Trump
- rgio - May 2, 2024 - 11:07am
Israel
- R_P - May 2, 2024 - 10:20am
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:27am
NY Times Strands
- maryte - May 2, 2024 - 9:18am
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:17am
Questions.
- oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:13am
Breaking News
- Red_Dragon - May 2, 2024 - 9:07am
What can you hear right now?
- ScottFromWyoming - May 2, 2024 - 8:39am
What Makes You Laugh?
- Red_Dragon - May 2, 2024 - 8:38am
What Makes You Sad?
- pilgrim - May 2, 2024 - 8:31am
Radio Paradise Comments
- pilgrim - May 2, 2024 - 8:27am
NYTimes Connections
- maryte - May 2, 2024 - 8:09am
Wordle - daily game
- geoff_morphini - May 2, 2024 - 8:05am
The Obituary Page
- Proclivities - May 2, 2024 - 7:42am
Main Mix Playlist
- roadie - May 2, 2024 - 6:31am
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful
- Proclivities - May 2, 2024 - 4:55am
Today in History
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 2, 2024 - 4:00am
Russia
- Lazy8 - May 1, 2024 - 9:23pm
And the good news is....
- Bill_J - May 1, 2024 - 6:30pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- ladron - May 1, 2024 - 6:22pm
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum
- haresfur - May 1, 2024 - 5:49pm
Things you would be grating food for
- Manbird - May 1, 2024 - 3:58pm
Economix
- black321 - May 1, 2024 - 12:19pm
Name My Band
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 1, 2024 - 9:56am
Joe Biden
- VV - May 1, 2024 - 9:24am
RightWingNutZ
- rgio - May 1, 2024 - 7:57am
USA! USA! USA!
- haresfur - Apr 30, 2024 - 8:46pm
I Heart Huckabee - NOT!
- Manbird - Apr 30, 2024 - 7:49pm
Derplahoma!
- Red_Dragon - Apr 30, 2024 - 6:34pm
Democratic Party
- R_P - Apr 30, 2024 - 4:01pm
Oh, The Stupidity
- haresfur - Apr 30, 2024 - 3:30pm
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- VV - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:46pm
Canada
- black321 - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:37pm
What Did You See Today?
- Isabeau - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:15pm
Mixtape Culture Club
- miamizsun - Apr 30, 2024 - 7:02am
Food
- Bill_J - Apr 29, 2024 - 7:46pm
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- Alchemist - Apr 29, 2024 - 1:11pm
New Music
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 11:36am
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 8:34am
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc)
- rgio - Apr 29, 2024 - 7:37am
Photos you haven't taken of yourself
- Antigone - Apr 29, 2024 - 5:03am
The Dragons' Roost
- GeneP59 - Apr 28, 2024 - 5:37pm
Britain
- R_P - Apr 28, 2024 - 10:47am
Birthday wishes
- GeneP59 - Apr 28, 2024 - 9:56am
If not RP, what are you listening to right now?
- Beaker - Apr 28, 2024 - 9:47am
SCOTUS
- Steely_D - Apr 28, 2024 - 1:44am
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 27, 2024 - 9:53pm
Classical Music
- miamizsun - Apr 27, 2024 - 1:23pm
LeftWingNutZ
- Lazy8 - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:46pm
Things You Thought Today
- Red_Dragon - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:17pm
The Moon
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:08pm
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance
- fractalv - Apr 26, 2024 - 8:59pm
Musky Mythology
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 7:23pm
Mini Meetups - Post Here!
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 4:02pm
Australia has Disappeared
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 2:41pm
Radio Paradise sounding better recently
- firefly6 - Apr 26, 2024 - 10:39am
Neil Young
- Steely_D - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:20am
Country Up The Bumpkin
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:01am
Environmental, Brilliance or Stupidity
- miamizsun - Apr 26, 2024 - 5:07am
Poetry Forum
- Manbird - Apr 25, 2024 - 12:30pm
Ask an Atheist
- R_P - Apr 25, 2024 - 11:02am
Afghanistan
- R_P - Apr 25, 2024 - 10:26am
Science in the News
- Red_Dragon - Apr 25, 2024 - 10:00am
What the hell OV?
