAN WORKERS
The median income is the income of the average or typical person. Men’s incomes are used because the proportion of women working outside the home has changed dramatically over the years. Where data are available for women, they tell a similar story.
It’s obvious from this figure that typical male incomes rose continuously from the 1860s through the 1960s.
It’s also obvious that this growth ended in the 1970s. Since the 1970s there has been no increase in male median incomes — at all. None.
>>69781922
Inflation is money printing without more production being attatched, prices would stay exactly the same so long as workers are being paid sufficiently enough for there to be a profit.
>>69781674
>the difference is you don't die without clothes.
Actually you DO die without clothes, you DO die without vital drugs and vital vaccines and hospital beds and cancer treatments, you DO die earlier if you are poor, you DO die earlier if you do not have a home etc. etc.
>>69781844
Precisely why we should just let the chinese do it and focus our economies on other sectors. We're a knowledge based economy. Wanting to be a manufacturing economy isnt hugely desirable. But if you insist on it, you cant simultaneously be a manufacturing economy *and* a welfare state.
>>69781925
Do tell me how tariffs help anyone. European powers in the 1870s through to 1914 fought a massive tariff war amongst themselves, and all it did in the end was benefit the USA and slow down innovation.
>>69775038
The majority of cheap steal imported into the EU is not from China though, it is from the EU.
>>69781922
Why the fuck are you anti-worker?
Are you a globalist shill?
There's no point competing, if you can't retain the industry through reducing taxes on it for the sake of the employees. Mothball it. Steel production is not a delicate operation throw some fucking sheets on the kit.
>>69781954
This is the result of women in the workforce, not trade policy. Trade policy has made it worse, but only since the 90's.
>>69782030
Tarrifs brings production domestically thus employing the people and enriching the nation.
>>69778434
Once production capacity is lost you can't get that shit back in a hurry. Steel has strategic importance as much energy and food.
>>69781922
Germany has minimum wage for 1,5 years. Outcome: More employment and deflation.
>>69781922
>General conclusion: it's a bad idea,
this is far from economic consensus, if anything the economic consensus has shifted more in favour of minimum wages as the expected ill-effects have been much lower than theory suggested
you would know this if you understood economics, maybe read some journals that utilise empiricism
of course there comes a point where wages would become too high and a burden, but we are not there yet
>>69782030
i agree, if you go by my post id in this thread you will see i've generally argued against tariffs and for the benefits of cheap goods manufactured in china, india etc
>>69782103
>This is the result of women in the workforce, not trade policy. Trade policy has made it worse, but only since the 90's.
This makes no sense. If women also work (and haven't done so before), you actually should pretty much double the income of American households. Meanwhile, the household income in America has been stagnant for everyone below the top 6% in the last 45 years.
>>69782137
Go isolationist, produce your own food, build factories, produce, open up market to trade, export shit.
>>69781954
>Unemployed people do not contribute anything to society. They take away through welfare
So end welfare.
>politics shouldnt be made for the 1%
I agree. Politics shouldnt exist in the first place.
>>69782000
You can have price inflation too buddy. Inflation isnt limited to monetary policy. Its just the most common form.
>>69781947
And what will prevent anyone from buying from the Chinese if they can do it cheaper? You have to raise tariffs to ridiculous amounts if you want to make it just as expensive as domestic production, and in the end the result will be that your industry falls behind technologically because there is no incentive to compete.
>>69782209
use export and import tariff profits to build more factories.
>>69782123
>Tarrifs brings production domestically thus employing the people and enriching the nation.
Exactly. Only the globalist elite wants no tariffs, because this way they can get even richer by selling their stuff to everyone in this world... they do not care that the middle class gets squeezed and the poor class cannot find manufacturing jobs and gets even poorer. They only care about themselves.
We need to stop the madness of handing manufcaturing to the dictatorship in China or the dictatorship in Vietnam or the dictatorship in Thailand. It is not only a way to help the middle class here, it is only a way to fuck with these dictatorships.
