Ask an Atheist
- R_P - Apr 19, 2024 - 7:24am
NYTimes Connections
- ptooey - Apr 19, 2024 - 7:23am
Wordle - daily game
- ptooey - Apr 19, 2024 - 7:22am
Baseball, anyone?
- Proclivities - Apr 19, 2024 - 7:21am
Radio Paradise Comments
- Coaxial - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:20am
NY Times Strands
- Proclivities - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:14am
Trump
- rgio - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:05am
how do you feel right now?
- miamizsun - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:02am
When I need a Laugh I ...
- miamizsun - Apr 19, 2024 - 5:43am
Remembering the Good Old Days
- miamizsun - Apr 19, 2024 - 5:41am
Today in History
- DaveInSaoMiguel - Apr 19, 2024 - 4:43am
The Obituary Page
- kurtster - Apr 18, 2024 - 10:45pm
TV shows you watch
- kcar - Apr 18, 2024 - 9:13pm
Israel
- R_P - Apr 18, 2024 - 8:25pm
Live Music
- oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 3:24pm
What Makes You Laugh?
- oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:49pm
Robots
- miamizsun - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:18pm
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 10:22am
Museum Of Bad Album Covers
- Steve - Apr 18, 2024 - 6:58am
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance
- haresfur - Apr 17, 2024 - 7:04pm
Europe
- haresfur - Apr 17, 2024 - 6:47pm
Country Up The Bumpkin
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 17, 2024 - 5:23pm
Name My Band
- GeneP59 - Apr 17, 2024 - 3:27pm
What's that smell?
- Isabeau - Apr 17, 2024 - 2:50pm
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:48pm
Business as Usual
- black321 - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:48pm
Things that make you go Hmmmm.....
- dischuckin - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:29pm
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- VV - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:26pm
Russia
- R_P - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:14pm
Science in the News
- Red_Dragon - Apr 17, 2024 - 11:14am
Magic Eye optical Illusions
- Proclivities - Apr 17, 2024 - 10:08am
Ukraine
- kurtster - Apr 17, 2024 - 10:05am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- Alchemist - Apr 17, 2024 - 9:38am
Just for the Haiku of it. . .
- oldviolin - Apr 17, 2024 - 9:01am
HALF A WORLD
- oldviolin - Apr 17, 2024 - 8:52am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - Apr 16, 2024 - 9:08pm
Little known information... maybe even facts
- R_P - Apr 16, 2024 - 3:29pm
songs that ROCK!
- thisbody - Apr 16, 2024 - 10:56am
260,000 Posts in one thread?
- oldviolin - Apr 16, 2024 - 10:10am
WTF??!!
- rgio - Apr 16, 2024 - 5:23am
Australia has Disappeared
- haresfur - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:58am
Earthquake
- miamizsun - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:46am
It's the economy stupid.
- miamizsun - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:28am
Republican Party
- Isabeau - Apr 15, 2024 - 12:12pm
Vinyl Only Spin List
- kurtster - Apr 14, 2024 - 11:59am
Eclectic Sound-Drops
- thisbody - Apr 14, 2024 - 11:27am
Synchronization
- ReggieDXB - Apr 13, 2024 - 11:40pm
Other Medical Stuff
- geoff_morphini - Apr 13, 2024 - 7:54am
What Did You See Today?
- Steely_D - Apr 13, 2024 - 6:42am
Photos you have taken of your walks or hikes.
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 12, 2024 - 3:50pm
Things You Thought Today
- Red_Dragon - Apr 12, 2024 - 3:05pm
Poetry Forum
- oldviolin - Apr 12, 2024 - 8:45am
Dear Bill
- oldviolin - Apr 12, 2024 - 8:16am
Radio Paradise in Foobar2000
- gvajda - Apr 11, 2024 - 6:53pm
Mixtape Culture Club
- ColdMiser - Apr 11, 2024 - 8:29am
Joe Biden
- black321 - Apr 11, 2024 - 7:43am
New Song Submissions system
- MayBaby - Apr 11, 2024 - 6:29am
No TuneIn Stream Lately
- kurtster - Apr 10, 2024 - 6:26pm
Caching to Apple watch quit working
- email-muri.0z - Apr 10, 2024 - 6:25pm
April 8th Partial Solar Eclipse
- Alchemist - Apr 10, 2024 - 10:52am
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- orrinc - Apr 10, 2024 - 10:48am
NPR Listeners: Is There Liberal Bias In Its Reporting?
- black321 - Apr 9, 2024 - 2:11pm
Sonos
- rnstory - Apr 9, 2024 - 10:43am
RP Windows Desktop Notification Applet
- gvajda - Apr 9, 2024 - 9:55am
If not RP, what are you listening to right now?
- kurtster - Apr 8, 2024 - 10:34am
And the good news is....
- thisbody - Apr 8, 2024 - 3:57am
How do I get songs into My Favorites
- Huey - Apr 7, 2024 - 11:29pm
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously
- R_P - Apr 7, 2024 - 5:14pm
Lyrics that strike a chord today...
- Isabeau - Apr 7, 2024 - 12:50pm
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- oldviolin - Apr 7, 2024 - 11:18am
Why is Mellow mix192kbps?
- dean2.athome - Apr 7, 2024 - 1:11am
Musky Mythology
- haresfur - Apr 6, 2024 - 7:11pm
China
- R_P - Apr 6, 2024 - 11:19am
Artificial Intelligence
- R_P - Apr 5, 2024 - 12:45pm
Vega4 - Bullets
- nirgivon - Apr 5, 2024 - 11:50am
|
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.
|
|
|