|
OhFunny posted:https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-02-28/ryan-said-to-forge-unexpected-alliance-with-bannon-on-border-tax he's raising prices on americans buying american goods when compared to foreigners buying american goods? i don't think that's gonna go well with his base Condiv fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Mar 2, 2017 |
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 23:13 |
|
|
Condiv posted:he's raising prices on americans buying american goods as opposed to foreigners buying american goods? Yeah apparently it's actually not a bad idea and according to textbook econ theory it should have no effect on domestic prices because currency markets should adjust. But if the econ textbook theory is wrong (heh heh heh) and prices do go up the huge brunt of it will be on old people living on a fixed income
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Yeah apparently it's actually not a bad idea and according to textbook econ theory it should have no effect on domestic prices because currency markets should adjust. But if the econ textbook theory is wrong (heh heh heh) and prices do go up the huge brunt of it will be on old people living on a fixed income well, the tax is lowered on income from the US to 20% and a 20% tariff on imports, but the article seems to say that sales on exports are untaxed. which means that americans pay more for all goods while every other country gets cheaper american exports. i don't think his base is gonna be happy about a macbook being theoretically cheaper for people in france and britain than it is for americans. at least if you're following typical republican tax logic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Condiv posted:well, the tax is lowered on income from the US to 20% and a 20% tariff on imports, but the article seems to say that sales on exports are untaxed. which means that americans pay more for all goods while every other country gets cheaper american exports. i don't think his base is gonna be happy about a macbook being theoretically cheaper for people in france and britain than it is for americans. at least if you're following typical republican tax logic. According to articles I've seen on the topic the dollar should strengthen versus other currencies, which would negate the effect of imports being more expensive, as more people want to buy dollars to buy untaxed American exports. Of course that depends on international currency markets working like they do in the textbook (they don't) and Trump has stated repeatedly he wants the dollar to be weaker not stronger, so... http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/27/news/economy/border-adjustment-tax-trump-trump-congress/ quote:The whole thing only works if the dollar rises roughly 20% in value, and quickly. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
I'm not sure why you're so convinced tariffs are going to sock it to the 1% relative to everyone else, but let's try and think for a second how import substitution is supposed increase manufacturing employment. As soon as you up the price of goods, you start taking money out of the pocket of every American worker, and you give it American factory owners. You're literally redistributing wealth from real Americans into the hands of capitalists. Now THEORETICALLY, the idea is that wealth will trickle back down as they start employing more people to make widgets, assuming they can't now make robots to do it instead. But like, immediately the wealth transfer is regressive, you're taking money from pensioners and giving to the the rich, and praying they'll start giving it back at some point. You're not punishing the rich, you're dumping poor people's money on them, and harming everyone in aggregate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:According to articles I've seen on the topic the dollar should strengthen versus other currencies, which would negate the effect of imports being more expensive, as more people want to buy dollars to buy untaxed American exports. Of course that depends on international currency markets working like they do in the textbook (they don't) and Trump has stated repeatedly he wants the dollar to be weaker not stronger, so... How does this proposal compare with European consumption taxes?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Squalid posted:How does this proposal compare with European consumption taxes? I read somewhere that VATs as implemented in most EU countries replicate the effects of a border adjustment tax but I'm not sure how exactly they compare Matt Yglesias' podcart on.Vox did a segmen on it, if you can stand the sound of that guy's voice for more than 30 seconds icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I read somewhere that VATs as implemented in most EU countries replicate the effects of a border adjustment tax but I'm not sure how exactly they compare That is a joke right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
The US government will let the 99% burn to the ground before the rich suffer any consequences.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:That is a joke right. you're right, even that's way too long to expect the average, un-hardened civilian to take
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:If manufacturing comes back and (more importantly) unions can flex their power again the lower and middle classes will make more money which would allow them to absorb any price increases. Manufacturing isn't "coming back" because it never actually went anywhere. We produce twice as much now as we did in the 70s with one third of the labor. A manufacturing boom would create a few tens of thousands of jobs at most, which is literally a drop in the bucket compared to the number of jobs the US economy produces every month. Even if all of those were high paying jobs, it wouldn't move actual wage growth one bit. It can't be said enough that US manufacturing is not and has not been declining. US manufacturing is strong and has been strong for decades, we just don't need factory workers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
The awkward problem of the 21st century will be that we don't ”really need" 4+ billion of the human race. How we deal with that will be what defines the global millenial generation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
We had the solution in the 19th century.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:The compelling vision here is PAY YOUR F*CKING TAXES (both individually and as corporations) and restore a proper tax system with increased marginal rates. With all the wealth sitting in the Cayman Islands alone, you could fund US & EU welfare systems to Scandinavian levels for the next 50 years. Yep I totally agree. That's where we should start. We gotta get these fuckers to start paying their taxes, it's only fair. But according to MMT-types there is no such thing as a "fair" tax plan so...
