Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by antiquity
That's exactly what it means. They wouldn't be manufacturing abroad if it wasn't necessary to prop up their profits because raising prices isn't possible in a market equilibrium.
Never got one from a rich one either...because I'm not chinky.I never got a job from a poor man...
I Pledge Resistance, to the Nazi Flag, of the United Police States of America, and to the Private Federal Reserves for which it stands. One Corporation, under Goldman Sachs, unaccountable, with poverty and slavery for all.
The world market would change overnight if wages were equalized through import tariffs. Manufacturers would return to the US because there would be no advantage to manufacturing in foreign lands. Prices would stabalize, profits would be made and millions of Americans would be employed. Americans want to make a decent wage and higher prices for goods comes with that.
When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man? [Henry David Thoreau]
Let's take shoes gentlemen. Years ago I read that Nike gave more money to Michael Jordan so negus would buy 20 pairs of shoes than the money it took to produce the shoes in one southwest Asia country.
How about a profit cap? Nike was getting a 500%+ profit on shoes. Why, they could make/sell in America, give generous benefits and pay and still make bank on bush missiles. Why, they could hire some of these negus...give them self-respect, work experience, doing something bigger than yourself, a free pair of Nikes a month, etc
And/Or, a you make it here, you sell it here policy.
I Pledge Resistance, to the Nazi Flag, of the United Police States of America, and to the Private Federal Reserves for which it stands. One Corporation, under Goldman Sachs, unaccountable, with poverty and slavery for all.
That's utterly illogical.
Those manufacturers are producing in that foreign land because the lower wages represent their only means to earning a profit. Tariffs would therefore eliminate their sole opportunity for a profit at all.
Raising prices wouldn't help because the laws of supply and demand don't allow a manufacturer in a competitive marketplace to regain lost profits via price increases. The only options would soon be either leaving the country permanently or bankruptcy.
Not exactly:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...XnEhAQ&refer=hGross margin, or the percentage of sales left after subtracting the cost of goods sold, narrowed to 43.4 percent from 43.5 percent partly because of higher labor costs in Asia.
Selling, general and administrative expenses rose to 32 percent of sales from 30.4 percent, hurt by stock-option costs, which cut profit by 8 cents a share. Marketing spending rose 27 percent.
Moreover, because the rate of profit tends to equalize across industries, it's the opportunity for superprofits that drives investment. A profit cap would therefore be highly counterproductive in the medium-to-long-term.
Wrong. Tariffs would put our labor rate on par with the labor rates of foreign lands. If Walmart has to pay the same amount for a product made in China as one made in the US, they'll start buying US products.
Or stay and be competitive and employ millions of Americans.Raising prices wouldn't help because the laws of supply and demand don't allow a manufacturer in a competitive marketplace to regain lost profits via price increases. The only options would soon be either leaving the country permanently or bankruptcy.
Last edited by Freedom&Liberty; 09-21-2011 at 12:29 PM.
When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man? [Henry David Thoreau]
The concept of comparative advantage requires that labor be immobile. It's written right into Ricardo's theories. Didn't you read it?
It's going to come down to either tariffs or currency devaluation - the latter being an ongoing and unavoidable consequence of large trade deficits.
Let them go bankrupt. They'll be replaced.
Wrong. Poor men spend money.I never got a job from a poor man...
Poor or rich, anyone who spends money automatically hires someone to 1) make and 2) sell them something.
How is it that you don't understand these basic facts about economics?
Wrong of course you can't make enough money selling products to the poor, because the poor by definition don't have enough money. Unless of course your definition of poor is anyone making less than 1 mill a year.
Tarriffs don't work because they invariably generate counter tarriffs. In many respects the death of world trade sparked by the trade wars following WWI was as much responsible for the conditions that led to the crash of 1929 as anything. And generally the people who are hurt the worst by tarriffs are the poor you are trying to help because the net result is a rise in the cost of almost everything.
Annoy a leftist: Think logically.
Nope. See the First Amendment. Not the letter of it, but its spirit.
Last edited by Alberto_Balsalm; 09-22-2011 at 12:03 AM.
Tell that to Wal Mart and Dollar Tree. What are their standings in the market and who do you think shops there primarily? Why is it that Kroger stores time their best food discounts on days when the welfare checks come in?
Why don't you tell them that you can't make money off selling products to the poor?
Again, not true. We already have a massive trade deficit with China. We have nothing to lose by completely blockading everything they sell to us. On the other hand if we did that we would be putting millions of unemployed Americans back to work producing goods for America. That means more people with jobs, ergo more people with money to spend.Tarriffs don't work because they invariably generate counter tarriffs. In many respects the death of world trade sparked by the trade wars following WWI was as much responsible for the conditions that led to the crash of 1929 as anything. And generally the people who are hurt the worst by tarriffs are the poor you are trying to help because the net result is a rise in the cost of almost everything.
Oh and you're referring to the Smoot-Hawley tariffs that allegedly made the Great Depression even worse. The problem is that this story is a myth. The Smoot-Hawley tariff did not damage much of anything. The Dust Bowl was far more responsible for the damage that the Smoot-Hawley tariff gets the blame for.
Facts: http://unlawflcombatnt.proboards.com...ay&thread=2528
By the way, our massive trade deficit is causing the dollar to devalue as well. That inherently causes the price of imported goods to rise anyway. Sure, our domestic spending is also very large and it is adding to our debt, but a massive trade deficit makes a rising national debt a certainty and a currency collapse unavoidable. Our domestic spending only hastens the inevitable. This is explained in detail here, and here is another explanation here by Ian Fletcher (you'll need to access this link directly since deep linking isn't allowed).
Off-shoring saves jobs. It also makes many things possible that were not possible before.
Don't like off-shoring? Tough Shayt.
Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature.... Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.
- H Keller
If your shit is tough then it indicates a liver problem and you should have that checked.
Dick Tator (09-22-2011), Sparkly Mary (09-23-2011)
Offshoring has cost millions of high-paying jobs and has replaced them with lower paying jobs.
Recent polls say that most Americans oppose offshoring and support tariffs. What are you going to do, overwhelm the majority of Americans?Don't like off-shoring? Tough Shayt.
Recent polls say that most Americans believe in Jesus. Guess that settles it, huh?
jwreck (09-23-2011), Sparkly Mary (09-23-2011)
Evidence?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks