Why not let businesses themselves decide where to make make products?

[Azrairc]

Will the regulatory and tax reforms make it cheaper for businesses to operate in the US or will they still be at a better advantage doing it oversea?

I don't have the answer

However even if it does nothing is going to stop a democrat from reversing these policies in the future, more taxes, regulations, elimination of tariffs. If foreign producers innovation surpasses the us made cars (Which is likely if they are protected against foreign competition) the whole industry will collapse when these policies are reversed and the protected american companies will have less interest to innovate or be efficient as opposed to foreign cars.

[Metz00]

Will the regulatory and tax reforms make it cheaper for businesses to operate in the US or will they still be at a better advantage doing it oversea?

I don't have the answer

However even if it does nothing is going to stop a democrat from reversing these policies in the future, more taxes, regulations, elimination of tariffs. If foreign producers innovation surpasses the us made cars (Which is likely if they are protected against foreign competition) the whole industry will collapse when these policies are reversed and the protected american companies will have less interest to innovate or be efficient as opposed to foreign cars.

The Republicans have to hit a grand slam here so that they can continue in power. If they lose in 2020 or in 2024 then that may be it for manufacturing jobs.

[JonathanRhimes]

At the end of the day, it's about developed countries promoting social standards through minimum wage, environmental regulations, and unions competing against lesser developed countries that cut corners to attract businesses and profit in the long run. Having companies go abroad and sell you products cheaper is good for them but bad for the buying country in the long-term. In a way you basically exchange manufacturing jobs for service jobs since you need people to sell stuff t that is buying bought. However manufacturing jobs require working class people while service jobs are more of a lower middle class to middle class type of thing.

By outsourcing factories and manufacturing, you basically discard a whole socioeconomic generation and their children which strains the economy. What happens to these former workers who have done and mastered one thing their whole life and can't relearn a new trade that requires years of education just to be eligible to compete with much younger people? The Midwest has cities and towns in ruins and in exodus because the production jobs are gone. In exchange, you get more retail jobs in the other metropolitan areas of the United States. As a response, the government then seeks to ease people by granting more social programs and raising wages even more which ends up causing an avalanche and hurts the middle class and their small businesses (even if they aren't manufacturing). Government subsidies are useful as a safety net but should never be used as a lifestyle. If you subsidize negative behavior, you get more negative behavior. The longer it lasts, the more chance there is that the next generation will not understand what it means to work an honest job rendering them them lazy, inefficient, and conformist.

Trump wants to take a step back and restore the industry of the United States. Clinton advocated progress and liberalism which the young sought for, however the cost was living behind a whole generation of Americans who would have been inadequately prepared for globalism. Trump's protectionist platform is being dragged out of the field of economics and being placed into politics with the name of nationalism which bothers the left. At the end of the day, we may share the same world but each country and their people have their own goals. Any individual who is part of a community within a state tends to have the same goal which is the improvement of one's socioeconomic status or at least their economic status and that of their children.

A problem is that social spending that has been increased as a way to ease the lose of jobs will remain once jobs and industry are recreated or returned. Meaning that goods will be costly because of worker wages. This will be a problem because cutting social programs is never favorable to people. It's a double edged weapon, it's used to appease but if removed, it causes dissent.

I always lol at people who want the 52 year old automobile factory blue collar dude to get "better skills". As if he or she is gonna become a computer scientist or robot designer plz

Two options, keep these people working or oversee the creation of a new permanently unemployed underclass with all of the misery and crime that involves

[elterrible987]

That tariff is ultimately paid by the consumer in the form of increased prices, reduced quality and choices.

What tariffs boil down to is attempts to stop American consumers from enjoying a high living standard by buying cheap, yet quality foreign products. It is forcing them back to inefficient, over priced products for no reason other than their geographical location.

Look at it like this... if each US State was its own country, why shouldn't they impose tariffs on each other, too? New York's dairy farmers, having less favorable land/climate and struggling to compete with Pennsylvania dairy farmers, lobby to impose a tariff on all imported milk to NY. Who is this screwing over, really? Consumers in NY now have expensive milk less available, and all for the purpose of rewarding businesses that were less efficient and productive.

Take it another step, down to the county level, neighborhood. How is a neighborhood better off and more wealthy if they prohibit importing goods without a tariff? This is absurd. But it is 100% the same principle and same effect.