>>69775038
The supremacist jews have england and germany in their hands and they alternate between them as tools to fuck up europe.
>>69782246
we tarrif it sufficiently for it to be more expensive, foreign good should always be more expensive, low quality shit shouldn't destroy all your peoples jobs, wages, and well being.
>>69779001
The system will break down sooner or later, either moral hazard is rewarded or it's punished. In a country like Japan you can just keep letting this shit slide because the Japanese have enough honor not to abuse it too badly, but that won't work here.
Just like immigration, at some point the things portrayed by the establishment as impossible will become inevitable.
>>69782294
it is strictly anti nation and pro international elite.
>>69782179
>Germany has minimum wage for 1,5 years. Outcome: More employment and deflation.
BS. The minimum wage in Germany has only had little effect, because there is a general workers' shortage in Germany.
If a high minimum wage had been introduced 15 years ago, it would have been a disaster.
Deflation is principally the result of little economic activity in Southern Eurozone states, cheap oil and low birth rates.
>>69782324
if foreign goods are too low quality people will not buy them, but clearly most people are happy with the price and quality of goods
>>69776229
>British Government now insisting public councils and NHS etc buy British steel and not Chinas to save our industry etc
lol, why did they even publicize this?
It's just admitting that the government has been pressuring public industry to import chinese steel for years, and now it's destroyed the industry.
They've already said they won't nationalize, but they've also been setting up the "they may be no good solution to the crisis" because they know there's no other solution. So what's the plan here, just get rid of steel completely? That will be fucking great when the chinese ramp their prices up and all our plants are gone.
>>69782384
>general workers' shortage
nice shilling, having worker shortages is good not that there's a real worker shotage, only not having 10,000,000 workers as backup disposable slaves is what's called a "worker shortage".
>>69782403
People buy cheap shit.
>>69782072
Because forcibly maintaining a working class, a proletariat, through tariffs and other crap is not profitable. Its bad for your economy. Yeah, it will employ people, at huge cost. And then what? You start lagging behind technologically and your exports drop to nothing because your prices arent competitive.
Just fucking let the Chinks do the hard work and let your people focus on education and more profitable sectors.
>>69782137
We have nukes these days, Jaap-Jan. Steel is about as useful in warfare these days as teddy bear factories. The kind of warfare that would require mass steel production, would be immediately sorted with either diplomacy or nukes.
>>69782192
I meant general consensus on /pol/. And specifically Sanders ridiculous 100% raise to $15.
>>69782384
lol just admit your theories are wrong.
>>69782483
>U
What the fuck are you on about?
stop with your faith based bull shit, no all production should be domestic.
>>69775038
I like how china stopped importing from us and is now literally colonising africa.
Good riddance, we need to ostracise their economy. They'll realise just how bad they fucked up.
>>69782209
>export shit
>while your labour costs $15 and the chinks costs $1.50
Why would a third party buy from you at 100% the price, rather than from the Chinese? You'd have no export, retard.
>>69782465
so don't let people buy what they want?
>>69782483
well consensus on /pol/ doesn't mean much, sanders $15 is probably too high though yes - mainstream economic opinion seems to be that $10-$12 would be ok though
>>69782483
>I meant general consensus on /pol/
lol true seal of quality.
>>69782209
It's too late for us, please MAGA.
>>69782570
because they probably want to have an economy and good worker wages, they would ban china and only trade among peers.
>>69775495
>where has china stopped importing iron from
Dumb easterner detected. SECESSION WHEN.
>>69782596
Correct.
>>69782596
15$ is not too high, but higher minimum wage does nothing with we have no production and 99% of the people are only leaching off the resources and production the U.S is colonizing for the rest of the world.
>>69778434
SEA NIGGER
C
L
O
G
W
O
G
go join your anglo faggot asshole buddies be a cuckservative somewhere else pls
the benefits of cheap steel far outweigh any benefits from a higher domestic steel price.
>>69782540
>all production should be domestic.
