Milton Friedman on Free Trade/Tariffs

[thackney]

Scarcity of resources has been a major reason why past wars were fought and won or lost.  Chief among them was access to raw materials like energy.

Yes, other than the will to fight, retaining the abilities to procure machinery will certainly enhance one's ability to win.

How does making it more expensive to produce energy in your own country help along those lines?  When it becomes more economical to expand oil/gas fields and build pipelines elsewhere?

[txradioguy]

Well, I prefer security I guess in having the capabilities of creating our own weapons of war like ships, planes and the like rather than trying to procure them from others.

And if it comes to an all out world war...assuming the whole world isn't a mushroom cloud...we'll produce wholly from within out borders.

So I continue to vote for our domestic security and will accept some actions such as tariffs to prevent other countries rigging their economic schemes to bring down critical industries of this country.

Next time you go to Walmart...Target....Trader Joes...your local car dealership...demand to pay higher prices for no reason in the name of "domestic security".

[IsailedawayfromFR]

And if it comes to an all out world war...assuming the whole world isn't a mushroom cloud...we'll produce wholly from within out borders.

  Not if there are no factories left nor experienced workers to run them.

Next time you go to Walmart...Target....Trader Joes...your local car dealership...demand to pay higher prices for no reason in the name of "domestic security".

So you believe there is "no reason" we should ever fight foreigners dumping materials or products into the country unfairly?  Your preference appears to be making American jobs disappear regardless in order to buy things cheaply.  Maybe good over the short term for your pocketbook but how sound a long-term strategic policy is that economically regardless of the defensive ramifications for industries we need to preserve?

[DB]

Scarcity of resources has been a major reason why past wars were fought and won or lost.  Chief among them was access to raw materials like energy.

Yes, other than the will to fight, retaining the abilities to procure machinery will certainly enhance one's ability to win.

Tanks and heavy armor won't win the next world war.

[kevindavis007]

  Not if there are no factories left nor experienced workers to run them.
So you believe there is "no reason" we should ever fight foreigners dumping materials or products into the country unfairly?  Your preference appears to be making American jobs disappear regardless in order to buy things cheaply.  Maybe good over the short term for your pocketbook but how sound a long-term strategic policy is that economically regardless of the defensive ramifications for industries we need to preserve?

How do you feel about automation?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

How does making it more expensive to produce energy in your own country help along those lines?  When it becomes more economical to expand oil/gas fields and build pipelines elsewhere?

True, leveling the playing field might make steel more expensive.  Apparently, it has been heavily subsidized by other countries in order that they can undercut the domestic industry and create jobs elsewhere at the detriment of Americans.  So perhaps it has simply been cheaper than it should have been if the world all played fair.

There are a number of things that make energy more expensive in this country, including undue restrictions imposed on companies such as environmental regulations.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

How do you feel about automation?

Good things.  It has been helping us since Henry Ford

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Tanks and heavy armor won't win the next world war.

And you know that how?

[kevindavis007]

Good things.  It has been helping us since Henry Ford

You do realize that in 10 years robots will do 95% of the work.

[roamer_1]

You do realize that in 10 years robots will do 95% of the work.

Nah.

[jpsb]

When you take raw materials and use them to create something like a car you are creating wealth. I
would like to keep the means of creating wealth here in the USA. Every year we send 500 billion
dollars of wealth to Communist China. The Chicoms use that money to build up their military and to
buy our high tech companies. The Chicoms get free access to our market and we do not get free
access to their market. In trade we a being played for fools. Milton Friedman is an idiot. We tried it
his way for 30/40 years and the results are in. We went from the strongest economy the world has
ever seen to a hollowed out debtor nation that can't pay it's bills. Mean while China has become an
economic super power behind high tariffs walls.

[kevindavis007]

Nah.

Yes they will.

[roamer_1]

Yes they will.

Maybe in white collar... Certainly in factories (nearly already true now) But you're a long, long way from replacing workers in the field.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You do realize that in 10 years robots will do 95% of the work.

And compared to 20 years ago, computers do a lot as well.

What is the point if you have no factories or raw materials to use?

[DB]

And you know that how?

The world has changed. Weapons have changed. The last place you want to be is a tank in a war against a modern enemy out to win.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

The world has changed. Weapons have changed. The last place you want to be is a tank in a war against a modern enemy out to win.

And the last situation you wish to find yourself is reliance upon a foreign entity to supply you with the weapons you need.

Guess you do not believe we need to build planes or ships either.

[kevindavis007]

Maybe in white collar... Certainly in factories (nearly already true now) But you're a long, long way from replacing workers in the field.

They are replacing a lot of blue collar jobs. Today's factories don't require a lot of workers like they did 60 years ago.


