Again, you can't square nationalism with the basic logic of capitalism. No one can. You're in or you're out. One will always undermine the other.
nonsense.
take the current example of the US government spending billions to subsidize chips to be made in the US rather than just Taiwan. In case China does invade Taiwan or force Taiwan to stop selling to the US.
This is using a nationalistic move with government help to assist the longer term health of capitalism by securing the supply of chips, even if it doesn't make immediate capitalist sense. I'm sure the Taiwanese are better at chip making than we are...but national defense requires we not reply on free trade to meet our chip demand.
Sorry, I didn't specify that only US nationalism can't be squared with capitalist market imperatives. No nationalism, including Chinese nationalism, can.
It has been the dream of capitalist nations since the Wilson era to expunge the exercise of state power, and especially imperial military power, from world trade and commerce. What the US is attempting to do w/r/t to onshoring microchip production is not at all a squaring of capitalist market rationality with nationalism; it represents a tilting of the balance of the two logics towards national political imperatives. As such, it dispenses with the economies that the trade based on actual comparative advantage offers, raising prices above what they would otherwise be, at least in the short term. The opposite balancing would entail the US, China, and Taiwan setting aside their respective nationalisms in the interest of mutual, trade-based, growth. But this would simply create another set of problems; problems of political instability arising from potential pockets of unmet material need as resources shift within the global economic space-- the EXACT problem the US has faced for decades, and which has produced the political dealignments that have led to Trump.
The isolationist and protectionist tilt that Biden gestured toward and that Trump promises to pursue vigorously is just the flip side of the neo-liberal "free trade" based regimes of the past 40-odd years. Globalist "free trade" attempted to solve the political-economic problems of nations through trade-driven growth. This hyper-capitalist regime indeed produced growth, but it did so very inequitably, as capitalist growth typically does. Enter the nationalist response, which promises to fix the inequities of neo-liberal growth regimes using direct state intervention in the form of nationalist trade policy (there were and are other statist options, but this is the one forthcoming from M@GA).
China has been trying to reconcile nationalism with capitalist market imperatives for several decades now. It has succeeded better than most (due to its sheer size and political unity), but it can't do this permanently. No one can, least of all the US, which is large but hardly unified. A tilt towards nationalism will produce pressure toward imperial conflict (the negation of settled economic life), but a tilt back toward capitalist imperatives will produce further inequality (and ecological devastation, but that's another story). There is no way out, unless it's out of capitalism and capitalist nationalism altogether. It's either this or more barbarism-- likely BOTH that of deprivation and immiseration AND that of military conflict.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Nike makes huge profits by using slave labor and exploiting the "brown people" you spend your life pretending you care about.
If you weren't a hypocrite and a fool you'd be mad at Nike not the guy trying to level the playing field. Nike's profit margin is like 40%. They make the absolute trash over at Apple look human.
You didn't answer the question. Rather pivoted. Yes or no a simple answer.
Again, would Republicans pay $600 added 60% tariff?
I would never buy Nike's in the first place.
If one show company jacked up their price 60% I would buy from their competitor because I'm not an idiot.
Genuine question here from a neutral observer. Interest payments on US National Debt now exceed defense spending. One of the largest expenditures after Social Security & Healthcare. Will the tariff revenues not at least help to pay that?
(Ignoring the costs transferred to US Companies / Consumers)
If not, what methods would be more effective at tackling the national debt problem? A wealth tax? I feel like higher income taxes benefit wage-earners, while the truly wealthy can horde wealth and earn passive income from the returns.
I’m not very political and definitely not an economist- just wondering about this.
Yes, tariffs especially on China will almost certainly increase gross national wealth, a measure that includes government tax revenue.
50% tariffs all around! every nation! Every nation will become rich on tariffs!
Yes, tariffs especially on China will almost certainly increase gross national wealth, a measure that includes government tax revenue.
50% tariffs all around! every nation! Every nation will become rich on tariffs!
this one is a piece of work.
You have truly gone senile if you really don’t understand ant what point economic forces reach their equilibrium or breaking point. Come back when you have learned something about economics to be able to make quantitative arguments beyond some quaint notion of American exceptionalism from your post-war memories growing up.
This Thursday, Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell told the House Budget Committee that there was “no reason to think, that I can see, that the probability of a downturn is at all elevated.” Not every economic indicator is...
take the current example of the US government spending billions to subsidize chips to be made in the US rather than just Taiwan. In case China does invade Taiwan or force Taiwan to stop selling to the US.