Or put it yet another way...in the Industrial Revolution, railroads were established connecting cities and communities across the US for the first time. Goods and materials circulated more quickly and cheaply than ever, and people gained access to more options and better quality items, and at better prices. And producers had access to more customers. Standard of Living skyrocketed in large part to this enhanced transportation for trade. What tariffs and protectionism do is work against that- to slow down or disrupt the flow of goods between producers and consumers for the benefit a special few others, and resultantly limiting the overall standard of living and wealth creation.




And because Mr. ______ said it then it must be right. I don't really care what this person or that believed, I care whether it is right.



Hey, your favorite local [whatever] can now either conduct business out in Bumfukville, or they can stay near you and pay me 20% of their profit. It's totally their choice.

Thats all textbook (literally from the business textbooks) free trade talk. That only exists as a theory. In reality we dont have free trade when china blocks us from selling them our services. So tariffs it is.

[elterrible987]

Let's establish a few things:

1.You don't have a free market, not domestically and certainly not abroad;

You have things like LLCs, intellectual property, tariffs, crony capitalism, insider trading laws etc. These are NOT "free market" as in the government staying out of the market.

You will NEVER have a free market as even the most hardcore ancaps realize they can't dismantle the state so the question isn't what do we do after we reach zero governance, but how do we best govern.

Other countries are even worse, China is probably the best example of an extremely mixed economy where it is very hard for American companies to enter and they do all sorts of funny business (currency manipulation, prohibitory laws etc) to take care of CHINESE BUSINESS and how have they done, take a look

http://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKi...am%20ex_1.ashx



So it seems like despite the fact that China has FAR worse of an "interventionist" government when it comes to the economy, they've WHOOPED America who has signed countless trade deals and "liberalized" in many ways. This is the reality for many Americans:

http://www.epi.org/publication/chart...ge-stagnation/

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/02/95-mi...bor-force.html

95-million-american-workers-not-in-us-labor-force

http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemc.../#6dfd23666dde

63% Of Americans Don't Have Enough Savings To Cover A $500 Emergency

/\ STRONG prosperity! Despite the fact that we have far MORE free trade, far MORE free movement and far MORE companies, the average American has made virtually no gains in the past 30 years, to the point where they don't even have $500....

2.Let's assume you're a libertarian or ancap;

You CANNOT be for NAFTA or any other 1000 page """""""""""""""""free trade"""""""""""""""""""""""" deals written by big corporations as free trade deals should be 1 page deals (like Ron Paul suggests) that say: 5% tariff so we can assure that products are there and apart from that, trade away

You also HAVE to be for open borders as the same logic that suggests we should have free trade applies to people. So if these same people came in and voted for bigger government as Hispanics have done, you should have no qualms as this is the "democratic" will and when private institutions bring in low IQ third worlders like the ****lians infesting America, well hail liberty, it's a beautiful thing that we'll have a surplus of labor.

3.America was NOT founded on free trade

https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.o...3/1/v7n1-8.pdf

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fl..._b_713521.html

Actually the most prosperous eras coincided huge tariffs



Other countries like Japan, China, South Korea, Singapore, all had tariffs as well and they prospered regardless, although the best examples will always be America and Britain:



Funny how France's low tariffs did not lead to great prosperity and Britain was one of the most prosperous nations even with their high tariffs.

Please read the following book for more:

https://analepsis.files.wordpress.co...samaritans.pdf

Or watch:



4.Why the **** would America let companies abuse it's intellectual property laws, it's infrastructure which allows for smooth commerce, all of the social institutions that helped mold this person into a successful individual all for them to **** off to a country with NONE of those things where it would be EXTREMELY hard to achieve similar success all for that person and a few other close compadres to benefit as the average worker gets ****ed? Even the idea of free trade had NOTHING to do with """""""""""""free trade""""""""""""" as it's done now

http://therightstuff.biz/2016/12/17/...n-one-country/

The original theory of free trade, as fully formulated by the British economist David Ricardo, was based on the immobility of the factors of production (in particular, labor and capital). In Ricardo’s day and age, the high costs of transportation, travel, and communication, as well as old-fashioned loyalty to king and country, fixed the factors of production within given national borders, meaning that comparative advantage would not be traded for corporate profits. Today, however, the virtually free costs of transportation, travel, and communication, along with the rootlessness of globalism, have invalidated Ricardo’s assumption of immobile factors of production. With this newfound freedom, capital flows from high-wage to low-wage countries while labor flows from low-wage to high-wage countries. This outcome – an ongoing and never-ending redistribution of resources around the world – was inconceivable to classical-liberal economists in the eighteenth century.

