Tariffs and You (Mongoose edition)

[Arkathan]

They could not, that is the mountain. Plenty of actual hard data, if someone can't accept that, not my problem. There is no equal to knowledge, it takes work.

We know that they could and can survive because so many did and have. Example: While they have mostly returned to sanity now, we had a decade where corporate meritocracy was considered racist. Opinions were rated by intersectionality of the person pushing the idea. Companies survived that mismanagement. Intermittent bad management does not have to be fatal. Companies like Disney, that are lagging in that area, may not survive much longer, because you are right in the assertion that knowledge, work, talent and skill are better than immutable attributes and silly mass psychoses.

 

[actionman]

It isn't what the colleges told you it was either.

Yeah, colleges. I remember one econ class in which the instructor just read the slides so she could leave as soon as possible to get back to her real job as a fiduciary. I asked her about how the US could bring manufacturing back, and she assured me it was impossible. As she answered, I got the creeping feeling that it was an article of faith for her.



Nah, couldn't be. Internets is full of crap, as usual.

unions negotiated $45K salaries in early 1980's dollars for janitors. The skilled workers got proportionally more. Considering that $45k was management wages for most of America then, that is a lot of excess overhead to absorb, especially when slave wages are available elsewhere.

And let me tell you, quality sure as hell wasn't job one. Union wages and pensions certainly didn't motivate business to stay in the US. And the H1B flap, it has nothing to do with American workers being unable to do the work, and everything to do with importing cheap docile foreign labor. That's why businesses fired American IT professionals after forcing them to train their foreign replacements. If the current US administration put tariffs on imported labor, it would stop overnight.

Anyway,

It is comparative advantage, labor costs are sort of fixed for one reason or another (edit: such as moving to a cheaper labor market, has to be weighed against transportation costs, setting up a new facility, etc..).

Of course, I'm sure any business would do a cost benefit analysis before embarking on such a major undertaking as moving or setting up production (in a Traveller context) on a particular world, and if such a move weren't sufficiently profitable the business wouldn't do it.

 

[dragon3r]

We know that they could

You don't know, because they didn't survive. Too much of that is all fantasy though.

 

[dragon3r]

Of course, I'm sure any business would do a cost benefit analysis before embarking on such a major undertaking as moving or setting up production (in a Traveller context) on a particular world, and if such a move weren't sufficiently profitable the business wouldn't do it.

So labor is just another cost.

 

[actionman]

So labor is just another cost.

Is labor not a cost?

 

[dragon3r]

Okay ... lol

 

[actionman]

Okay ... lol

I've noticed you do that. You'll give an answer that is partially related to the discussion and partially not, then insinuate that someone is wrong or stupid without explanation, despite your knowledge on the subject. If that makes you feel superior, that's okay, no one's perfect.

 

[Arkathan]

You don't know, because they didn't survive. Too much of that is all fantasy though.

We DO know, because companies have survived to change their policies back to being merit based.
We also know one big company has been mismanaged nearly to death, and continues to double down on Dumb. They won't survive with that bad management attitude, but COULD recover if they listened to the 80% instead of a fraction of the 20%.
Denying these facts is just following propaganda.

 

[dragon3r]

I've noticed you do that.

Why make it personal? All the statements I have made I have backed up with actual sources. As far as giving a big lecture on economics, I don't think anyone wants that, I certainly don't want to give it. Nor do I think I am capable of it. Plus arguing beliefs is pretty futile. Often the thing about labor, or even products is wrong; take GM for example, largest auto manufacturer until 2008, they got in trouble not because of labor, or products, except the decisions they made were for things outside their core competency, such as credit lending, or owning direct TV. If labor was that important, the Chinese wouldn't be opening factories here: https://nanshanusa.com/ right down the road from Arconic (used to be Alcoa, before the company was bought and split in half by a private equity firm), using the exact same labor force, Arconic is dying.

Believe what you want, the facts simply point to something else.

 

[dragon3r]

They won't survive with that bad management ...

Now you are saying the same thing I said, companies survive or fail due to their management and the decisions they make. All this discussion is circular. Bringing it back to point zero, tariffs aren't going to solve that problem.

 

[Arkathan]

I said they can survive intermittent lapses, IF they return to sanity in time.
I specifically pointed out that I agreed with you on several points, but not every point.

 

[dragon3r]

I'm just staying focused on tariffs, or at least trying to, and not get sidetracked.

 

[Condottiere]

1. It usually comes down to where the demand is, and who has the supply.

2. In what form the demand takes, as well as the supply.

3. In an interstellar economy, planetary governments may decide as to which specific commodities and goods they are willing to permit to import.

4. They may insist that individual components can be imported, but the finished product must be assembled locally.

5. Any component that could be manufactured locally, must be.

 

[dragon3r]

One has to distinguish between positive, and normative statements.

Economists engage in two distinct, but related activities. They conduct research on economic issues, e.g. to determine cause and effect. For example, why did unemployment increase rapidly in 2008 and 2009? Economists also make policy recommendations. For example, what should the federal government do in response to the increase in unemployment?


The first type of activity is economic science, based on theories and evidence, where researchers attempt to determine how the world (or at least the economy) works. This is called positive reasoning, and the conclusions are called positive statements. A relevant conclusion might be that because the level of employment is based on production in the economy (i.e. GDP), the increase in unemployment was because of the slowdown in GDP over that time period. This slowdown has been called the Great Recession.


The second type of activity is more subjective, and is inevitably based on the researcher’s values. This is called normative reasoning, and the conclusions are called normative statements. A policy recommendation could be that since unemployed workers are not earning income, government should try to stimulate demand in the economy, so unemployed workers could get back to work. A different policy recommendation could be that stimulating demand could involve running a larger federal budget deficit, which future generations would have to pay back through higher taxes, so the government shouldn’t try to stimulate demand. Which of these recommendations is the right one? That depends on your subjective values.

Positive and Normative Statements | Macroeconomics

courses.lumenlearning.com

 

[Arkathan]

That last part would tend to show that the economists have as much of a chance of getting it right as a coin does.
I'll choose stimulating jobs without increasing the deficit.

 

[dragon3r]

As one can tell from my posts here, I prefer positive statements, normative, beliefs, are weak. My econ prof criticized my papers for looking like engineering docs, something also said about my books. Being on the production side in business, hard data is key, my ideal cold steel perfection.

 

[Sigtrygg]

1. It usually comes down to where the demand is, and who has the supply.

and what does it cost

2. In what form the demand takes, as well as the supply.

and the cost

3. In an interstellar economy, planetary governments may decide as to which specific commodities and goods they are willing to permit to import.

not and be part of the Imperium they can't

4. They may insist that individual components can be imported, but the finished product must be assembled locally.

knock knock, who's there, Imperial navy, you are interdicted until further notice.

5. Any component that could be manufactured locally, must be.

which is against the rules of being an Imperial member world, and can only be enforced with tariffs or other such blunt instrument of economics.
Smuggling will be prolific.

 

[Sigtrygg]

How come economists get it wrong all the time?

 

[Condottiere]

Even with hindsight, it's best guess what happened.

And, trade restrictions can take many forms, including government sponsored consumer boycotts.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Which would once again result in interdiction.