This is using a nationalistic move with government help to assist the longer term health of capitalism by securing the supply of chips, even if it doesn't make immediate capitalist sense. I'm sure the Taiwanese are better at chip making than we are...but national defense requires we not reply on free trade to meet our chip demand.
Sorry, I didn't specify that only US nationalism can't be squared with capitalist market imperatives. No nationalism, including Chinese nationalism, can.
It has been the dream of capitalist nations since the Wilson era to expunge the exercise of state power, and especially imperial military power, from world trade and commerce. What the US is attempting to do w/r/t to onshoring microchip production is not at all a squaring of capitalist market rationality with nationalism; it represents a tilting of the balance of the two logics towards national political imperatives. As such, it dispenses with the economies that the trade based on actual comparative advantage offers, raising prices above what they would otherwise be, at least in the short term. The opposite balancing would entail the US, China, and Taiwan setting aside their respective nationalisms in the interest of mutual, trade-based, growth. But this would simply create another set of problems; problems of political instability arising from potential pockets of unmet material need as resources shift within the global economic space-- the EXACT problem the US has faced for decades, and which has produced the political dealignments that have led to Trump.
The isolationist and protectionist tilt that Biden gestured toward and that Trump promises to pursue vigorously is just the flip side of the neo-liberal "free trade" based regimes of the past 40-odd years. Globalist "free trade" attempted to solve the political-economic problems of nations through trade-driven growth. This hyper-capitalist regime indeed produced growth, but it did so very inequitably, as capitalist growth typically does. Enter the nationalist response, which promises to fix the inequities of neo-liberal growth regimes using direct state intervention in the form of nationalist trade policy (there were and are other statist options, but this is the one forthcoming from M@GA).
China has been trying to reconcile nationalism with capitalist market imperatives for several decades now. It has succeeded better than most (due to its sheer size and political unity), but it can't do this permanently. No one can, least of all the US, which is large but hardly unified. A tilt towards nationalism will produce pressure toward imperial conflict (the negation of settled economic life), but a tilt back toward capitalist imperatives will produce further inequality (and ecological devastation, but that's another story). There is no way out, unless it's out of capitalism and capitalist nationalism altogether. It's either this or more barbarism-- likely BOTH that of deprivation and immiseration AND that of military conflict.
can you try again, more clearly? regular english, with more topic sentences and conclusion sentences?
are you saying that despite lived history 1945-2016 of massive success and alleviation of world poverty and ending of bigwar during the adoption of global capitalism...that somehow capitalism is a failure? Or that 'nationalism' has been subsumed by capitalism until now?
I really don't know what you are saying, but if you could address why 1945-2016 was such a massive global golden period of relative peace and prosperity at the same time capitalism raged and set the agenda...that might be helpful and interesting.
This post was edited 5 minutes after it was posted.
50% tariffs all around! every nation! Every nation will become rich on tariffs!
this one is a piece of work.
You have truly gone senile if you really don’t understand ant what point economic forces reach their equilibrium or breaking point. Come back when you have learned something about economics to be able to make quantitative arguments beyond some quaint notion of American exceptionalism from your post-war memories growing up.
come back when you have learned something about comparative advantage and how that truly enriches all nations. Not the fool's gold of protectionism.
and you aren't talking about equilibriums - is the Republican's 25% tariffs on mex and can 'equilibrium?' 60% tariffs on china? You seem to think those will increase the wealth of the US. Will they?
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Sweat shops are much better than subsistence farming. Nike has done more to alleviate human suffering 99% of other companies.
Yes Apple puts nets around the buildings because so many people are killing themselves rather than stay at work because everyone is having a great time...
The company is actually Foxconn (not Apple) which employs around 900,000 people, sounds like a terrible and hostile workplace that has violated human rights. The suicides are tragic but incredibly small in relation to the number of employees. Not saying that makes it ok, but it should be said that the rate is lower than the reported rate of the general population. Foxconn manufactures products for many consumer electronics companies including foreign companies Xiaomi, Nintendo, and Sega.
First off, for anyone that doesn't know, tariffs are NOT a tax that you can charge to other countries. They're a tax on American companies that do business with other countries. I repeat: they are literally a tax on American companies, full stop.
Nope.
. A tariff is a tax imposed by one country on the goods and services imported from another country to influence it, raise revenues, or protect competitive advantages.
You have truly gone senile if you really don’t understand ant what point economic forces reach their equilibrium or breaking point. Come back when you have learned something about economics to be able to make quantitative arguments beyond some quaint notion of American exceptionalism from your post-war memories growing up.
come back when you have learned something about comparative advantage and how that truly enriches all nations. Not the fool's gold of protectionism.
and you aren't talking about equilibriums - is the Republican's 25% tariffs on mex and can 'equilibrium?' 60% tariffs on china? You seem to think those will increase the wealth of the US. Will they?
Do you understand gross national wealth? That will almost certainly increase assuming that consumers spend the money they choose not spend on Chinese goods here in America instead. The frictional costs like deadweight losses don’t exceed the tariff tax collected.
”Almost certainly” because there are no absolutes. GDP will decrease if tariffs are pushed beyond a limit. I don’t know if 60% is too high. It’s not as easy to answer that question as you are casually posing.
come back when you have learned something about comparative advantage and how that truly enriches all nations. Not the fool's gold of protectionism.
and you aren't talking about equilibriums - is the Republican's 25% tariffs on mex and can 'equilibrium?' 60% tariffs on china? You seem to think those will increase the wealth of the US. Will they?
Do you understand gross national wealth? That will almost certainly increase assuming that consumers spend the money they choose not spend on Chinese goods here in America instead. The frictional costs like deadweight losses don’t exceed the tariff tax collected.
”Almost certainly” because there are no absolutes. GDP will decrease if tariffs are pushed beyond a limit. I don’t know if 60% is too high. It’s not as easy to answer that question as you are casually posing.
Ok so you have no idea if the Republican tariffs will grow national wealth. But you are defending them full throatedly anyway.
and part 2 is putting Americans to work stitching running shoes and hammering pots into shape will not improve our national future.
Let me add another very simple example of adding tariffs hurts ALL runners Republicans cannot ignore, deny, fake, lie ect. RUNNING SHOES !!!!
Republicans will be happy to pay 60% more for a pair of Alpha Fly next % gen 4 for "only" $600 bucks to run a 24 flat Turkey Trot next Thanksgiving.
Ok with you Republicans? Lets see how you explain your way out of thjs. Let.me guess, " Nike is making huge profits and that's what Republicans stand for a free market".
Nike makes huge profits by using slave labor and exploiting the "brown people" you spend your life pretending you care about.
If you weren't a hypocrite and a fool you'd be mad at Nike not the guy trying to level the playing field. Nike's profit margin is like 40%. They make the absolute trash over at Apple look human.
Out of curiosity I took a look at the profit margins of Nike. Here's are the averages for the past 5 years:
Pretax Margin 12.4% Net Margin 10.7% Free CF Margin 9.8%
Nike is a bit above the average US corporation but they are nowhere close to 40%.
Do you understand gross national wealth? That will almost certainly increase assuming that consumers spend the money they choose not spend on Chinese goods here in America instead. The frictional costs like deadweight losses don’t exceed the tariff tax collected.
”Almost certainly” because there are no absolutes. GDP will decrease if tariffs are pushed beyond a limit. I don’t know if 60% is too high. It’s not as easy to answer that question as you are casually posing.
Ok so you have no idea if the Republican tariffs will grow national wealth. But you are defending them full throatedly anyway.
and part 2 is putting Americans to work stitching running shoes and hammering pots into shape will not improve our national future.
You are a senile fool who doesn’t even know what he doesn’t know. I don’t care about defending Trump or republicans or bashing them either.
Nike makes huge profits by using slave labor and exploiting the "brown people" you spend your life pretending you care about.
If you weren't a hypocrite and a fool you'd be mad at Nike not the guy trying to level the playing field. Nike's profit margin is like 40%. They make the absolute trash over at Apple look human.
Out of curiosity I took a look at the profit margins of Nike. Here's are the averages for the past 5 years:
Pretax Margin 12.4% Net Margin 10.7% Free CF Margin 9.8%
Nike is a bit above the average US corporation but they are nowhere close to 40%.
You're correct I googled their profit margin and the bolded percentage that popped up was Nike's gross profit rather than net profit.
As a woke corporation it is disgusting that they make any profit at all.
They should put their money where their mouth is and pay 100% of the profit to the government so the rich can start "paying their fare share".
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
and part 2 is putting Americans to work stitching running shoes and hammering pots into shape will not improve our national future.
Sucks for you. The sky is falling! Go cry in your soup about having to stitch shoes. It doesn’t seem like anything penetrates your Neanderthal skull no matter how many times you are told the same thing.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
