JSO is wrong? How could that be?

[Ibanez]

Its very easy to find articles by people contending that Trump's tariff ideas are bad. A few:



http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall ... 2669d77f6b

Here's a historical fact that Donald Trump, and many voters attracted to him, may not know: The last American president who was a trade protectionist was Republican Herbert Hoover.

Does Trump aspire to be a 21st century Hoover with a modernized platform of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff that helped send the U.S. and world economy into a decade-long depression and a collapse of the banking system?.

Oh man you've lost it. Hoover was in office 8 months before the markets crashed. Smoot-Hawley, while a failure, was a response to a problem he had no control over.


People gotta give Hoover some respect, the man was intelligent and did great things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

You refuse to believe the overwhelming number of scientists, and their writings, that support the idea of Global Warming. Yet you believe in a bunch of economists that predict the world's economy will crash because of a few tariffs?



Hey, I could make your head spin with details about trade and tariffs, and some inside stories about how things are done out of sight behind the curtain, but you wouldn't listen anyway.

So we'll try a different look.

When you look at the current economy, we have plenty of good paying jobs and no one is in debt, right? Full employment...full speed ahead.

No?

Wonder why?

Tell you what...since you believe so much in the intelligence of the people who wrote the stuff in your links, can you find me ONE article that has a proven solution to improving our economy?

Just one.

I'll wait.

And to provide some past history of an accurate record of forecasting, to lend credence to their current predictions, I'll let you go back several decades so you can dig up something from those sources, concrete ideas, that actually provided answers to getting Americans back to work. After all, the geniuses you cite, with all of the foresight, should have been able to solve our economic woes over the decades, and if we had listened to their forecasts, we'd have full employment and no poverty, right?

Ball is in your court, JSO. Should be an easy assignment. Let me know what you find.

Economists are pretty smart Cluck. They've predicted 18 of the last 12 recessions.

Here's a nice historical perspective on the goods and bads of free trade, currency manipulation, deregulation, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/04/opini ... .html?_r=0

[Ivytalk]

Economists are pretty smart Cluck. They've predicted 18 of the last 12 recessions.

Here's a nice historical perspective on the goods and bads of free trade, currency manipulation, deregulation, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/04/opini ... .html?_r=0

That could have been written by Thurston Klam III.

[kalm]

Here's a nice historical perspective on the goods and bads of free trade, currency manipulation, deregulation, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/04/opini ... .html?_r=0

That could have been written by Thurston Klam III.

[JohnStOnge]

Here's a nice historical perspective on the goods and bads of free trade, currency manipulation, deregulation, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/04/opini ... .html?_r=0

I am not saying that the author is necessarily wrong but I do think I can say that his views are not in the mainstream of economists. I say that because of the bio at the bottom. You know, the thing with the book about how the mainstream economists got it wrong.

Also, there's more to it than just jobs. There is cost to consumers. If your wages are 10% higher because of tariffs but the cost of living is 20% higher because of tariffs you're worse off. Or if you are someone who has a job that is not directly impacted by foreign trade...say you're a waiter or something...and the cost of living is 20% higher because of tariffs. And I don't think there is any question that the cost of living is lower in the United States than it would be if we had more protectionist policies that forced all the stuff we buy to be produced here.

I'm curious. If you guys could pick a year to go back to where you think things were great because most manufactured items people in the US bought were made in the US, which year would it be?

[YoUDeeMan]

Here's a nice historical perspective on the goods and bads of free trade, currency manipulation, deregulation, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/04/opini ... .html?_r=0

I am not saying that the author is necessarily wrong but I do think I can say that his views are not in the mainstream of economists. I say that because of the bio at the bottom. You know, the thing with the book about how the mainstream economists got it wrong.

Also, there's more to it than just jobs. There is cost to consumers. If your wages are 10% higher because of tariffs but the cost of living is 20% higher because of tariffs you're worse off. Or if you are someone who has a job that is not directly impacted by foreign trade...say you're a waiter or something...and the cost of living is 20% higher because of tariffs. And I don't think there is any question that the cost of living is lower in the United States than it would be if we had more protectionist policies that forced all the stuff we buy to be produced here.

I'm curious. If you guys could pick a year to go back to where you think things were great because most manufactured items people in the US bought were made in the US, which year would it be?

JSO...you didn't turn in your assignment. JUST. ONE. ARTICLE. THAT. SOLVES. OUR. ECONOMIC. PROBLEMS.

Just one.

If you do not turn in your homework, we will assume that you no longer believe in the accuracy of your linked sources...and that will pretty much eliminate any credibility in those fear based predictions where Trump destroys the planet's economy.

Oh, to answer your question...if you have a job that you didn't have, thus improving your income, and you don't purchase crap you don't need (at any price), then you will be better off. MUCH better off. <--- Surely you understand that, right?

[kalm]

I am not saying that the author is necessarily wrong but I do think I can say that his views are not in the mainstream of economists. I say that because of the bio at the bottom. You know, the thing with the book about how the mainstream economists got it wrong.