- miamizsun - Apr 25, 2024 - 9:46am
The Abortion Wars
- Isabeau - Apr 25, 2024 - 9:27am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- ColdMiser - Apr 25, 2024 - 7:15am
What's that smell?
- Manbird - Apr 24, 2024 - 10:27pm
260,000 Posts in one thread?
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Apr 24, 2024 - 10:55am
TV shows you watch
- Beaker - Apr 24, 2024 - 7:32am
China
- R_P - Apr 23, 2024 - 5:35pm
One Partying State - Wyoming News
- sunybuny - Apr 23, 2024 - 6:53am
YouTube: Music-Videos
- Red_Dragon - Apr 22, 2024 - 7:42pm
Ukraine
- haresfur - Apr 22, 2024 - 6:19pm
songs that ROCK!
- Steely_D - Apr 22, 2024 - 1:50pm
Republican Party
- R_P - Apr 22, 2024 - 9:36am
|
Index »
Regional/Local »
USA/Canada »
Trade War
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 |
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 11, 2018 - 9:24am |
|
black321 wrote: My point was the cost of manufacturing, chiefly labor costs, are strikingly lower in China and other developing countries, relative to domestic cost of production (i realize we have deficits with other developed economies, but other than dairy farmers, that doesnt seem to be where the current admin's focus is - see china). That's why U.S. manufacturers and retailers shifted to overseas production...not because of tariffs or x rates. I'm not sure how your reply counters that, or why labor costs are misleading? Are you arguing manufacturing in China and developing economies are more efficient, innovative? Efficient perhaps, to the point of lower labor cost. I just dont see how the manufacturing abroad provides any competitive advantage to domestic beyond cost, with labor being the most significant.
p.s., as to Japan, Germany and Canada...i dont know for certain, but might wager we haven't significant manufacturing jobs to these countries in the last 30 years. Perhaps they make a better car or product, but that brings in a different argument.
Firstly what you are claiming is only true for mass-produced goods with a high labor content.. clothes, shoes, etc. Moreover, as China develops, labor intensive manufacturing is anyway moving elsewhere (and a good thing too, encouraging development in the poorer nations). The US is not a banana republic, therefore low-cost-labor production is not the sector where a country like the US with such high per capita GDP should be competing on the world stage, but in goods and services with high added value. Secondly, offshoring to low-cost countries is an issue that applies to every developed economy yet not all of them are running trade deficits with emerging economies like between the US and China. You need to look elsewhere for the reasons behind the US trade deficit. My point is that the artificially high USD exchange rate due to the investment influx (safe haven) means that most US products are overpriced in global competition. Take Germany as a comparison. Despite importing similar volumes of consumer goods (per capita) from China as the US, Germany has consistently run a trade surplus due to exports of cars and machine tools. The US competition in this field is overpriced for the quality they offer so you end up with a trade deficit.
|
|
black321
Location: An earth without maps Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 11, 2018 - 9:02am |
|
NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:Maybe because it is misleading? Labor is only one part of a very large package. Expertise, operating efficiency, innovative strength, etc. are also key inputs and in terms of competitive strength, frequently outweigh the cost of an hour's labor. The US runs big trade deficits with high-cost countries (Japan, Germany, Canada). And in those countries that qualify as low cost countries, the imports are frequently produced by companies owned and operated by US interests, which repatriate the profits accordingly (or not, if they are clever). If you ask me, (ok, you didn't, but well) the US is hoist by its own petard. Because of its (very much intended) military dominance, its currency is viewed as a safe haven and the corresponding investment inflows keep the exchange rate artificially high. Were it not for that, the dollar would be much weaker and US goods much more competitive. A case of wanting to have your pie and eat it too. My point was the cost of manufacturing, chiefly labor costs, are strikingly lower in China and other developing countries, relative to domestic cost of production (i realize we have deficits with other developed economies, but other than dairy farmers, that doesnt seem to be where the current admin's focus is - see china). That's why U.S. manufacturers and retailers shifted to overseas production...not because of tariffs or x rates. I'm not sure how your reply counters that, or why labor costs are misleading? Are you arguing manufacturing in China and developing economies are more efficient, innovative? Efficient perhaps, to the point of lower labor cost. I just dont see how the manufacturing abroad provides any competitive advantage to domestic beyond cost, with labor being the most significant. p.s., as to Japan, Germany and Canada...i dont know for certain, but might wager we haven't significant manufacturing jobs to these countries in the last 30 years. Perhaps they make a better car or product, but that brings in a different argument.
