Economists: Trump's Tariffs Could Cost 400,000 Jobs (unemployment, wages, suspect, borders)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh boy, lets speculate because we really can't tell the future.
Trump ran on his trade policy and was elected.
Trump won the right to do what he said he would do.
He will have to answer for the success or failure.
All those before Trump complained but did little to nothing.
One million jobs created since tax reform was passed.
As close to full employment as can be expected,
with more jobs than people to fill them.
Democrats plan. Raise taxes. Open borders and provide anyone and everyone in the world who can cross the border with H/C and safety net assistance. End prosperity !!! We don't deserve prosperity and need to take our place at the bottom of industrial nations. We need to become a nation that serves the world population and treat them better than the tax paying citizens.
Oh boy, lets speculate because we really can't tell the future.
Trump ran on his trade policy and was elected.
Trump won the right to do what he said he would do.
He will have to answer for the success or failure.
All those before Trump complained but did little to nothing.
It's all speculation -- including imposing tariffs.
But we rely on historical evidence, common sense for speculation -- it isn't completely random.
This transfer is usually economically inefficient because the benefits that domestic producers receive from a tariff will generally be less than the costs to domestic consumers.
And that's the objection to tariffs.
It isn't just because it is a Trump policy (said with a sense of humor).....Historically it has shown tariffs may have a short term positive effect for a few and negative effects for many,
Common sense would be not to enact policies that have historically not netted the desired overall effect.
I am beginning to suspect though that Trump's tariff policies have really little to do with what is best for the country and more to do what is best for a few. And well -- isn't that the swamp at its healthiest.
This transfer is usually economically inefficient because the benefits that domestic producers receive from a tariff will generally be less than the costs to domestic consumers.
And that's the objection to tariffs.
It isn't just because it is a Trump policy (said with a sense of humor).....Historically it has shown tariffs may have a short term positive effect for a few and negative effects for many,
Common sense would be not to enact policies that have historically not netted the desired overall effect.
I am beginning to suspect though that Trump's tariff policies have really little to do with what is best for the country and more to do what is best for a few. And well -- isn't that the swamp at its healthiest.
Your ideal of historical evidence is a tea cup in the ocean. Looking around in that tea cup for a solution that backs up a confined view of the way the world works.
Lets face it America is the dominate world empire. Naturally people want to deny that for all types of reasons but the fact remains.
There have been many dominate empires over thousands of years. What they all have in common is they rise, they decline, and eventually they fall. There are ups and downs all along through the years until the decline that leads to the eventual failure from which there is no recovery.
The truth told over and over again is the empire that captures or produces wealth thrives as long as it has military success enough to continue its existence. The empires decline when they export their wealth and are unable to win military victories against their rivals.
An interesting comparison would be to compare Obama to the Pharaoh Akhenaton. He decided to transform Egypt too. The people had no idea what he had in mind and they paid dearly for it.
His policy's threw people into unemployment, poverty and hunger. They didn't have the benefit of a safety net. There was no one to encourage 50 million people to survive on food stamps.
After his reign there was the very successful effort to erase him from history for thousands of years. Everything he did while in power was undone by those that followed. In the end he added nothing that lasted. He ruled over a decline he caused and yet it wasn't enough to end the empire as his policy' were reversed.
Global trade is failing. The WTO is failing and unable to force nations found to be cheating held accountable. They ignore the WTO and continue to cheat. They keep in place trade barriers and tariffs that give them advantage. Its a broken system that is a leading cause for the shrinkage of the middleclass. When all that is left is the elites and the poor its called slavery. When you are starving what will you do for a dozen eggs ?
Lets face it America is the dominate world empire. Naturally people want to deny that for all types of reasons but the fact remains.... .
Not any longer. After WWII the US was the only advanced economy with Europe and Japan were in shambles. The emerging economies had not yet emerged and were primitive subsistence economies. Since then growth rates in the emerging economies, fed by global trade, exceeded that of the US and the US lost market share. The real story is that the rest of the world has caught up to the US and the US is not nearly as dominant as it used to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phma
Global trade is failing. The WTO is failing and unable to force nations found to be cheating held accountable. They ignore the WTO and continue to cheat. They keep in place trade barriers and tariffs that give them advantage. Its a broken system that is a leading cause for the shrinkage of the middleclass.
The leading causes of the shrinkage of the middle class are:
1. Strong decline in union membership, low wages and flat wages.
2. Rising productivity per worker due to automation and robotics.
3. Rise of emerging former 3rd world economies that can produce goods cheaper.
4. Shift of US from manufacturing economy dependent on manual and skilled labor to a service economy dependent more on professionals, causing a surplus of unneeded unskilled workers.
The US is guilty of cheating too -- just as China uses government money to subsidize exporters, the US does the same with many agricultural goods like corn.
Hard to feel sorry for any red state that loses lots of jobs. Elections have consequences.
I hope they hurt. Maybe then they'll stop voting against their own--and the rest of the country's--interests.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.