Yeah, the Netherlands with it's 0 natural resources should just make it's own cars, planes and steel. Meanwhile, everyone is putting tariffs on everyone else, so we cant afford to buy the goods we need on the free market to produce these things, because all you cunts are preventing us from earning enough money from our exports.
Meaning basically 6 countries survives: Canada, USA, Russia, China, India and Brazil.
Everyone else goes bankrupt and starves because they are reliant on trade and arent self sufficient.
>>69775038
Steel production is an industry of the 18th century.
Just let it die allready.
>>69782611
How is it too late?
You can literally do it today.
The Netherlands is one of the world's largest exporters of agricultural and food products, thanks to its innovative agrifood technology. The Dutch agrifood sector is a sustainable source of healthy, safe food that is produced with respect for nature and the environment.
You wont die.
>>69782483
Who the fuck are you? Ludwig von Mises reincarnated?
Look around you. We have Islamists who can easily recruit poor Muslims because there is no way they could ever get a job. We have middle class people who work two jobs and still fall out of the middle class. We have 30year old Italians who live at home with their parents despite university degrees and stable jobs, because wages are suppressed.
Globalist trade with dictatorships with slave labor is a disaster.
Imagine a world of three villages. Two villages are democracies and have over many years built up a sound industry, have a prosperous population and things are good. The third village was a commie disaster with lots of poor people. Then that third village gets a dictatorship in plce which executes dissenters and outlaws free speech. In order to not get overthrown, they get the idea that they can use cheap, unregulated labor to make goods for the other two villages. The other two villages are well off, so they say "trade is good" and access the cheap, unsophisticated products and pay their own currency for them. The third village slowly builds up a massive industry and pockets money fro the other two villages, which it in turn uses to manipulate its own currency in order to keep up the big slave labor economy. The elites in the two democracy villages get richer and richer from trade, but slowly, the general public there is ever more out of a job and wages are suppressed.
Now, how do you think this will end? Or, better question, what do you think the first two villages should do that benefits their populations?
>>69782684
i think theres a blm protest you're missing
>>69782570
They don't need any exports. The US has the natural and human resources to sustain high standards of living within its own borders. If the global economy doesn't provide anything of value on top of that, fuck it.
Lowering your living standards to make yourself more competitive on the global market is retarded.
>>69782782
add greater germania to that list and everything is golden
>>69782629
You are presuming total government control on all transactions for that to be a reality. Like I said before: fuck off commie scum. If I want to buy cheap shit from China, over excessively expensive shit made domestically, I should be free to do so.
Fucking tyrant.
>>69782782
Netherlands has plenty of resources.
>>69782777
No it doesn't.
>>69782791
You're retarded.
>>69782897
I am pro worker, pro nation, correct.
I don't give a fuck about the world, only my neighbors being employed in the highest standard and for production to be domestic giving the production dollars to my citizens rather than having it shamelessly exploited in China.
>>69782684
>Correct.
what right do you have to tell people what to buy? i recently bought a cheap chink tv, works fine, why can't i buy that?
>15$ is not too high
evidence please, it's probably not too high on the coasts of the us, but could have nasty impacts on flyover states, particularly small towns
>but higher minimum wage does nothin
well, it increases people's wages generally, i don't think that's nothing
>we have no production
the west produces more than it did 40 years ago, less people are employed in manufacturing though sure, but people are in different areas of work which is fine
>99% of the people are only leaching off the resources and production
most people work, so not really
>U.S is colonizing for the rest of the world.
go on, give some examples, the us arent doing anything like china are doing in china for instance
>>69782782
You don't need China, you don't need USA, you don't need "cheap workers" to live, build houses, have production, and export your shit.
>>69783029
The right of the workers, now fuck off shill.
>>69782792
We are coasting on the abilities of a small number of super-entrepreneurial people, a lot of which are pulling up stakes and moving their abilities elsewhere. They'll refuse to be sucked dry by Muslim immigrants inevitably.
If we could keep offering them a Dutch culture they'd stay regardless of taxes, but as it stands we are going to lose it all.
>>69783005
>I am pro worker, pro nation, correct.