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:Yep I totally agree. That's where we should start. We gotta get these fuckers to start paying their taxes, it's only fair. But according to MMT-types there is no such thing as a "fair" tax plan so... If by MMT you mean modern monetary theory, what it actually says is that you shouldn't raise taxes to finance balanced budgets. The idea is that issuing currency creates money and taxation simply destroys the issued money, exactly like paying down debt destroys the money created when private banks issue credit. Public deficit in a country that issues its own currency is never bad unless it's financed with high-interest/foreign-currency debt or it starts causing problems consistent with excess demand, like accelerating inflation. However, taxation in and of itself is good. Most importantly, it creates the demand for your currency. Secondly, it gives democratic control over whose money it is that should be destroyed. Since poor people having more money is better both morally and for aggregate demand than rich people having more money, there's no way to conclude that taxing the rich is bad. I can see why someone would say that there's no fair tax plan though, since MMT basically denies that we should strive toward some sort of equilibrium-enabling tax policy and instead says that who we tax is best left for the people to decide. As an aside, one interesting consequence of MMT is that government bonds are, first and foremost, welfare for the rich.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
How do you intend to tax the rich, when they hold the reigns of power in both major parties of the USA and have effectively come to control the entire democratic system through outright bribery of elected officials? Please, enlighten me, will your petitioning speak louder than a high six-figure lobbying campaign? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 07:42
|
|
|
uncop posted:As an aside, one interesting consequence of MMT is that government bonds are, first and foremost, welfare for the rich. Well that's basically been the case since Adam Smith though. The whole point of government bonds domestically is that you borrow the money that you need to sustain the state from the rich and pay them for the privilege through interest instead of just taking it through taxation as you do with those of less means. It's an extension of the idea that the state exists to protect the interests of the rich from the interests of the poor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 07:50
|
|
|
Rime posted:How do you intend to tax the rich, when they hold the reigns of power in both major parties of the USA and have effectively come to control the entire democratic system through outright bribery of elected officials? Molotov cocktails and guillotines, ofc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:Molotov cocktails, gulags, and guillotines, ofc. Ftfy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
The rich destroyed the political power of labor in the US. They have also spent decades funding propaganda outlets in both the media and the government to demonize the left so throughly that anything left of William F Buckely is basically communism. So not only would you have to fight the rich and their comical amounts of money/resources, you'd also have to fight tens of millions of regular Americans whose beliefs range from "welfare is socialism and needs to be cut" to "taxation is theft, period."
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 08:58
|
|
|
Scent of Worf posted:The rich destroyed the political power of labor in the US. They have also spent decades funding propaganda outlets in both the media and the government to demonize the left so throughly that anything left of William F Buckely is basically communism. So not only would you have to fight the rich and their comical amounts of money/resources, you'd also have to fight tens of millions of regular Americans whose beliefs range from "welfare is socialism and needs to be cut" to "taxation is theft, period." At the same time: Public opinion is mercurial by nature, and successful social democratic takeovers have been accomplished by turning a suffering population against the political and economic elites. The question isn't if this can work, but how you accomplish it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 09:19
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-02-28/ryan-said-to-forge-unexpected-alliance-with-bannon-on-border-tax The only way Trump gets his way is if the use withdraws from the WTO. Global trade isn’t going to end if he does that. It just means that all of our influence on the global economy goes to either Europe or China.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
Scent of Worf posted:Giiiiivve...Uuuuuuup....