|
|
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 11, 2018 - 7:08am |
|
black321 wrote:Re. trade deficits..tariffs have something to do with it, x rates a little more...but the biggest reason is cheap manufacturing, ie, labor. This is the reason our retailers and manufacturers have chosen to source more goods from overseas. Why is this is key point being overlooked, by both the right and left?
Maybe because it is misleading? Labor is only one part of a very large package. Expertise, operating efficiency, innovative strength, etc. are also key inputs and in terms of competitive strength, frequently outweigh the cost of an hour's labor. The US runs big trade deficits with high-cost countries (Japan, Germany, Canada). And in those countries that qualify as low cost countries, the imports are frequently produced by companies owned and operated by US interests, which repatriate the profits accordingly (or not, if they are clever). If you ask me, (ok, you didn't, but well) the US is hoist by its own petard. Because of its (very much intended) military dominance, its currency is viewed as a safe haven and the corresponding investment inflows keep the exchange rate artificially high. Were it not for that, the dollar would be much weaker and US goods much more competitive. A case of wanting to have your pie and eat it too.
|
|
black321
Location: An earth without maps Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 11, 2018 - 6:14am |
|
Re. trade deficits..tariffs have something to do with it, x rates a little more...but the biggest reason is cheap manufacturing, ie, labor. This is the reason our retailers and manufacturers have chosen to source more goods from overseas. Why is this is key point being overlooked, by both the right and left?
|
|
Lazy8
Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 11:22pm |
|
westslope wrote:From the article: But if sweet reason won’t work, what’s the alternative? In 1971 the United States dealt with a similar but much less severe problem of foreign undervaluation by imposing a temporary 10 percent surcharge on imports, which was removed a few months later after Germany, Japan and other nations raised the dollar value of their currencies. At this point, it’s hard to see China changing its policies unless faced with the threat of similar action — except that this time the surcharge would have to be much larger, say 25 percent. I don’t propose this turn to policy hardball lightly. But Chinese currency policy is adding materially to the world’s economic problems at a time when those problems are already very severe. It’s time to take a stand.
Please note that since 2010, that the renminbi has appreciated in value. So maybe the threats worked?
You are brave Lazy8 to take on Krugman on trade issues. Please note that there is no equivalence between Trump's trade war and the tariff action directed at China that Krugman was calling for. And no, Krugman is a soft target. For any given pontification of his it's a trivial matter to find a ready-made rebuttal...by Krugman.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 11:03pm |
|
haresfur wrote: I am amused at the silence coming from the left-wing anti-globalization crowd.
I thought the anti globalists were alt right ? Ya know, nationalist, tribalist and all that stuff ...
|
|
westslope
Location: BC sage brush steppe
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 6:05pm |
|
haresfur wrote:.....
I am amused at the silence coming from the left-wing anti-globalization crowd.
Yes, that is amusing. It really speaks to Trump's great ability to polarize. On the other hand, I recall the intense Canadian opposition to the FTA first signed with the USA and then to NAFTA signed with Mexico. Canadian voters over the years have decidedly shifted in favour of freer trade. Even if the so-called left New Democratic Party (NDP) had formed the federal government in the last election, the NDP would have continued to actively pursue freer trade agreements. I suspect that among other things, some unionized private sector workers have benefited from freer trade/gained experience working under freer trade. The trade deals will over time create their own vested interests. AMLO — the president-elect of Mexico — has declared that in response to Trump hostility to Mexico and NAFTA, that he would encourage more investment by Canadian mining firms and look into more Mexicans working temporarily in Canada. The social democracies of northern Europe have been rooting for freer trade for quite some time now. I reckon that freer trade will become increasingly acceptable and desirable from the perspective of left-wing Latin American politicians. The environmental, labour and human rights clauses will help win them over.
|
|
Red_Dragon
Location: Dumbf*ckistan
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 6:01pm |
|
haresfur wrote:The trouble with trade wars is that you don't really know if you've won or lost. There is no clear end. Governments will always try to bend agreements to their advantage and have a legitimate interest in areas like carbon emissions that are poorly managed through the market. But any interventions should be nudges rather than hammers. Large policy changes are disruptive.