>I don't give a fuck about the world, only my neighbors being employed in the highest standard and for production to be domestic giving the production dollars to my citizens rather than having it shamelessly exploited in China.
Bro, you are a man who understands what patriotism means.
>>69783085
the right of the workers for what?
still plenty of workers around you know, there aren't a fixed number of jobs that suddenly goes down if a steel mill goes bust
>>69783095
Let them move, I don't want globalist shills here, I want only those committed to making the nation the richest and of the highest standard for all its citizens.
>>69782840
Nice for the USA. Sucks to be a small European country then I guess.
>>69782799
We have muslims in the first fucking place because socialists like you made it profitable to import cheap labour. Because you made wages for the domestic population unaffordable.
And the solution isnt to employ muslims, the solution is to gas them.
The first two villages should start producing commodities the third one cant, preferably ones more expensive than what they buy off the third village.
Banning products from the third village and making them domestically is retarded. It's expensive, it destroys competition and it results in technological retardation.
Not to mention a lot of 'villages' dont have the natural resources to produce the goods village nr3 does.
>>69783095
you dont deserve to be a country. you are a failed empire of weird looking faggots who live below sea level for some dumb reason
We'd have a fine steel industry had manual labour drones not forgotten their place as the serfs of the industrial and post-industrial world.
>>69783182
Ah, don't say that. You were on the short list for escape countries, Estonia it is then :/
>>69782777
You must be retarded. Chinese steel is fucking trash. I wish my plant would go back to US steel.
>>69782902
Only gas. No steel or coal. Not even timber.
>>69783005
Pro your own nation, pro your own workers. If you were to live in a nation like mine that relies on free trade, you would think differently. As I said before, only a very limited few countries are capable of full domestic production of goods. Most rely on trade. They import some goods and export others. They find a niche and make mutually beneficial deals.
You are returning to the beggar-thy-neighbour policies of the 19th century. They provably dont
>>69783058
>you don't need "cheap workers" to live, build houses, have production, and export your shit.
work.
We need to import steel and concrete to build our houses. We need to import raw materials to produce anything worth exporting (which you put tariffs on that make it impossible for me to export). Basically, we would go bankrupt, and the USA would do more or less okay. And with you maybe 5 other countries. Everyone else gets shafted.
>>69783178
>Because you made wages for the domestic population unaffordable.
You asshole wants to "compete" with China on wage. Are you seriously suggesting any Dutch person would be willing to work for the same wage as a Chinese worker and the same work hours?
Fuck you. Yes, Fuck You.
We need to close our borders, slap tariffs on goods coming from dictatorships and from countries without the same labor standards we have, and then we can start to rebuild our middle class.
>>69783172
Gallup states that during the first quarter of 2015, 15.8 percent of Americans surveyed indicated that in the last year they had struggled to afford food for their families.
China is literally starving my people, no jobs, no houses, low wages, having to compete with slaves, how the fuck is this a good idea?
>>69783332
im just messing with you european weedman its just really fun to insult the dutch for some reason
>>69783425
>>69783425
Stop being a drama queen, either way you can't starve.
>>69783439
>China is literally starving my people, no jobs, no houses, low wages, having to compete with slaves, how the fuck is this a good idea?
Ask this Dutch idiot who is shilling for "moooare Chinese slave labor production .... gooooood for us".
People are struggling because of elites who do not want to limit cheap slave labor producing for the masses here. They want to keep the masses silent through Hollywood blockbusters and welfare, instead of allowing people to work and produce the goods that their society consumes.
>>69783432
No, Im saying we shouldnt do manufacturing in the first fucking place, and work on more profitable markets.
But if you *insist* on investing in domestic manufacturing, yeah, you're gonna have to drop wages or be completely uncompetitive.
You slap tariffs on imports, all your neighbours lose out, and they retaliate with their own tariffs on your goods. No one gets to export anything anymore, and countries that cant produce things domestically go bankrupt.