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:At the same time: Public opinion is mercurial by nature, and successful social democratic takeovers have been accomplished by turning a suffering population against the political and economic elites. The question isn't if this can work, but how you accomplish it. OTOH, the sheer scale of such an effort coming from such a weakened position makes success highly unlikely. Also in the US at least there is a strong, nearly insurmountable structural conservative advantage. We are at the point where normally insane/wacky/desperate solutions have about as much chance as working as this typically feel good line you are going for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Manufacturing isn't "coming back" because it never actually went anywhere. We produce twice as much now as we did in the 70s with one third of the labor. A manufacturing boom would create a few tens of thousands of jobs at most, which is literally a drop in the bucket compared to the number of jobs the US economy produces every month. Even if all of those were high paying jobs, it wouldn't move actual wage growth one bit. This argument is disingenuous. It really did leave the US. Stating that the total value of manufacturing went up doesn't support your position that it didn't. Offshoring really did happen on a colossal scale. if total value went up that means the manufacturing economy didn't increase as much as it should have. Automation ( at least as it has been up until now) should not in and of itself totally destroy employment in manufacturing if the gains in productivity were equitably distributed. Increased productivity ought to increase aggregate demand for goods which would support more mostly automated factories. Assuming the gains are distributed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Global trade isn’t going to end if he does that. It just means that all of our influence on the global economy goes to either Europe or China. It will have a very nasty headache at the very least. Many carriers will fail if this happens. The container lines in particular would be turbo hosed. They are already weak and some have already failed because of the over building and overcapacity driven by seeking economies of scale. A sharp demand decline would send many of them under. Eventually this would lead to higher freight rates after the blood bath. Higher rates combined with more barriers to trade could very possibly make the current supply chain models, that strive for leanness of inventory, just in time logistic, and which are incredibly complex, non viable. None of this would end global trade. But it would end the way global trade occurs now. The SCOR model of supply chain would likely not make sense anymore. This would be very bad. What happens if the way most of the world's companies run thier logistics and supply chains all becomes non viable simultaneously? Trade didn't end during the depression. Global trade will surely continue. That doesn't mean these things would not gently caress us all. Edit: Trump is an idiot who doesn't know what dumping WTO entirely would do. But you can bet your rear end Bannon does. Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Mar 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
Whoever said the only thing that matters was whether the status quo personally benefitted you was correct. Good luck selling people on not burning it all down when your only argument is "well next time you want to buy a new car you'll be sorry!!!" to people that are unemployed and whose children are addicted to heroin. Half of the country is already essentially living in a depression, they don't really give a poo poo whether it spread upwards to the rich. You will never make people care about the health of global trade when they don't have the resources to participate in trade for adequate food, shelter, education, and healthcare. Brexit showed this, Trump showed this, and it will rear its ugly head again and again until we become a more socialist or social democratic society at the minimum. call to action fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Mar 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
call to action posted:Whoever said the only thing that matters was whether the status quo personally benefitted you was correct. Good luck selling people on not burning it all down when your only argument is "well next time you want to buy a new car you'll be sorry!!!" to people that are unemployed and whose children are addicted to heroin. Half of the country is already essentially living in a depression, they don't really give a poo poo whether it spread upwards to the rich. No sorry people in the US have a pretty good life compared to the vast majority of the world. Slightly less good than the previous generation, but still really drat good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:No sorry people in the US have a pretty good life compared to the vast majority of the world. Slightly less good than the previous generation, but still really drat good. First of all, this doesn't matter at all politically. Nobody looks at WHO statistics (ignoring the ridiculous child mortality, life expectancy, and healthcare costs we have in the US) and rejoices that they're doing better than Cameroon. Secondly, a lot of people in the US actually have it real bad. Black people living in the shells of former industrial communities like Akron, OH, Latinos (both legal and illegal) living in literal shanties with no running water or electricity all along the Texas/Mexico border, white people living deep in the mountains of WV where the literal only jobs are Walmart stocker and heroin dealer, these people are in legitimately bad situations that privileged folk like yourself like to handwave away. Just because these people have greater access to quarter waters than an Indonesian trash picker doesn't make their suffering inconsequential, you loving dweeb. Try asking people like the folks that run RAM (Remote Area Medical), a medical charity that focuses on underserved communities in the US, instead of smugly jerking yourself off about how great it is to be unable to afford to remove an infected tooth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:No sorry people in the US have a pretty good life compared to the vast majority of the world. Slightly less good than the previous generation, but still really drat good. This is the liberal equivalent of 95% of poor people have refrigerators.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
