Red pill me on Protectionism /pol/. Would it help or hurt our economy?
>>70888148
quick bump
>>70888148
It will probably slow down the growth of your country but make it more self sustainable in the long run.
>>70888453
How so?
>>70888148
In the short run (5-10 ish years) it will catastrophically fuck your economy over until the massive hole is eventually filled.
Hope you like paying for $3000 phones and $100 tshirts.
>>70888148
Hurt the economy. But the economy is not the only thing that matters to a nation. We should completely open the borders if all we care about is GDP.
>>70888148
The US had a protectionist economy for it's entire existence until the decades of tariffs and American business friendly policies were broken down and lessened to allow for progressive globalism.
>>70888673
That's an outright lie you nigger. Maybe in New Zealand but in the US we actually have the industry, resources, and domestic market for it.
>>70888148
It will probably cause an immediate, large-scale recession followed by a yuge increase in prices on most consumer goods. After US manufacturing is rebuilt, however, real wages should steadily rise again and unemployment/underemployment should drop, assuming all goes well.
>>70888720
So do you like Trump's tariffs?
>>70888638
It would increase the price of imports and foreign produced consumer goods, but will allow for domestic versions to be made as people slowly forget how cheap those items used to be. The extra domestic manufacturing from those would increase our economy over time, negating the increased cost.
You can't have a country where everyone makes a shitload and pays nothing for products. Just doesn't make sense. You have to have one or the other.
>>70888673
In part this.
The bigger issue is that people's concept of trade is completely backwards.
1.) There is no such thing as a trade deficit. All trade is, by definition, balanced.
2.) Imports are not the cost to the economy, exports are the cost because those are resources that can't be used by people in that country.
3.) Trade is mutually beneficial to both sides because it frees up resources to produce things that country produces most efficiently. From there, they surplus can be traded abroad for goods that another country can produce efficiently, thus increasing the total amount of goods that consumers in each country can consume.
>>70888148
The only successful economies in history have intelligently used protectionism. The reason you have ever heard of Korea and probably own Korean products is militant fascist protectionism.
>>70888148
I only started studying protectionism recently
here's what I got so far:
Pros:
-it protects home grown industries and the jobs they create
cons:
-it encourages monopolies/oligarchies by blocking out external competition
-it drives prices up
-it makes room for corruption
anything else I should add to that list /pol/?
>>70889025
The problem is that I don't think people in the current day would be patient enough to wait for the turn around. They'd see a short term hardship and vote for some faggot social democrat to do away with protectionism and hand out gibs.
>>70889193
The issue with trade is that the values of the trade are determined by the parties involved. Liberals think trade is good for us if we only marginally benefit from something while giving everyone away. It might be considered "fair" to them but it certainly isn't balanced. We give away more than we get in the long run.
>>70889232
So Koreans screw over their own citizens in order to sell subsidized exports to Americans. It makes my dick hard when the US is the world's #1 recipient of foreign aid.
>>70889310
Monopolies can be busted by domestic companies as well.
>>70889090
I think some carefully done tariffs could help bring back some jobs to the US and manufacturing.
>>70889310
>it makes room for corruption
Yeah man, totally different different from our pure and corrupt IMF-run globalist free trade economy right?
>>70889025
What the fuck traitor is punishing himself by not buying American and why should I feel bad for him?
>>70889310
>it encourages monopolies/oligarchies by blocking out external competition
"No". You can still have foreign based monopolies and international oligarchies with open trade. You can prevent monopolies forming with carefully structured tax codes, and a few other tricks.
>it drives prices up
It's also increases wages and "can" increase quality of goods if done right.
>it makes room for corruption
More bullshit. Any government involvement can lead to corruption but then again so can no government involvement, it's a matter of culture not policy for the most part.
>>70889359
Here's what i mean by "trade is, by definition, always balanced":
If i buy a widget from Japan, I pay the Japanese manufacturer in USD. There are only two things that Japanese man can do with US currency (or someone else if he exchanges it for Yen, makes no difference in the long run). He can use $ to buy American goods (the export side of the equation) or he can invest it in the US. That's why trade is always balanced.
If the US has a trade deficit of $123B (hypothetically), then the US has, by definition, a capital SURPLUS of $123B
People always forget that there is a flip side to the trade equation. If foreigners holding USD want to use those USD, there are only two things they can do with it: Buy US goods or invest it in the US
I know in Australia the government keeps going on about how the GDP is growing. If you look at the numbers though everyone is loosing wealth. We need to bring back Manufacturing and stop out sourcing jobs and importing workers. It's already fucking people under 30 and probably older.
>>70888148
Protectionism will preserve and create jobs, create a situation where American labor doesn't have to compete with the labor of foreign countries, and eventually help the economy by making us self sufficient.
>>70889410
>>70889794
it is much harder to create and control a monopoly on the large scale of globalism than it is to create and control a monopoly on the small scale of one country. So in a sense, it encourages monopoly more than globalism. (or at least makes it easier).
>>70889794
>if done right.
that's a big "if" considering you're relying on governments
>>70889794
>You can still have foreign based monopolies and international oligarchies with open trade. You can prevent monopolies forming with carefully structured tax codes, and a few other tricks.
Virtually all monopolies exist BECAUSE of government, not in spite of government. The only non-government sponsored monopoly i can think of is De Beers diamond company.
>It also increases wages and "can" increase quality of goods if done right.
It can increase wages for those in protected industries, but everyone who does not have government protection is screwed
>>70890095
Ever heard of currency exchange? The US dollar is acceptable currency in most places in the world. Or it can be exchanged for local currency.
>>70888148
Protectionism is for companies that can't compete in the market. It boost buisness at the expense of the consumer.
Essentially it's goverment trying to fix problems caused by over regulation.
Deregulation would be better.
>>70888148
Different viewpoint. Direct DOD to buy American. And only American. The service based economy would shift extremely fast to manufacturing.
>>70893476
I don't see how. Companies don't have an incentive to stop outsourcing jobs unless they have to pay more to move products back into America. Otherwise they produce for wages cheaper than they're legally allowed to offer American workers. Deregulation would just exacerbate this, most likely allowing them to invest even more overseas.
Companies, when left alone, will do whatever makes them the most profit regardless of what social consequences their actions have.
>>70890095
>There are only two things that Japanese man can do with US currency... He can use $ to buy American goods or he can invest it in the US
What is Forex for 200 please?
>>70888148
Protectionism would help the economy in the medium and long run. In the short term you may see a moderate recession and the prices of certain goods become unusually expensive however, you can abate and shorten this by assisting and helping finance domestic competition to the American off-shorers. It's also worth noting that there are still a fair number of things made in the US so the whole "prices of errything is going way up!!1" is just a meme.
>>70893476
>Protectionism is for companies that can't compete in the market
It's actually more about protecting a standard of living.
>>70888148
It will be an adjustment for sure but Its better to be a self reliant nation than to continue to have our wealth be slowly siphoned off to the swarming unending hordes of the thrid world.
>>70894665
You sound very liberal right now