China is taking all the resources of my nation to build factories there while my nation is only plundered for equally slave conditions with our workers being disposable ants to the globalist class that can simply use slave labor.
>>69783439
how do cheap imports i.e. cheap goods, cause people in the us to starve exactly
how does raising the price of goods actually help people? how does that figure relate to 20, 30, 40 years ago?
there are many issues with western economise, but cheap chinese imports are not at fault
100% of the U.S citizens must be employed in production.
>>69783522
We cant stave, but we'd basically return to a subsistance farming economy. We'd have no money to import anything (because our exports are tariffed to hell and back) and as such cant export anything. We'd be forced to make do with our national resources which are basically... a swamp. Not much more than farming then.
This is classic beggar-your-neighbour policy. Read up on it. They tried it in the 19th century and it really didnt fucking work.
>>69783586
People should stop being stupid cunts, get an education and go into profitable sectors the Chinese cant compete with us in. IT for instance.
We'd benefit much more from lower taxes and no welfare, allowing more entrepeneurs to create jobs in our countries.
>>69782652
KEK you wouldn't survive a month Worst Australian. Isn't it funny how after low commodity prices the diminutive secessionist voice has been completely silent.
>>69783432
>>69783586
If there's one country in the world that has dumping wages it's Germany. Germany is exporting its unemployment into the rest of the world before anyone else.
>>69783806
End yourself retard.
>>69783806
>We'd benefit much more from lower taxes and no welfare
this is where you go off the deep end
>>69783914
You are advocating retarded economic policies that have been tried in practice and have been proven to be absolutely terrible for everyone involved. Read this, fucknugget:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beggar_thy_neighbour
Yeah man, sorry for defending my countries interests over your moronic isolationism. Go USA, fuck everyone else, am I right?
>>69783952
Shut up socialist. Welfare encourages immigration and lazyness. We have no use for it. Only combat veterans and physically disabled should get it.
Lower taxes increases consumption which is always good.
>>69784029
>Go USA, fuck everyone else, am I right?
now your getting it!
>>69784146
Doesnt end up working out great for even the USA. Since all your trade partners are now either bankrupt or putting such high tariffs on your goods that exporting becomes unprofitable, the USA becomes limited to only its own domestic market. Making growth basically tied to population growth.
Which isnt fantastic for innovation and technological progress. Nor social mobility. Your market would become basically static.
>>69781000
Wrong, ASML only makes chip producing machines, not chips. Also every machine that the produce is exported to either East Asia or the US. But most of them to Asia.
>>69784098
>Shut up socialist.
clearly not a socialist, don't be a child
>Welfare encourages immigration and lazyness
evidence please, recent research is generally showing it doesn't encourage laziness, and that most migration is simply down to searching for jobs - not welfare
>We have no use for it.
[citation really fucking needed], it's a clear help to people between jobs and even many in work - an earned income tax credit for instance has clear evidence showing it enourages work and helps better in terms of living standards than minimum wages and other measures
>Only combat veterans and physically disabled should get it.
sure they should too
>Lower taxes increases consumption which is always good.
not necessarily, what really drives economic improvement is capital investment and technological innovation - if anything we want to discourage consumption a little bit and try to push money towards investment - e.g. raising consumption taxes while lowering corporations and capital gains tax
2/10 must try harder
>>69784279
it is absolutely fantastic as we can repopulate the world with white children together with germany until half the world is white and happy, technological progress is not tied to any of that fuck off with your retarded social "sciences" more white people means more technological progress thats a fact now go be a fat swamp jew hoping to profit of the labor of others elsewhere
>>69779162
Because I loathe the lack of honour in today's world. If we cannot accomplish wealth in an honorable way, we should all be starving.
>>69784370
>if anything we want to discourage consumption a little bit and try to push money towards investment
So Quantitative Easing? Yeah, thats really been working out great. Pumped the stock market and bad companies full of investment, and has it translated into growth? Nope. Just a stock market bubble. We really dont need more money pumped into the economy, we need consumption to increase so businesses can expand and employ people.
