Socialism

[Fife]

If that's the goal, and I certainly think it is a very good one, tariffs are about as fucked up as a football bat to promote domestic capital investment.

GFY

[Fife]

BTW, if any of you all are interested, here's a dive into the economics and politics of protectionism, from Brother Rothbard no less:

Smashing Protectionist "Theory" (Again)

Invariably, we will find that the protectionists are out to cripple, exploit, and impose severe losses not only on foreign consumers but especially on Americans. And since each and every one of us is a consumer, this means that protectionism is out to mulct all of us for the benefit of a specially privileged, subsidized few — and an inefficient few at that: people who cannot make it in a free and unhampered market.

[DrYouth]

Corporations are moving back here to avoid the tariffs they know will surely be imposed upon them. Fuck off.

Which corporations have moved back to the US for that reason?

[heydaralon]

The whole tarrifs are bad argument kind of falls apart when you factor in the fact that all the folks whose jobs who get sent overseas end up on disability/welfare drugs etc and we as a people end up paying for more entitlements while getting cheaper goods. Thats what libertarians don't get imo. I'm not a fan of these programs, but if people vote they will use the government to protect them from the uncertainties of the market either through protectionism or welfare. You end up paying either way. It also has the added bonus of shrinking the labor pool, so the former workers on disability are no longer being taxed and the taxes of existing workers rise higher. At first glance, welfare and tariffs are separate issues, but they are actually connected.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Corporations are moving back here to avoid the tariffs they know will surely be imposed upon them. Fuck off.

Which corporations have moved back to the US for that reason?

Which corporations have moved back to the US?

[DBTrek]

The whole tarrifs are bad argument kind of falls apart when you factor in the fact that all the folks whose jobs who get sent overseas end up on disability/welfare drugs etc and we as a people end up paying for more entitlements while getting cheaper goods. Thats what libertarians don't get imo.

Here's where that falls apart dude.

1. Jobs go overseas because offshoring them costs less than keeping them in the USA.
2. Tariffs (artificial price increases via taxation) does not make it more inexpensive to keep jobs here. It simply makes it more expensive to export goods here.

So think about steel. Let's say we slap a $100 tariff on a ton of steel. Is it suddenly cheaper to buy American steel?
Only if you're an American company. Everyone else is buying steel for $100 less a ton than you from the world market.
Will American companies buy more steel? Hell no, they won't. Before the tariff they bought steel at the same price as the rest of the world. Now their only choices are to buy American steel (more expensive than what they were buying before), or crazy-expensive tariff'ed steel.

Prices on steel go up for American companies, meaning (say it with me now) demand goes down.

Dude, if it worked in some magical way where tariffs increased demand for our products and created more jobs we would tariff motherf*cking everything, wouldn't we? This isn't some crazy "libertarian" pipe dream. The economics are BASIC. Tariffs increase costs. Increased costs lead to diminished demand. Basic, basic, basic.

[heydaralon]

The whole tarrifs are bad argument kind of falls apart when you factor in the fact that all the folks whose jobs who get sent overseas end up on disability/welfare drugs etc and we as a people end up paying for more entitlements while getting cheaper goods. Thats what libertarians don't get imo.

Here's where that falls apart dude.

1. Jobs go overseas because offshoring them costs less than keeping them in the USA.
2. Tariffs (artificial price increases via taxation) does not make it more inexpensive to keep jobs here. It simply makes it more expensive to export goods here.

So think about steel. Let's say we slap a $100 tariff on a ton of steel. Is it suddenly cheaper to buy American steel?
Only if you're an American company. Everyone else is buying steel for $100 less a ton than you from the world market. Advantage - world
Will American companies buy more steel? Hell no, they won't. Before the tariff they bought steel at the same price as the rest of the world. Now their only choices are to buy American steel (more expensive than what they were buying before), or crazy-expensive tariff'ed steel.

Prices on steel go up for American companies, meaning (say it with me now) demand goes down.

Dude, if it worked in some magical way where tariffs increased demand for our products and created more jobs we would tariff motherf*cking everything, wouldn't we? This isn't some crazy "libertarian" pipe dream. The economics are BASIC. Tariffs increase costs. Increased costs lead to diminished demand. Basic, basic, basic.

I'm not arguing about the prices, I'm saying that these neoliberal economic policies have had large effects on huge swathes of the country. You mentioned trade-offs earlier. There are huge parts of the country where industries no longer exist. Many people working in those industries are now on welfare, disability, and have various substance abuse problems, which America also pays for. Yes, we are getting cheaper goods in the bargain, but we are still eating the cost in the form of a smaller labor pool paying taxes for these folks. That is a trade off and it does cost. In fact, the cost for some of that stuff has effects into the next generation, and these costs are not as easy to determine.

It sounds like you are still in favor of these policies. Ok fine. But a lot of this other stuff you dislike such as the rise of the disability industrial complex are tied to these trade agreements like NAFTA/GATT etc. To be honest, I wouldn't be nearly as worried about this stuff, but the open border rhetoric of half the country is what will push us over the edge economically.

Also, there are things that are not 100% economically efficient that I am in favor of keeping in house. For instance, I think having a strong steel industry in our borders is in our interest for national security reasons. For the same reason, I think we should be self sufficient agriculturally.

[Fife]

Yeah, boy -- nothing says "strengthen our steel industry" like artificially retarding demand for their products through taxation of our own citizens.

Moar taxes! That always works.

:goteam: :drunk:

[The Conservative]

Their patients.

The government.

The government pays the bill. But the government does not tell doctors what to do. The doctor decides what to do based on their medical training. They are held accountable for their clinical decisions by their conscience, their patients and their professional association. It's a good system for patients and doctors alike... with a minimum of meddling by untrained bureaucrats or insurance folks.

The government since the ACA is involved also state what can and can't happen now...

[The Conservative]

Democrats caved to the insurance companies.
This is what happened.
Noone had the guts to cut them down. They are the winners. The American citizen is the loser.

Fun fact - over the past few years I’ve pointed out that Democrats had all the power to implement their healthcare system, and we got Obamacare.

Without fail, every time, someone has stepped in to “explain” how it’s not really the Dems fault. Usually I’m offered the non-sensical excuse that “Dems we’re trying to appease Republicans” - which is extra stupid since the legislation passed without a single Republican vote.

Now Dr. Y is pointing the finger of blame at insurance companies.

Anyone care to guess how many excuses I’m offered when pointing out that Republicans has the same power and let Obamacare stand?

Just one more point of data in the left/right paradigm to consider. The left doesn’t even hold their representatives responsible for legislation they pass solely on their own.

/shrug

Well they killed ObamaCare by removing the tax for not having the ACA...