Also, there's more to it than just jobs. There is cost to consumers. If your wages are 10% higher because of tariffs but the cost of living is 20% higher because of tariffs you're worse off. Or if you are someone who has a job that is not directly impacted by foreign trade...say you're a waiter or something...and the cost of living is 20% higher because of tariffs. And I don't think there is any question that the cost of living is lower in the United States than it would be if we had more protectionist policies that forced all the stuff we buy to be produced here.

I'm curious. If you guys could pick a year to go back to where you think things were great because most manufactured items people in the US bought were made in the US, which year would it be?

JSO...you didn't turn in your assignment. JUST. ONE. ARTICLE. THAT. SOLVES. OUR. ECONOMIC. PROBLEMS.

Just one.

If you do not turn in your homework, we will assume that you no longer believe in the accuracy of your linked sources...and that will pretty much eliminate any credibility in those fear based predictions where Trump destroys the planet's economy.

Oh, to answer your question...if you have a job that you didn't have, thus improving your income, and you don't purchase crap you don't need (at any price), then you will be better off. MUCH better off. <--- Surely you understand that, right?

People make less but expect the same if not more. It's what our economy is based on now which is what JSO fails to understand.

[JohnStOnge]

JSO...you didn't turn in your assignment. JUST. ONE. ARTICLE. THAT. SOLVES. OUR. ECONOMIC. PROBLEMS.

I did not see that "assignment" before but I would not expect to find an article that proposes solutions to all economic problems. However, and you know this is not the first time I've said this, I don't think our economic problems are as bad as people perceive them to be to begin with. Specifically, as you know, I have repeatedly posted estimates on historical inflation adjusted income data while making the argument that the typical American now is materially better off than the typical American was back during what people perceive as the golden years such as the 1950s through mid 1970s. I think the typical American is materially better off now than the typical American was back when a lot more of what we consume was manufactured in the United States than is now.

More later because I have to go now. But I know you know that I've always said that and said it a number of times long before Donald Trump decided to run for President. Now he's appealing to the mythology I was talking about. Acting as though there was this golden time when everything was manufactured in the United States and people were much better off than they are now. The problem with that assertion is that, even with the decline of recent years, the overwhelming majority of the population distribution is better materially better off now than it was back during those years perceived as so golden. It's demagoguery appealing to a popular misconception.

[kalm]

JSO...you didn't turn in your assignment. JUST. ONE. ARTICLE. THAT. SOLVES. OUR. ECONOMIC. PROBLEMS.

I did not see that "assignment" before but I would not expect to find an article that proposes solutions to all economic problems. However, and you know this is not the first time I've said this, I don't think our economic problems are as bad as people perceive them to be to begin with. Specifically, as you know, I have repeatedly posted estimates on historical inflation adjusted income data while making the argument that the typical American now is materially better off than the typical American was back during what people perceive as the golden years such as the 1950s through mid 1970s. I think the typical American is materially better off now than the typical American was back when a lot more of what we consume was manufactured in the United States than is now.

More later because I have to go now. But I know you know that I've always said that and said it a number of times long before Donald Trump decided to run for President. Now he's appealing to the mythology I was talking about. Acting as though there was this golden time when everything was manufactured in the United States and people were much better off than they are now. The problem with that assertion is that, even with the decline of recent years, the overwhelming majority of the population distribution is better materially better off now than it was back during those years perceived as so golden. It's demagoguery appealing to a popular misconception.

The typical American these days has to go into more debt for a college degree and risks bankruptcy over medical bills. We've financed the standard of living for the poor with government and personal debt.

[GannonFan]

JSO...you didn't turn in your assignment. JUST. ONE. ARTICLE. THAT. SOLVES. OUR. ECONOMIC. PROBLEMS.

More later because I have to go now. But I know you know that I've always said that and said it a number of times long before Donald Trump decided to run for President. Now he's appealing to the mythology I was talking about. Acting as though there was this golden time when everything was manufactured in the United States and people were much better off than they are now. The problem with that assertion is that, even with the decline of recent years, the overwhelming majority of the population distribution is better materially better off now than it was back during those years perceived as so golden. It's demagoguery appealing to a popular misconception.

Hey, when did JSO channel his inner-Kalm, and why doesn't Kalm have Trump bumper stickers on all his vehicles?

[JohnStOnge]

The typical American these days has to go into more debt for a college degree and risks bankruptcy over medical bills. We've financed the standard of living for the poor with government and personal debt.

We've been through this before but, while there is more debt, there is more stuff. The typical American lives in a much nicer house nowadays than they did during the 1950s through 1970s. They have a lot more stuff in that house. They have personal computers and cell phones. They are more likely to have air conditioning. On and on.

I grew up in a family headed by someone with one of those vaunted American jobs back then. My Dad worked most of his life in an petrochemical refinery making a very good wage by the standards of a the day. But we lived as an 8 person family in a three bedroom house. I went to school with hand me down clothes. Patches on the knees of my pants. Many times we ate stuff like canned tuna mixed with macaroni and cheese or cream of mushroom soup over toast. We had a black and white TV and access to four channels. And every time we changed the channel somebody had to go outside and turn the antenna. We never had a new car. Always used. So on and so forth.

It's like I've written before: If most people who lament the days gone by and how wonderful a middle class life was back then actually had to live one like it actually was they'd think they'd been sent to Siberia. It's a total mythology.