I am amused at the silence coming from the left-wing anti-globalization crowd.
What about the left-wing pro-globalization crowd?
|
|
westslope
Location: BC sage brush steppe
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 5:54pm |
|
Lazy8 wrote: ..... If you have the stomach to read more Krugman, here's a piece from 2010 where he argued for 25% import tariffs on Chinese goods, arguing that they wouldn't dare retaliate because all they could do is dump US Treasuries. Krugman's problem with the Trump trade policy isn't that it's stupid and based on a zero-sum fallacy—he's argued for stupid, similarly misguided policies in the past—but that it's Trump's policy. He's all for trade wars...when Democrats get to wage them. Of course he's a globalist when Democrats are in power and pushing trade deals. But at all times he's a partisan hack, willing to say anything that disparages the opposition. Whatever is currently happening is just as he foresaw, and anyone who dares disagree—whichever side of the issue he's on at the moment—is an economic ignoramus. Trade wars are indeed stupid. All of them, including the ones Krugman supports. Supported. Whatever. From the article: But if sweet reason won’t work, what’s the alternative? In 1971 the United States dealt with a similar but much less severe problem of foreign undervaluation by imposing a temporary 10 percent surcharge on imports, which was removed a few months later after Germany, Japan and other nations raised the dollar value of their currencies. At this point, it’s hard to see China changing its policies unless faced with the threat of similar action — except that this time the surcharge would have to be much larger, say 25 percent. I don’t propose this turn to policy hardball lightly. But Chinese currency policy is adding materially to the world’s economic problems at a time when those problems are already very severe. It’s time to take a stand.
Please note that since 2010, that the renminbi has appreciated in value. So maybe the threats worked?
You are brave Lazy8 to take on Krugman on trade issues. Please note that there is no equivalence between Trump's trade war and the tariff action directed at China that Krugman was calling for.
|
|
Lazy8
Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 4:52pm |
|
haresfur wrote:I am amused at the silence coming from the left-wing anti-globalization crowd. They are now (mostly) free-traders for the duration of the Trump presidency.
|
|
R_P
Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 4:37pm |
|
haresfur wrote:(...)
I am amused at the silence coming from the left-wing anti-globalization crowd. Step 1: Remove fingers from ears.
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 3:25pm |
|
The trouble with trade wars is that you don't really know if you've won or lost. There is no clear end. Governments will always try to bend agreements to their advantage and have a legitimate interest in areas like carbon emissions that are poorly managed through the market. But any interventions should be nudges rather than hammers. Large policy changes are disruptive.
I am amused at the silence coming from the left-wing anti-globalization crowd.
|
|
Lazy8
Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 8:24am |
|
westslope wrote:NYT By Paul Krugman Opinion Columnist If you have the patience, read some of the comments of Americans directly affected by Trump's trade war. Real time reporting from the economic trenches. If you have the stomach to read more Krugman, here's a piece from 2010 where he argued for 25% import tariffs on Chinese goods, arguing that they wouldn't dare retaliate because all they could do is dump US Treasuries. Krugman's problem with the Trump trade policy isn't that it's stupid and based on a zero-sum fallacy—he's argued for stupid, similarly misguided policies in the past—but that it's Trump's policy. He's all for trade wars...when Democrats get to wage them. Of course he's a globalist when Democrats are in power and pushing trade deals. But at all times he's a partisan hack, willing to say anything that disparages the opposition. Whatever is currently happening is just as he foresaw, and anyone who dares disagree—whichever side of the issue he's on at the moment—is an economic ignoramus. Trade wars are indeed stupid. All of them, including the ones Krugman supports. Supported. Whatever.
|
|
westslope
Location: BC sage brush steppe
|
Posted:
Jul 10, 2018 - 8:00am |
|
NYT By Paul Krugman Opinion Columnist If you have the patience, read some of the comments of Americans directly affected by Trump's trade war. Real time reporting from the economic trenches.
|
|
|