![footwear-tariff-pic-impacting-childrens-shoes[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/lO77sew.jpg "footwear-tariff-pic-impacting-childrens-shoes[1].jpg")
Do you support tariffs? If Trump becomes president, then he will either force companies to move their factories to the US, or impose heavy tariffs on them.
But is this really a good idea? A lot of economists are mixed on tariffs. I personally enjoy buying cheap Chinese stuff, I buy it all the time. I wouldn't want the price of cheap Chinese clothes, electronics, and vidya to balloon in price if Trump becomes president.
PS4s cost $1800 in Brazil because of tariffs. many economists say that tariffs have hurt trade in Latin America and the European Union, and have not lead to job growth.
It's the kind of thing thats goes case by case
>>78109011
>black kid wearing work boots
Yeah right
![01-over-the-years-pharrell[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/MgvI3Ub.jpg "01-over-the-years-pharrell[1].jpg")
>>78109176
They wear work boots, they just don't use them for working.
>>78109176
Those are hiking boots moron
>>78109011
Supporting local/regional/national business can only be done through voluntary social efforts. Tariffs are just a poor emulation of what should be national pride.
KEK HAS BLESSED US KEK IS HERE
>>78109300
>>78109011
>>78109299
>>78109011
>Do you support tariffs? If Trump becomes president, then he will either force companies to move their factories to the US, or impose heavy tariffs on them.
Every single syllable of that greentext arouses me.
Fuck the kikes
Burn the slants
Make America Great Again
Please don't let the nigs find out that basketballs will increase 4.8%
>>78109176
>implying the black kid should be wearing $300 nikes that were stolen from the store and still have the ink cartridge on them
racist pls go.
>>78109011
I vote on tariffs that make imports equally priced to natively produced goods. That means if a car from a UK manufacturer costs £15,000 then so should a car from China. This would protect British employment and production, primarily cheap shit like steel and power.
5% tariff on imported goods we cannot produce.
Equalisation tariff on anything we could produce natively.
EU should do this as well and so should the US.
I'm against tariffs because I'm an upper middle class professional and I'm doing better than ever. The only people against tariffs are trailer-trash Trump fans who can't compete with illiterate peasants from Mexico because they are degenerate meth addicts.
>>78109011
>A lot of economists are mixed on tariffs
Most economists are against tariffs. They are NEVER beneficial in the long run, but there are a handful of highly dubious short-term benefits that someone sufficiently brainwashed by populist rhetoric might actually think are worth the tradeoff.
>>78109011
Their is a reason America doesn't make anything - it's all been exported to India and China by people like Trump
>>78109653
Most economists are also supporting globalism because it makes them look better while disparaging the working class.
Imports are shit. Always have been. If you can make a native product, then why should you import something?
>>78109653
What's the benefit of free trade, reducing labor to its cheapest value worldwide? I don't care to bring chinks up to our level, and certainly don't want to bring us down to theirs
>>78109011
Trump's only imposing tariffs on a company by company level. He's never even said the word tariff, the media put that in his mouth
There's a huge difference between putting a tariff on foreign cars to make domestic cars more competitive and just putting up a tariff accross all goods that don't even have a domestic competetor as Brazil did with PS4s in OP
>>78109819
>it makes them look better while disparaging the working class.
So you're jealous of people with degrees because you weren't smart enough to even get your GED, got it.
>Imports are shit
Objectively untrue, try again.
>>78109908
>I don't care to bring chinks up to our level, and certainly don't want to bring us down to theirs
Mercantilism doesn't work, international trade isn't a zero-sum game. Come back with an argument that wasn't disproven by a guy who's been dead for 200 years.
>>78110497
What do we get out of it?
>>78109632
>I'm against tariffs
>The only people against tariffs are trailer-trash Trump fans who can't compete with illiterate peasants from Mexico because they are degenerate meth addicts.
>>78110497
>get your GED
Except I couldn't afford it because my wage hasn't increased in 10 years due to the proliferation of cheap labour and price drops due to the EU and globalism.
>objectively untrue
How so? If I can produce my own steel, concrete and vehicles, why should I be forced into a competitive market where a country like India, China or Mexico can produce them at 10% the cost and sells them for roughly 75% of the actual price of a main native brand? The only country in the modern market that remained fair and competitive in the industrial vehicle sector was Japan. The rest of the countries gouged the British vehicle market like Leyland by offering cheap as fuck trucks and buses for years and the moment any major British brand died, they hiked their price because they were a nationally backed company and could absorb the losses.
International trade only makes sense on goods you cannot produce. Not to lower the cost of goods and labour that you can produce yourself.
>>78109011
Put tariffs on imports for a small number of products that your nation mainly produces and try to bring them down as much as possible for everything else. It's hard to do but it's a must, FTAs need to be negotiated for much longer periods and properly scrutinized.