And where does the money from QE come from? Governments and therefore taxes, exactly.
>>69784475
Germany heavily relies on food imports and coal imports. It wont do great under your idealised tottaly isolationist, protectionist society.
Technological progress is tied to competition. You innovate and develop because you want to defeat a competitor. Under your retarded neo-mercantilist system, no one has any incentive to do so. This shit is what killed the USSR, sonny boy.
>>69784370
>recent research is generally showing it doesn't encourage laziness, and that most migration is simply down to searching for jobs - not welfare
that's not true and the literal opposite is the case. why are you lying?
>>69785341
lebensraum
you dont need chinks to have competition, senpai, wtf kind of competition are zipperheads anyway all they do is copy white people poorly
>>69784370
>it's a clear help to people between jobs
You could have saved the money you would have paid in taxes to survive that period.
This might be a language barrier but what the hell is an "earned income tax credit"?
>most migration is due to jobs
Enabled by the need to drive down wages, due to wages being so prepousterously high, yes.
>not for welfare
50% of moroccans and 70% of Somalian immigrants (including second and third generation) in this country are on welfare. How do you explain that then? Systemic racism, I suppose? The first generation worked. Their kids dont, and their imported families dont either. So why do they move here, rather than stay in Morocco? Because they dont have to work here.
>>69775355
Go away fucking turkshit.
>>69785514
You realize that as soon as you start a policy of "tariffs on everything that isnt produced domestically" all your trade partners are forced to respond in kind. Bankrupting everyone. It isnt about competition with chinks, its about protectionism causing a lack of competition amongst all nations. Because no one can export shit, limiting them to their own domestic markets.
>>69775038
>the evil Chinese and their state-sponsored dumping prices.
why does China always ruin the industy fields in the world what China(state-sponsored) joins?
>>69785660
bankrupting politically contructed non countries you mean.
mercantilism built europe up to the power it has now and though empires it built the rest of the world too, it can do it again. dont let the slide into liberal degeneracy that france started take us all the way down
There's one thing you other countries don't get. We're not locked in the EU with you... you're locked in here with us!
>>69783644
>You slap tariffs on imports, all your neighbours lose out, and they retaliate with their own tariffs on your goods. No one gets to export anything anymore, and countries that cant produce things domestically go bankrupt.
You are a retard. Our neighbors are in the EU. We are not slapping any tariffs on their products or on products of any country with similar labor laws and wages which are democracies.
You just don't want to listen. You don't want to even deal with the argument that not supporting the Chinese dictatorship is a good thing,
>>69785925
No, bankrupting all non self sufficient countries. You'd end up with the only strong economies being Canada, USA, India, China, Russia and Brazil. And even their economies would tank severly due to a lack of exports. They'd all rever to 19th century economies.
Your idea of Lebensraum for instance... how is Germany going to conquer anything when it cant buy the steel and food it needs for that?
>mercantilism built europe up
Hardly. Colonialism and expanding markets did. All mercantilism did was cause harm to each other's economy, slowing growth down by many decades.
>>69775383
>>We're not.
>Your government is.
Then ask them yourself, dumb dumb. We don't know.
>>69786168
>No, bankrupting all non self sufficient countries
thats what i said, non countries. failed empires and political constructs.
>They'd all rever to 19th century economies.
except with 21st century technology, this is a good thing, the service sector does not exist and is just welfare for swamp jews, anglo scum and their feminist voting force in the rest of the world.
>how is Germany going to conquer anything when it cant buy the steel and food it needs for that?
The EU is already a solid framework it will go from there.
>>69786084
Most of your export goes to the likes of the USA Japan and China, as it happens, Germany. You start putting tariffs on them, they do it to you too.
Even if you dont put tariffs on fellow EU countries, all you do is change the scale. Rather than countries beggaring each other, now strong trade blocs do. Impeding free trade is always a bad thing.
