Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
"As president, he cut taxes for corporations, encouraged outsourcing, and lost nearly 200,000 manufacturing jobs, including auto jobs," said Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris.
I dont know of youre purposely missing the point, but tariffs are usually met with retaliation. They reduce trade, which reduces productivity and the increase inflation.
I listed the instances of retaliation. But they didn’t include steel, because we import more steel than we export.
They reduce trade, which reduces productivity
Global productivity, maybe. But domestically, tariffs simply insource productivity.
For industries where savings simply come in the form of negative externalities, there’s no loss forcing production back into a more regulated environment.
That’s not what Trump was trying to do, but I note it to disabuse the notion that tariffs are universally bad.
Yes, but you seemed to only focus on the effects for the steel industry and handwaved away the loss from rrtaliation.I’m pointing out that it was overall negative.
Youre also thinking its a zero sum game. In sourcing to the domestic market because of tarrifs means less competitive pricing which reduces demand and productivity. New products are not launched due to costs being too high to do so. New factories go unbuilt.
Tariffs to build in the negative externalities, like lax labor laws or carbon cost are allowed by WTO and level the playing field making trade more predictable, not more erratic and I expect will be a big part of future global trade. Trunks tariffs were not that. I take your point though that his weren’t that. I think its worth clarifying why.
you seemed to only focus on the effects for the steel industry
Trump did cripple the U.S.’s steel industry
That’s what I’m responding to. He didn’t cripple the industry. It improved after the tariffs.
Tariffs to build in the negative externalities
They localize production.
One way overseas production can out compete domestic production is by letting the foreign market eat all the externalities to keep production costs low.
Trunks tariffs were not that.
Largely because American steel production is as messy as anywhere else.
The future of cheap efficient steel production is going to be centered around electric powered foundries. But set up costs for new foundries are high, and simply costing on existing infrastructure lets prices stay low.
Tariffs/subsidies give developing industries an opportunity to invest in higher efficiency infrastructure without being priced out of the market.
They’re not inherently bad. And people being deluded into thinking they are undermines the quality of the industry as a whole, as businesses cling to cheap outdated machinery.
I dont know of youre purposely missing the point, but tariffs are usually met with retaliation. They reduce trade, which reduces productivity and the increase inflation.
I listed the instances of retaliation. But they didn’t include steel, because we import more steel than we export.
Global productivity, maybe. But domestically, tariffs simply insource productivity.
For industries where savings simply come in the form of negative externalities, there’s no loss forcing production back into a more regulated environment.
That’s not what Trump was trying to do, but I note it to disabuse the notion that tariffs are universally bad.
Yes, but you seemed to only focus on the effects for the steel industry and handwaved away the loss from rrtaliation.I’m pointing out that it was overall negative.
Youre also thinking its a zero sum game. In sourcing to the domestic market because of tarrifs means less competitive pricing which reduces demand and productivity. New products are not launched due to costs being too high to do so. New factories go unbuilt.
Tariffs to build in the negative externalities, like lax labor laws or carbon cost are allowed by WTO and level the playing field making trade more predictable, not more erratic and I expect will be a big part of future global trade. Trunks tariffs were not that. I take your point though that his weren’t that. I think its worth clarifying why.
That’s what I’m responding to. He didn’t cripple the industry. It improved after the tariffs.
They localize production.
One way overseas production can out compete domestic production is by letting the foreign market eat all the externalities to keep production costs low.
Largely because American steel production is as messy as anywhere else.
The future of cheap efficient steel production is going to be centered around electric powered foundries. But set up costs for new foundries are high, and simply costing on existing infrastructure lets prices stay low.
Tariffs/subsidies give developing industries an opportunity to invest in higher efficiency infrastructure without being priced out of the market.
They’re not inherently bad. And people being deluded into thinking they are undermines the quality of the industry as a whole, as businesses cling to cheap outdated machinery.