General Discussion

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)

21. So...

Mon Feb 3, 2014, 11:05 AM

Feb 2014

"fair" means "American consumers get to keep screwing developing countries out of their resources and using protectionism to beat them into submission if they start to develop competitive industries", then?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Tariffs were very strong American worker wage protection, HENCE corporations hate tariffs. [View all] livingwagenow Feb 2014 OP

Other nations have very strong tariff systems in place. truedelphi Feb 2014 #1

Couldn't agree more! K&R It's pretty simple, B Calm Feb 2014 #2

+100. closeupready Feb 2014 #3

No. Getting rid of high tariffs was a big progressive win in the early 20th century. pampango Feb 2014 #4

"high tariffs" are one thing; like any other regulation, tariffs can and should be used TheFrenchRazor Feb 2014 #5

Ah, yes, you again, with the corporate propaganda brentspeak Feb 2014 #6

+1 B Calm Feb 2014 #7

I think FDR was a "globalist" too so the term does not bother me. n/t pampango Feb 2014 #9

Yes the RTAA was FDR's first step in reversing high tariffs followed by GATT and the ITO. pampango Feb 2014 #8

"corporations thrived under high tariffs then at the expense of the working class" brentspeak Feb 2014 #22

Exactly. Historically corporations have thrived and the working class suffered under both high and pampango Feb 2014 #26

You might need a lifesaver jacket brentspeak Feb 2014 #29

The VAT is not a tariff. The VAT effects the final cost of imports and domestic products equally. pampango Feb 2014 #31

You continue to make stuff up brentspeak Feb 2014 #32

Fine. So the "Import Turnover Tax" is "the equal of the domestic VAT". When you combine the two pampango Feb 2014 #33

I see you've thrown in the towel brentspeak Feb 2014 #34

You are really good at titles for your posts. :) pampango Feb 2014 #48

There is no voter "partisan attitude" about US policy towards China brentspeak Feb 2014 #50

Yes there is. Even the poll you reference shows republicans want more to 'get tough' with China. pampango Feb 2014 #53

Doesn't say much about the quality of your posts here brentspeak Feb 2014 #58

Ditto. The links you posted to make your case were to posts from a "banned troll". pampango Feb 2014 #60

You just nailed the problem with modern "free trade" agreements Armstead Feb 2014 #24

"What do you think these current "free trade" agreements are intended to do?" pampango Feb 2014 #27

Motives and sources of power are what is really important Armstead Feb 2014 #28

Are you really suggesting that the global economy in the 1920's - 1930's has any Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #51

I believe that history is relevant. And I believe that the experience of other countries is too. pampango Feb 2014 #54

So, you choose to ignore the question. Completely expected. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #55

You asked: "Are you really suggesting that the global economy in the 1920's - 1930's has any pampango Feb 2014 #56

Thanks for answering. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #57

kick B Calm Feb 2014 #10

Let me know how you plan to re-implement tariffs... Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #11

Want to be more specific on raw materials and energy we need? B Calm Feb 2014 #12

Nine million barrels of oil a day, for a start Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #13

The earth receives enough energy from the sun in B Calm Feb 2014 #14

Let me know when you have enough installed solar capacity for that. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #15

I say we start with the tariffs, maybe then we could B Calm Feb 2014 #16

Tariffs lead to trade wars. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #17

If we just had FAIR tariffs it would be a huge start! B Calm Feb 2014 #18

Define "fair"? Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #19

Not laissez-faire capitalism! B Calm Feb 2014 #20

So... Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #21

No - Fair means developing nations do not become colonies of multinational corporations Armstead Feb 2014 #25

Considering that we are the #1 exporter of raw materials to China brentspeak Feb 2014 #23

We export virtually zero oil. mathematic Feb 2014 #30

The US does not export oil. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #35

Uh, we import crude when we really don't need to brentspeak Feb 2014 #36

I see you don't understand economics. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #37

You claimed that the US can't produce 9 million barrels of oil/day brentspeak Feb 2014 #38

I linked you to figures that say the US doesn't. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #39

That wasn't you who said we need "9 million barrels/day"? brentspeak Feb 2014 #40

Either you're being wilfully obtuse or you're remarkably dense Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #41

So when you said that we need to produce 9 million barrels/day brentspeak Feb 2014 #42

No, I said the US needs to import nine million barrels a day. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #43

What I'd prefer you to clear up brentspeak Feb 2014 #44

Who said anything about tariffs on China? Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #45

The OP did not say uniform tariffs on every country for every product Armstead Feb 2014 #46

Again, you clearly don't understand economics. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #47

re introduce tariffs frwrfpos Feb 2014 #49

Only two of the DU Corporate Warrior Brigade? It was a Sunday, I suppose. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #52

Free trade = Chineses wages + American prices - good jobs. nt TheFrenchRazor Feb 2014 #59