I dont give a fuck about the chinks either. I care that your massively retarded protectionist ideas would crumble the entire fucking world economy. You want to protect your national interests? You want to employ your people? Reorient your fucking economy to be more profitable than the chinks and make sure you end up with a positive trade balance with them. Why the fuck do you want to make your own people do back breaking labour to earn a shitty wage, when you can make the chinks do it and employ your people in cushy jobs making 100x as much as the chinks?
You basically want to return to a 19th century economy, artifiicially creating jobs. Why not just fucking dismantle green houses and farming machinery and give everyone a spade and have them do it? Because its fucking unprofitable you dumb cunt.
>>69786331
Czechia, your economy isnt self sufficient either. You'd go bankrupt too.
>with 21st century technology
Do let me know how you are going to maintain your tractors and shit when you cant make enough money to import steel or new engines because everyone else has tariffed your exports to death? How is Germany going to produce engines for you to buy if it cant import steel?
>the EU
Because all 26 countries will just lockstep behind Germany as it starts attacking Poland, right?
I wouldnt give the EU another decade as it is, nevermind if one of the member states starts to clearly lord over other members or being outright agressive.
>>69786607
i thought it was clear i was american by now
the EU is shit and only exists to facilitate the liberal free trade multicultural hellscape you want so bad, but the framework is there for something more useful. needed materials can be take from colonies, here on earth and in the near future from passing asteroids
>>69786963
Liberal free trade, yes. Great idea. Best system we've tried so far.
>multiculturalism
Not so much. But that has nothing to do with the trade system, and everything to do with fucking socialists messing our values up and instuting welfare.
Look man, you clearly are not very economicaly literate. All your ideas have been tried in the past and failed hard. Please read some more on mercantilism, beggar thy neighbour policies and the tariff wars of the 19th century. You'll see all your ideas were tried, while Europe had colonies and everything, and protectionist measures ended up fucking over people more than free trade did.
>>69787404
>But that has nothing to do with the trade system
you cannot separate the two, they each create problems that the other "solves" by destroying everything good in the world.
it has been tried, protectionism made europe strong and wealthy in the first place, liberalism has made it progressively weaker and poorer, socially, economically, and militarily broken. europe was the king of continents and now you are just another vassal
>>69787883
You are confusing liberal free trade with libertarianism. Free trade doesnt mean no borders, no nations. That's libertarians.
> protectionism made europe strong and wealthy in the first place
No, not really. Trade has always been the foundation of European growth. The renaissance was kickstarted due to Italian trade with the east. The Enlightenment was kickstarted by colonialism. The industrial revolution was started with money from increasingly free trade.
Protectionism has only worked for the USA, very briefly.
>liberalism
You stupid yanks, I swear. Classical liberalism is nothing at fucking all like American liberalism. Leftism is what you mean. Socialism. Liberalism does not have any social policies and does not give a single flying fuck how you organize society, as long as you dont impede trade.
By the by: until the 18th century, China had always been stronger economically than Europe. It was always an inevitability that countries like the USA, China and Russia would surpass us, with their populations and resources.
>>69778604
I
Am
Not
Surprised
>>69778936
He means that if there is no domestic steel capability, it's a strategic weakness.
>>69775038
Chinese steel is shit.
Work is going to be a fucking headache if I can't get British Standard steel.
We may have to start importing from India.
My general understanding of the issue is this:
China makes cheap steel (possibly through uncompetitive means), and cheap Chinese steel puts UK steel jobs at risk.
A nationalist would argue for protectionism and tariffs to protect British jobs.
However, this would mean raising the price of steel, which would negatively impact British construction, industry, etc..
So you give with one hand, but take away with another.
On top of that, if you impose tariffs on China, it would damage relations and trade.
Sure, Cheap chinese steel threatens the British steel industry, but more expensive steel would threaten other British jobs and profit too.
>>69788469
>Protectionism didn't go hand-in-hand with colonialism and wasn't present during the industrial revolution
Why euro-commies want to block and control everything? If chinks are willing to give us ridiculously cheap steel then I see nothing wrong about it. If gayropean steel is really so superior in quality it should have no problem getting its share of market even with higher prices.