call to action posted:First of all, this doesn't matter at all politically. Nobody looks at WHO statistics (ignoring the ridiculous child mortality, life expectancy, and healthcare costs we have in the US) and rejoices that they're doing better than Cameroon. Sure universal healthcare would be nice. It's more like, the number of people living in shanties in the US is fairly tiny, and they do sometimes have options if they are willing to move. Compare that to somewhere like Malaysia, which is in theory one of the richest economies in Asia, where the minimum wage is about 45 cents (2 ringits) an hour and even relatively qualified manual workers such as ones in construction live in shanties built next to where they work. And while there is universal healthcare there it's a not a terribly great standard of care unless you can afford to be treated privately. e: You get paid minimum wage working at Subway or Starbucks there. And no the prices aren't all that different. Imagine serving coffee drinks all day that cost almost as much as your daily salary. And this is still much better than it was even a decade ago. And perhaps more importantly much better than India or Burma or Bangladesh, and somewhat better than Thailand or China. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Mar 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:And while there is universal healthcare there it's a not a terribly great standard of care unless you can afford to be treated privately. Thanks for tacitly admitting that it's worse to be poor in America with a toothache than almost anywhere else. quote:e: You get paid minimum wage working at Subway or Starbucks there. And no the prices aren't all that different. Imagine serving coffee drinks all day that cost almost as much as your daily salary. And this is still much better than it was even a decade ago. And perhaps more importantly much better than India or Burma or Bangladesh, and somewhat better than Thailand or China. There's actually large swaths of people in America that don't get paid minimum wage, they do this stupid poo poo called "producing all the food". But again, somehow earning a few dollars a day in an open field with no toilets is better in the US than it is in India. Has anyone else noticed this strategy for neolib/capitalism apologists? The pivot from "a rising tide lifts all boats" to "just be happy you're not in CHINA" was effortless for these morons. It takes some deft hands to say "gently caress the struggle of literally every poor and minority in America" and still portray yourself as something other than an inhuman monster. call to action fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Mar 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
call to action posted:Thanks for tacitly admitting that it's worse to be poor in America with a toothache than almost anywhere else. Well, yeah. At least in Malaysia the healthcare really isn't all that bad at all. And they have state-subsidised cars and fuel. Even in China where the healthcare is more, uhh, spotty, it's still probably better than in the US. But America can afford universal healthcare without throwing a huge tantrum about losing manufacturing and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
call to action posted:Has anyone else noticed this strategy for neolib/capitalism apologists? The pivot from "a rising tide lifts all boats" to "just be happy you're not in CHINA" was effortless for these morons. It takes some deft hands to say "gently caress the struggle of literally every poor and minority in America" and still portray yourself as something other than an inhuman monster. It's a good one, because even if some third-world person complains about being poor the neoliberal can just go "well you should be happy you're not living in North Korea" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
call to action posted:Thanks for tacitly admitting that it's worse to be poor in America with a toothache than almost anywhere else. IIRC, this is also a sign a system is in full decay. I believe there were similar appeals regarding how the strength and wealth of France has never been better in the years preceding the revolution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
call to action posted:Thanks for tacitly admitting that it's worse to be poor in America with a toothache than almost anywhere else. It might be that they are worse than conservatives at least conservatives admit they want people to suffer. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Mar 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
call to action posted:You will never make people care about the health of global trade when they don't have the resources to participate in trade for adequate food, shelter, education, and healthcare. Brexit showed this, Trump showed this, and it will rear its ugly head again and again until we become a more socialist or social democratic society at the minimum. Whatever system we end up with in the future, it must provide those things : adequate food, shelter, education, and healthcare, to the populations that participate in it. The wages of the failure to provide those things will be death, in a literal sense, from instability and the growth of reactionary right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:It's more like, the number of people living in shanties in the US is fairly tiny, and they do sometimes have options if they are willing to move. You see, people who live in shanties could simply move if only they had the will. Perhaps the poor are lazy and simply prefer not to work?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
"Necessitous men are not free men. ”
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 23:13 |
|
|
BrandorKP posted:"Necessitous men are not free men. ” Lol, weren't you defending Mike Rowe's lovely right wing list in the Trump thread?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 20:53
|
|