Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I Simply Do Not Understand Obama's Support Of The TPP. [View all]pampango
(24,692 posts)113. People were not making a "livable wage" in the 1930's. FDR lowered tariffs because
he thought it would be good for the economy. With progressive taxes and stronger unions those economic benefits were then spread to the middle class.
The 'wage differential' tariff you describe was done by republicans in 1924. The world was not so different back then. Republicans claimed to be protecting us from low-cost foreign producers.
After raising tariffs in 1921, they increased them again in 1924 and, last but not least, in 1930. FDR campaigned against these tariffs and lowered them once he was in office. Here is a description of the 1924 tariff increase bill.
The hearings held by Congress led to the creation of several new tools of protection. The first was the scientific tariff. The purpose of the scientific tariff was to equalize production costs among countries so that no country could undercut the prices charged by American companies. The difference of production costs was calculated by the Tariff Commission.
A second novelty was the American Selling Price. This allowed the president to calculate the duty based on the price of the American price of a good, not the imported good.
The tariff was supported by the Republican party and conservatives and was generally opposed by the Democratic Party and liberal progressives. ... Five years after the passage of the tariff, American trading partners had raised their own tariffs by a significant degree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FordneyMcCumber_Tariff
A second novelty was the American Selling Price. This allowed the president to calculate the duty based on the price of the American price of a good, not the imported good.
The tariff was supported by the Republican party and conservatives and was generally opposed by the Democratic Party and liberal progressives. ... Five years after the passage of the tariff, American trading partners had raised their own tariffs by a significant degree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FordneyMcCumber_Tariff
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
127 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Funny, that period you described is the one period of real wage growth in 40 years
Recursion
Sep 2013
#8
You got a link for that assertion? Are you counting cooking hamburgers as manufacturing?
Th1onein
Sep 2013
#34
Notice you didn't respond to my request to a link for your assertion. Figures.
Th1onein
Sep 2013
#86
You made the assertion, not me. Of course, when flipping HAMBURGERS are counted as manufacturing
Th1onein
Sep 2013
#95
True, you did not post any link to back up your claim that line cooks are counted
Recursion
Sep 2013
#127
The huge factories where McDonalds assembles hamburgers are classed as manufacturing
Recursion
Sep 2013
#89
Does that include McDonald's and Burger King? That statistic isnt helping American
rhett o rick
Sep 2013
#76
So manufacturing more isnt necessarily a good thing. We need to protect American
rhett o rick
Sep 2013
#93
I don't think we need to protect *manufacturing* jobs anymore than wheat threshing jobs
Recursion
Sep 2013
#94
It may be good for the giant agriculture corporations but not for workers.
rhett o rick
Sep 2013
#75
Neither am I stumped: ye shall be known by your works and this and the Keystone Pipeline would
indepat
Sep 2013
#81
If he were doing that, "they" would have been caught and exposed long ago.
truebluegreen
Sep 2013
#80
I like to use the term COSTLY trade agreements.... It's more accurate and costly is the opposite
grahamhgreen
Sep 2013
#82
Have you bothered to look into the effect that NAFTA had on the jobs in this country?
truedelphi
Sep 2013
#102
They say that he is very smart. Could he be planning for his retirement?
AnotherMcIntosh
Sep 2013
#16
Isn't this the 124on234x234 time were Obama is "supposed" to fuck something up and doesn't?
uponit7771
Sep 2013
#36
I wish people would stop pretending that this is a free trade agreement.
Democracyinkind
Sep 2013
#38
If tariffs magically produced a strong middle class, FDR would have been for them not against them.
pampango
Sep 2013
#107
We didn't need tariffs in the 1930's and 40's. We had a strong union labor movement back then and
B Calm
Sep 2013
#108
People were not making a "livable wage" in the 1930's. FDR lowered tariffs because
pampango
Sep 2013
#113
Everybody loved FDR, but just like Obama, I don't agree with everything he did.
B Calm
Sep 2013
#115
"... the Smoot Hawley Tariff caused almost 0 damage to our economy" seems to be damning with faint
pampango
Sep 2013
#122
I don't understand why a lot of seemingly-liberal Democratic Congresspeople support it either.
Chan790
Sep 2013
#58
Obama may be able to get 'fast track' and the TPP itself through the Senate, but
pampango
Sep 2013
#66
Part of it is racism and ODS but their base has been skeptical of trade for a long time.
pampango
Sep 2013
#71
The deal that Bush had largely crafted years ago, no surprise they supported it.
tritsofme
Sep 2013
#84
23 cents an hour is more than is paid either to Salvation Army for Good Will handicapped workers.
lonestarnot
Sep 2013
#109