>>78109011
>leave it to the burgers to understand how trades work
are all burgers this fucking retarded? just because you slap a tariff on shit going in and out of your land, it doesn't mean tariffs will be slap on goods being trade in trade routes between other nations; it's just business as usual to everyone else while your nigger kids can't afford shoes anymore and turn into the next poo-in-loo land.
>shoes will cost more.
Boo fucking hoo. I'm sure my country could remember how to manufacture stuff again without relying on near-slave labor from asia.
Pure greed.
>>78109686
>exported to India and China by people like Trump.
Because once the gates were flung open, it was the only way to compete.
Trump recognizes it's ruinous effects on our economy and that it's both wrong and short-sighted and wants to fix the problem now.
>>78111097
But you forgot American Exceptionalism desu~
>>78110749
More benefit for less work, just like with trade and specialization at any other level of economic activity.
>>78111003
>why should I be forced into a competitive market where a country like India, China or Mexico can produce them at 10% the cost and sells them for roughly 75% of the actual price of a main native brand
Just FYI, since you apparently don't even have your GED, this argument is the single most retarded thing you can say in "defense" of protectionism.
It's exactly the same reason I should buy my steel from the guy at the other end of town from you if he can produce it at lower cost and sell it cheaper. If you don't like it, you can either lower your prices and improve your process, or get into a different line of business.
Tariffs are nothing but government handouts to businesses and workers too lazy to get out of industries they aren't competitive in. You're no better than the nigger welfare queens you probably also bitch about.
>>78112024
At what expense does that benefit come though?
>>78109011
Having moved from America to Australia and seeing the quality of life Tariffs bring to spiderland, I have to say I am in favor of Tariffs. Brazil is a shitty example of them in use, the existence of Tariffs prevents things like entire cities turning into ghettos when the factories move just like the american midwest since 2008.
>>78112024
It's not really a fair competition when the businesses from other countries achieve those low prices/operating costs by exploiting child labor and a massively devalued currency. You can't just "get gud" and compete globally while the rules of the game are completely different across the pond.
>>78109011
Yes, basic protection save industry.
Milton Freedman was a kike who wrote the book on how to turn all American business into overseas monopolies
>>78112024
There is no defense for non protectionist ideas..
We tried them and they didn't work. Inflation was suppose to make up for the cheap wages and regulations.
It never fucking happened. They manipulated their currency so wages never went up in the third world...
>>78109653
This.
Support for free trade among economists is virtually universal. Trump supporters are simply economically illiterate.
>>78113716
Or I was alive for the protectionist vs free trade debate of the 80's and 90's and I remember their arguments...
Inflation was always the key to the free trade side...None of it mattered because if they started to out produce us their currency would inflate and our products would be cheaper....It never happened they just artificially deflated their currency the wages stayed the same...The supply and demand curve decides price of goods so when the American producers went out of business the price went up...Nothing is fucking cheaper, the only thing that happened was the de-industrialization of the west
>>78113716
Also the appeal to authority is a logical fallacy
>>78114062
Stop trying to invoke fallacies to sound smart. You clearly don't understand what actually constitutes a fallacy.
>>78112953
at the expense of manufacturing companies and workers having to accept short-term losses as they reinvest and find new jobs. Which is no cost at all if you actually have any sense.
>>78113293
Nice not-an-argument-against-globalization there. Exploitative economic practices are an entirely different issue, and attempting to deal with it at the tariff level is, to compare you to your equally retarded cohorts on the left again, about as productive as banning guns for reducing violent crime.
>>78113614
>There is no defense for non protectionist ideas
There is, it's called basic economics.
>>78114062
You're as ignorant of argumentation as you are of economics. Appeal to authority is only a fallacy if the person in question isn't an authority on the subject at hand.
>>78114382
You didn't even comment on any of the substance of what i said...You just said your more educated. Why are you here...Go do something that your dumbass generation does.
>>78114382
Defend you the core of free market ideals...Why has inflation not increased in low wage countries
>>78113199
Are you literally retarded? We have free trade agreements with most of our biggest trading partners.
Car industry is dead in Aus sice the gov stopped giving them handouts and our steel industry is slowly dying (it's dying everywhere besides china though). It shouldn't be the government's prerogative to prop up non-competitive businesses.
>>78115592
whats the point of government then?
China is taking over the steel industry by devaluing their currency and taxing non chinese steel in china.
>>78115865
>whats the point of government then?
>>78115399
because your comments contain no substance. Just a bunch of bitching about inflation that isn't remotely germaine to how free trade works.
The fact that inflation isn't, contrary to what Federal Reserve officials and their shills would have you think, a magic bullet for every economic woe, doesn't change the fact that if I'm better at making A and you're better at making B, it doesn't matter if we're conjoined twins or living on opposite sides of the planet, we're both better off trading with each other than trying to make all our own A and B.
>>78116520
Inflation was Freedmans core argument for free trade. Our regulations didn't matter, their low wages didn't matter because if they sold their products in the United States their currency would inflate and it would cost more for Americans to buy Chinese goods. Its the core argument for free trade.
