Help me get on "The Apprentice"

[KenC]

Ken, I don't devalue your economic views, but I'm a huge fan of Laissez-faire politics. We should just leave the economy alone. How can we properly tune a machine as large or as complex as the economy. It is not an engine for god sakes. Things such as price floors only create surpluses, just an example of intervention. As for cotton subsidies.....America must protect its production. Maybe other nations need to step up to be competitive, like follow suit, or increase efficency. I mean, we could say the same thing about Asia taking technological jobs, or Mexico stealing electronic factories and car production.......free market isn't at work today, but it should be.

Your ideas seem to condtradict eachother a bit. You stated that 'America must protect its production.' However, protecting production by any means, especially federal subsidies directly opposes international market liberalism. If truely free-trade is allowed to play through, ultimately every nation-state would 'specialize' in producing products that it can efficiently. If one truely believes in the 'free-market' or 'laissez-faire', then they would be completey opposed to any form of government intervention in the market (read: tariffs, subsidies, etc.). Isn't it ultimately the consumer who is at the greatest disadvantage when it comes to subsidies and tariffs?

[rwh11385]

Ah, the great problem of what a free-market fan gets into when there is already policy, and the rest of the world is pro intervention.

If the entire world could go free market, that'd be great....but not going to happen..... (If we were, each nation would specialize and we would rely on trade for the things we need. However, wars and all that stress would get in the way. It is a good compromise to have each nation somewhat self-reliant, but focusing on the industry they are most efficent at)

If one truely believes in the 'free-market' or 'laissez-faire', then they would be completey opposed to any form of government intervention in the market (read: tariffs, subsidies, etc.). Isn't it ultimately the consumer who is at the greatest disadvantage when it comes to subsidies and tariffs?

I have to disagree with both statements, in some respect. In our circumstances, we are not able to change the world to the way we would desire. We must make the best of it. I.e. reduce restrictions on business as Reagan did in the 80s. With the rest of the world using intervention, we must remain competition with them, and therefore follow suit. It's not good in my eyes, but there's little way around it.

As far as consumer goes, maybe a lil. When we subsidize goods, the producers can make a greater profit, and offer lower prices in the domestic market as the amount of business increases. They can also invest more into themselves, and increase efficency, reducing prices. When we had tariffs, we increase the prices of foreign goods. This would hurt us on products we rely on from other nations. However, it protects our domestic production and in turn protects our jobs. But that helps the consumer.

p.s. Ken, thanks for participating in intelligent debate, instead of just cussing me out or having us call each other idiots. :)

[KenC]

Part of your argument rests on the assumption that the international industries in the US desire a free-market. However, emperical evidence illustrates that the opposite is true. For example, I'm sure that you're familiar with steel tariffs of 2002 (a tariff of over 30% was imposed on any foreign produced steel); President Bush recently was forced to repeal them by the WTO on the grounds that they violated free-market principles. The autoproducers in Detroit were staunchly opposed to the tariffs because their cost of production went up. The steel industry, as well as the steel-workers unions, were in favor of them because they increased profit-margins. A truely free market will lead to the demise of the industrial worker in the US.

... to be continued. I've gotta run to BrewFest! :D

[rwh11385]

Nah, rather.....it would be ideal if the world was free market. But the sad part is some industry would not fair as well. The steel industry, my spidy sense is telling me, is not naturally competition with the world. Hence, we need to put up tariffs. If they weren't in existence, our industry would be hurt, which would not be good. Obviously. But we are stubborn and instead of moving resources from an industry, we attempt to protect it. (Like how we still have automakers, even if our product sucks......:roll: )

What is good intervention for one industry is shitzfil for the other. If tariffs were placed on other nation's cotton, so our domestic produces can raise prices.....the clothing industry locally would suffer as well. That is where nature is beauty. Without intervention, clashes such as these would not occur.

WTO and treaties about tariffs are set up to try to limit too many shenanigans. We can't quite raise tariffs to help ourselves, and not expect other nations would do the same.....which would be bad.

Looking forward to more economic speak. Have fun @ Brewfest.

[SickE30]

Wow, two firsts in one day. Oomph and I agreed, and I genuinely laughed @ something Charlie said. This day has been a definite accomplishment.

[M42Technik]

You know that over 250,000 people tried to get on that show, the most in the history of television, right?

Trump said it himself on "The Daily Show".

Good luck.

[AndreNY]

rwh11385: ONCE AGAIN how can you TALK about socialism when you never lived in a socialist country?. what you wrote about socialism doesn't make sense at all, it is obvious that you are mixing Socialism with communism and that is not the same my friend.

[rwh11385]

rwh11385: ONCE AGAIN how can you TALK about socialism when you never lived in a socialist country?. what you wrote about socialism doesn't make sense at all, it is obvious that you are mixing Socialism with communism and that is not the same my friend.

ever wonder what communism uses for its economic system? :roll: Does Sweden or somewhere use socialism somewhat....or another one of those nations. Bascially people talk about how all your medical bills are paid for or what not, at least this is what I hear. Only they take a shitload of your money. I'd rather pay for my own medical care than everyone pay for everyone else's. Not to sound selfish, but imagine if you keep yourself in good health with diet/exercise, and you have to pay with taxes for all the sick smokers out there. Pretty shitty eh? That is socialist and that is crap. Fork over for your own bills.

have you ever experienced capitalism? It's great, I really recommend it. (;))