When free-flowing factors of production are combined with free trade, Say’s Law (“supply creates its own demand”) no longer applies to labor: a supply of labor will not always create its own demand. In the past, when capital was fixed in a given country, labor displaced by trade could be easily reallocated to new industries in the same country. Out-of-work machinists and blacksmiths from the horse-and-buggy industry could, for example, get a new job at one of Ford’s automobile plants. In the present, however, when capital is not fixed in a given country, labor displaced by trade is not always reallocated to new industries in the same country; those industries are now often located outside of the country. Instead of getting a new job at the Ford plant opening up in town, unemployed workers would have to learn Spanish or Mandarin and move to cartel-controlled Mexico or Communist-controlled China just to continue to do the same job for less money. Needless to say, this is not something that the American working class is going to do. Thus, instead of trade reallocating the factors of production to their most-efficient utilizations within a given country, capital simply flows out of the country and labor is left idle.

So BOTTOM LINE:

1.Free trade/liberalization has NOT been followed by more prosperity, if anything there is a correlation between higher tariffs and prosperity as seen in American and British history

2.State capitalism WHOOPS less statish capitalism

3.The average person has hardly seen any gains from """"""""""""""""free trade"""""""""""""""""""""" and no smart phone that you can watch porn on is going to make up for the decimation of the white working class

4.Free trade as it's done today had NOTHING to do with the original idea, nor was America (or Britain) founded on free trade

5.In reality free trade is a way that the .01% can benefit off of slave labor, no environmental regulations and no labor laws WHILE completely ****ing over the country that gave it that opportunity through the things it has built with 100s of years of investment both public and private in schooling, infrastructure, protecting their intellectual property and protecting private property

6.Free trade has also coincided with the greatest flow of people into the west, people who have increased crime, grown the government through their voting patterns, abused welfare and have zero hopes of assimilating due to their culture, IQ and even hatred of the west

Free trade is a racket and a scam, there is a reason that this is both pushed HUGE by neocons and neolibs (along with wars and sucking Israeli cock), it is an AWFUL IDEA.

All of this. How hard is it to understand that free trade doesnt exist in the real world. Its the business equivalent of absolute zero or frictionless engineering problems. They only exist as something on paper. In the real world there are barriers to trade out the ass and china cucking us hardcore.

[hungarian_boss]

When did trump say businesses can't make products wherever they want? He only said they can't expect to do it as cheaply as before. As they look at the bottom line, trump does the same.

I always thought this was a great video.
Start at :20

[RyanAintLying]

Tariffs are not the answer. I don't get why people think they are but they aren't. If tariffs helped trade then everything would have tariffs. There'd be tariffs for inter-state trade in the US as well as tariffs on all exports/imports.

If US imposes tariffs on Chinese goods then China raises costs on their exports and imposes tariffs of their own on American products they buy (not as much as the other way around but still some)

The end result of that: American consumer eats the cost of higher goods, less import/export jobs due to less trade

It's a lose/lose for American consumers all around. The consumer always gets screwed in trade wars

[JonathanRhimes]

Tariffs are not the answer. I don't get why people think they are but they aren't. If tariffs helped trade then everything would have tariffs. There'd be tariffs for inter-state trade in the US as well as tariffs on all exports/imports.

If US imposes tariffs on Chinese goods then China raises costs on their exports and imposes tariffs of their own on American products they buy (not as much as the other way around but still some)

The end result of that: American consumer eats the cost of higher goods, less import/export jobs due to less trade

It's a lose/lose for American consumers all around. The consumer always gets screwed in trade wars

Oh look a lecture about how tariffs will just result in a standoff. Which would be so so much worse than the net outflow of hundreds of billions of dollars from USA to china

Pls go lol

[LukeLissen]

Seven of the world's ten busiest container seaports are in China.

The other three are in Singapore, South Korea and the UAE

[AlwaysFocus]

ITT op is grabbing at straws, now promotes it is wrong for the US to bring jobs back.

LOL

[Stizzel]

Thats all textbook (literally from the business textbooks) free trade talk. That only exists as a theory. In reality we dont have free trade when china blocks us from selling them our services. So tariffs it is.