Check this story out (yes it is old)
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-robots-jobs-20150211-story.html

[LMAO]

When you take raw materials and use them to create something like a car you are creating wealth. I
would like to keep the means of creating wealth here in the USA. Every year we send 500 billion
dollars of wealth to Communist China. The Chicoms use that money to build up their military and to
buy our high tech companies. The Chicoms get free access to our market and we do not get free
access to their market. In trade we a being played for fools. Milton Friedman is an idiot. We tried it
his way for 30/40 years and the results are in. We went from the strongest economy the world has
ever seen to a hollowed out debtor nation that can't pay it's bills. Mean while China has become an
economic super power behind high tariffs walls.

We still are the worlds largest and strongest economy. And we didn’t become a “hollowed out debtor nation” because of free trade.

[txradioguy]

  Not if there are no factories left nor experienced workers to run them.

Hence the reason I added "assuming it doesn't go nuclear".  If the world goes up in a mutually assured mushroom cloud we no one is producing squat in any corner of the world.

So you believe there is "no reason" we should ever fight foreigners dumping materials or products into the country unfairly?  Your preference appears to be making American jobs disappear regardless in order to buy things cheaply.  Maybe good over the short term for your pocketbook but how sound a long-term strategic policy is that economically regardless of the defensive ramifications for industries we need to preserve?

Did I say that?  Quit trying to be a mind reader...you suck at it.

Like I keep saying...repeal the U.S.'s MFN status for China and that will stop the goods dumping.  Stop allowing the Chamber of Commerce and the heads of the companies that benefit from china dumping cheap goods into the country from lobbying to keep the flood gates open.

Turn off the spigot and their money will dry up and THEN you'll have their attention.

There is no tariff stiff enough on China that because of their centrally controlled government they can't absorb...especially when the dollar amount in what they steal from the U.S. and other Western nations more than makes up for what they'd have to pay out from some stupid tariff that only ends up hurting the American consumer.

[roamer_1]

They are replacing a lot of blue collar jobs. Today's factories don't require a lot of workers like they did 60 years ago.

Right.. I SAID that in factory jobs you were right (already here). But that impact is pretty well done. Machines are a long, long way off from handling anything outside of a predictable and repetitive factory floor, and the likewise, fairly predictable cubicle farm.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Tanks and heavy armor won't win the next world war.

Obviously not what NATO believes.

How Roads Could Win or Lose a War With Russia
Amid cries to increase NATO defense spending, many see investments in heavy vehicles and good roads as ways to deter Russia. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a22518247/nato-roads-het-europe-tanks/?src=nl&mag=pop&list=nl_pnl_news&date=072418

[thackney]

Obviously not what NATO believes.

Are you confusing Popular Mechanics and the Center for European Policy Analysis with NATO?  Where is this claim from NATO?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Are you confusing Popular Mechanics and the Center for European Policy Analysis with NATO?  Where is this claim from NATO?

No confusion.  I read the article

NATO's workaround has been loading tanks on trains. But even if trains do the lion's share of the work, you still need HETs to ferry tanks to where they’re needed. Train tracks and stations are also fixed targets, and Russia certainly has them mapped for possible sabotage, cyberattacks, and aerial bombing.

“In the event of a crisis,” says a recent report from the Center for European Policy. “HETs will be invaluable. They are also exceptionally limited at present. More are needed to provide for an effective deterrent; and to maximize NATO’s speed of reinforcement.”

[txradioguy]

No confusion.  I read the article

NATO's workaround has been loading tanks on trains. But even if trains do the lion's share of the work, you still need HETs to ferry tanks to where they’re needed. Train tracks and stations are also fixed targets, and Russia certainly has them mapped for possible sabotage, cyberattacks, and aerial bombing.

“In the event of a crisis,” says a recent report from the Center for European Policy. “HETs will be invaluable. They are also exceptionally limited at present. More are needed to provide for an effective deterrent; and to maximize NATO’s speed of reinforcement.”

Actually in the event of an all our war...it won't really matter...because the tanks and APC's will use whatever road or farmers field they have to traverse to engage the enemy.  We used to road march units up and down the Autobahn over there...there's a 2mile strip of the A29 specifically designed as a landing field in the event of WWIII.

Besides there's not enough HET's in the Army to move tanks as necessary in no sh*t combat situations.

Bottom line is trains and HET's won't matter one whit when the SHTF. 

[kevindavis007]

Actually in the event of an all our war...it won't really matter...because the tanks and APC's will use whatever road or farmers field they have to traverse to engage the enemy.  We used to road march units up and down the Autobahn over there...there's a 2mile strip of the A29 specifically designed as a landing field in the event of WWIII.

Besides there's not enough HET's in the Army to move tanks as necessary in no sh*t combat situations.

Bottom line is trains and HET's won't matter one whit when the SHTF.

Nothing matters if WWIII goes full mushroom cloud.