If only we had geniuses like yourself teaching economics.

[RyanAintLying]

Oh look a lecture about how tariffs will just result in a standoff. Which would be so so much worse than the net outflow of hundreds of billions of dollars from USA to china

Pls go lol

Oh look, a total strawman

Pls go lol

[moksha16]

There is one good thing about all this..

Republicans and Conservatives have apparently seen the light and can't wait to get all these UNIONIZED well paying, with benefits and pensions jobs back in the USA......... right?

Because "bringing back" these jobs while continuing to bust the unions, driving down the wages and eliminating the benefits wouldn't do chit for the american workers or middle class. .

[ODBM]

Republicans and Conservatives have apparently seen the light and can't wait to get all these UNIONIZED well paying, with benefits and pensions jobs back in the USA......... right?

You're overcomplicating it. Let me make it really easy for you to understand..

I care about Joe, who lives down the street. I care significantly less about Xang, who lives in China.

[moksha16]

You're overcomplicating it. Let me make it really easy for you to understand..

I care about Joe, who lives down the street. I care significantly less about Xang, who lives in China.

So you care about Joe having a good Union job that pays a good wage and provides good benefits and a good pension


awesome!!

[JonathanRhimes]

So you care about Joe having a good Union job that pays a good wage and provides good benefits and a good pension


awesome!!

I care too

[second2noneBrah]

I care too

Me 3

[elterrible987]

I'm a typical libtard capitalism hater (it's predatory and exploitive imo), but Mike Rowe does make some good points.

The only problem for me is this retarded notion always pushed by capitalists zealots: if companies have more money, they can hire more workers. Such fuking bullchit. That is not how a business works--when a corporation sees increased revenues, under no circumstances does the board of directors say yay, we can hire more people now!! Adding labor costs to their balance sheet is a last resort. In fact most of their planning involves reducing labor costs through new technology or efficiencies.

The ultimate goal of any business is zero labor costs.

We should never expect lower corporate taxes or increased revenue by other means to result in job creation. Never. Doesn't fukking happen.

The ultimate goal of any business is profit. labor is a necessary business expense. you want to lower expenses obviously, but zero labor is not realistic. This is what happens when libtards try to talk business.

[elterrible987]

I always thought this was a great video.
Start at :20

David letterman was soooo offended when he found out Trump makes sexual locker room type comments. The same david letterman who was ****ing one of his employees while he was married. what a **** nut.

Arnold, same thing. omg Im sooo offended by what Trump said. The same arnold that had a kid with his ****ing maid, while he was married. gtfo arnold.

[elterrible987]

If only we had geniuses like yourself teaching economics.

would you like to show me a real world current free trade relationship the united states has? since you think you know some chit

[watertoy]

BOLA is for small government except when he worries his hipstertarianism might hurt the feelings of Al Sharpton.

Trump is just using his massive following to shame & boycott horrible people. We shall overcome.

[watertoy]

David letterman was soooo offended when he found out Trump makes sexual locker room type comments. The same david letterman who was ****ing one of his employees while he was married. what a **** nut.
The same arnold that had a kid with his ****ing maid, while he was married. gtfo arnold.

Trump dates HBB10 queens. Arnold & Letterman just dumpster hump anything they find.

[B.O.L.A.]

Will the regulatory and tax reforms make it cheaper for businesses to operate in the US or will they still be at a better advantage doing it oversea?

I don't have the answer

However even if it does nothing is going to stop a democrat from reversing these policies in the future, more taxes, regulations, elimination of tariffs. If foreign producers innovation surpasses the us made cars (Which is likely if they are protected against foreign competition) the whole industry will collapse when these policies are reversed and the protected american companies will have less interest to innovate or be efficient as opposed to foreign cars.

No way. The tax cuts are great but just one small part of the issue.

Companies primarily outsource to reduce certain costs � such as peripheral or "non-core" business expenses, high taxes, high energy costs, excessive government regulation/mandates, production and/or labor costs. The incentive to outsource may be greater for U.S. companies due to unusually high corporate taxes and mandated benefits, like social security, Medicare, and safety protection (OSHA regulations).
- Buchholz, Todd G. Bringing the Jobs Home: How the Left Created the Outsourcing Crisis � and How We Can Fix It.

[BetaAsPhuck]

Let's establish a few things:

1.You don't have a free market, not domestically and certainly not abroad;

You have things like LLCs, intellectual property, tariffs, crony capitalism, insider trading laws etc. These are NOT "free market" as in the government staying out of the market.

You will NEVER have a free market as even the most hardcore ancaps realize they can't dismantle the state so the question isn't what do we do after we reach zero governance, but how do we best govern.

Other countries are even worse, China is probably the best example of an extremely mixed economy where it is very hard for American companies to enter and they do all sorts of funny business (currency manipulation, prohibitory laws etc) to take care of CHINESE BUSINESS and how have they done, take a look

http://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKi...am%20ex_1.ashx



So it seems like despite the fact that China has FAR worse of an "interventionist" government when it comes to the economy, they've WHOOPED America who has signed countless trade deals and "liberalized" in many ways..

THANK YOU!

It baffles me, the amount of americans that I debate who try to argue that the US is a capitalist country, and/or try to attribute prosperity to capitalism/free trade.

Like you point out, mixed and regulated economies work, and work extremely well (in terms of GDP growth).

Unfortunately, when it comes to politics, IME most people are ideologues, they aren't interested in a pragmatic assessment, they want idealized models to be implemented.

I threw out loyalty to ideologies a long time ago. I'm just interested in what works, to promote a healthy, happy, and flourishing society (ie. a pragmatist).

[NVious]

THANK YOU!

It baffles me, the amount of americans that I debate who try to argue that the US is a capitalist country, and/or try to attribute prosperity to capitalism/free trade.

Like you point out, mixed and regulated economies work, and work extremely well (in terms of GDP growth).

Unfortunately, when it comes to politics, IME most people are ideologues, they aren't interested in a pragmatic assessment, they want idealized models to be implemented.

I threw out loyalty to ideologies a long time ago. I'm just interested in what works, to promote a healthy, happy, and flourishing society (ie. a pragmatist).

You can thank neoclassical economists who have rewritten history to fit their narrative for that, funny the older I get, the more I realized how rewritten history at large is.

Yep, but this is lost on both parties, cuckservatives think offshoring jobs is offset by lowering taxes for business investment and lolberals think that offshoring jobs is bad, but there is nothing we can do about it so we just need to tax corps more.

Lower taxes can be used as a carrot IF the corps play ball and invest as you want them to and tariffs can be used as a stick if corps get too cocky and think the .01% making a few million more matters more than the 1000s of lives they will ruin by leaving the country.

[Jrd86]

It comes down to this. Do you want a small ultra elite upper class, and a massive poor underclass and virtually no middle class?

Or

Do you want a small elite upper class, a massive middle class, and a small underclass?

Corporations are like dictators. Their only concern is enriching themselves. They have no national patriotism when it comes to running their business.

Theyll suck the blood out of the american mddle class until there is no more blood to suck. Then theyll move on to their next victim.

Then maybe theyll start sending jobs back to what will be a broken 3rd world America... rinse and repeat the entire process.

[anonymous]

Because we're tired of seeing "Made in (Insert Foreign Country Here)" instead of "Made In America".

And what's wrong with the job point? We could certainly use them due to the current economy and unemployment rates.

[B.O.L.A.]

Because we're tired of seeing "Made in (Insert Foreign Country Here)" instead of "Made In America".

And what's wrong with the job point? We could certainly use them due to the current economy and unemployment rates.

There is a sort of pride that comes with knowing something you find useful/valuable is made nearby or by someone you know. But what is the basis for this, in reality? It's nothing but feelings. It's the same thing that fans of a sports team get when "the team from my geographical area beats the team from your geographical area." There is no true, economic benefit to it. In fact, there's a much better argument that it actually causes economic harm. So you are harming the economy so that you can get happy feelings when you look at where stuff is made. This is fundamentally no different from what liberals do when they want to feel good about "helping" people through welfare. It feels good for them to know everyone has health insurance from the government, and they refuse to consider whether that has actually produced a true improvement in conditions or actually done a net amount of harm in other ways. This is really not good that the supposed "conservative" side of American politics is letting their emotions get the best of them and reducing themselves to being no better than Liberals.

[DegenLife]

Why don't you stop posting and get outside you beta

[veggie530]

Liberals pining for slave labor in foreign lands.

God, the two party system creates so many inconsistencies lol