The British conservativemagize the ECONOMIST panned Obama’s Chinese tariff and they seemed to have a good point.  The US will simply import them from the Indians or Brazilians while irritating the Chinese and threatening a trade war.

I wonder if Obama knows what he is doing, or is capable of doing it.  Eveery since Rumsfield fired General Shimsinki for stating that 4 hundred thousand troops would be necessary to occupy Iraq, and he sent Jerry Bremer there to fire the Iraq army (he also wnted to fire the police)  I have the distinct feeling that we are being ruled by political dingdongs.  Maybe it is the obsolete political system itself that is to blame.

Inherit- a competent impartial economist?  that’s what I like about you, Imherit, a million laughs. That and you’re such a good speler.

On the other hand using taxes and tax incentives to keep industry in the US sounds like a great idea.  I don’t know much about economics but this seems like it should be a major part of a progressive program.

Bushfatigue, since 1978 the unofficial policy of the Repubican Party for their United States uses Indonesia as their model, including a military dictator. It is the unofficial policies which are important, official policies are for PR, window dressing. With this as their goal, it necessitates elimination of the middle class which they are doing as you so well noted.

China is also dumping solar panels on the US, in an effort to corner a major emerging market, and destroy our domestic production.  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/business/energy-environment/25solar.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=solar panel&st=cse.  And I expect the usual free market fundamentalists will resist any reaction, as we stupidly sit by, and watch another promising source of US jobs disappear.
The Right would rather destroy labor as a political force, and drive us towards an ever more dangerous distortion of income distribution in this country, than enforce fair trade laws, and save jobs.

Inherit The Wind, September 18 at 7:04 am said:

“OTOH, we have to put tremendous tax burdens on companies who export their manufacturing base, and give tax INCENTIVES to companies who keep or start manufacturing here.  USE THOSE KEYNESIAN TOOLS!  You know, the ones the Rethuglicans and “fresh-water economists” insist don’t work! “

I don’ think you are advocating Keynesian Economics - “Keynesian economics advocates a mixed economy—predominantly private sector, but with a large role of government and public sector—and served as the economic model during the latter part of the Great Depression, World War II, and the post-war Golden Age of Capitalism, 1945–1970, though it lost some influence following the stagflation of the 1970s. As a middle way between laissez-faire capitalism and socialism, it has been and continues to be attacked from both the right and the left.” See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics .

I think you are actually advocating Mercanitlism see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism .

FT:

You don’t need a radical “economist” (translation: dogmatic ideologue with whom the rationally-challenged FT agrees).  You need a competent impartial economist.

There is no painless way to extract ourselves from this.  Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush all put the Chinese sword at our throats, and anything we do, or don’t do, will be economically bloody.

But we have to start by banning any Chinese made goods shown to be deliberately tampered with: Toothpaste, Thomas the Tank Engine Toys, now a certain brand of tires. The Chinese have shown they are singularly unwilling to a) accept blame for such tampered products b) recall them, c) put in place tools to prevent a recurrence.

But they our markets just as much as we need them.

OTOH, we have to put tremendous tax burdens on companies who export their manufacturing base, and give tax INCENTIVES to companies who keep or start manufacturing here.  USE THOSE KEYNESIAN TOOLS!  You know, the ones the Rethuglicans and “fresh-water economists” insist don’t work!

NABNYC, September 17 at 7:18 pm said

“We should rescind all trade agreements and start over.  All decisions should be based solely on the question of what is in the best interests of the American working people.  Most of the trade agreements have been dictated by, and are for the benefit of, corporations.  And harm working people.  So let’s start over.

We’ll start with this:  all clothing will be made inside the U.S.  One T-Shirt may cost $30, so people will lose the ability to buy five T-shirts from China.  But the benefit to our country will be that people can be employed making clothes and earn a decent living.  The same is true for all other products.

As long as third world countries have such cheap wages, it is not possible for U.S. businesses to “compete” in terms of product price for sales inside the U.S.  And therefore, imports should be banned.”

Could I suggest that your read a basic economics text book before advocating such policies. I’d suggest the original
“An Inquiry into the nature and causes of the Wealth of Nations” by Adam Smith that you can find for free at http://www.adamsmith.org/smith/won-intro.htm .

Just by way of simple illustration, the USA imports 60% of its oil. If you were to ban imports, as you suggest, and rely on your domestic production the oil price would be very much higher for you - probably c.$300. What would that do to a country that is so reliant on the car?

Like it or not we are all interdependent in this world. You may no longer export tyres, but you do export Microsoft Windows, Apple Ipods, Hollywood films and make a lot of money from financing the world economy through your banks (even allowing for recent hiccups) plus dominating many other areas of the world economy such as Coca Cola and marketing.

Trade is not a zero sum game. Restricting it just makes everyone poorer including both Americans and Chinese. Just investigate the disasterous effects of protectionism during the Great Depression.

We should rescind all trade agreements and start over.  All decisions should be based solely on the question of what is in the best interests of the American working people.  Most of the trade agreements have been dictated by, and are for the benefit of, corporations.  And harm working people.  So let’s start over.

We’ll start with this:  all clothing will be made inside the U.S.  One T-Shirt may cost $30, so people will lose the ability to buy five T-shirts from China.  But the benefit to our country will be that people can be employed making clothes and earn a decent living.  The same is true for all other products.

As long as third world countries have such cheap wages, it is not possible for U.S. businesses to “compete” in terms of product price for sales inside the U.S.  And therefore, imports should be banned.

We are told that trade agreement “help” “our” corporations get access to Chinese markets.  But it doesn’t help me—it only helps the shareholders and CEOs.  If any business wants to compete in China, they should move there and set up a business there, live according to Chinese laws.  But American businesses should make products for sale inside the U.S.  Only. 

“Our” corporations wouldn’t be as rich?  Good.  Look what their wealth has done.  They’ve corrupted our government, bought every politician, controlled the country, and directed us into war after war in their quest for cheap resources and captive markets.

All food production should be local too.  Let Chile and Mexico grow food for their own people, not for cheap export to the U.S.  This will create more farm jobs inside the U.S. and allow us to control the sanitation, prohibit pesticides, protect our own consumers.  It also would be better for the world to grow and eat locally. 

As far as what China may do, or how they can employ their own people:  they can do the same.  Make their own shoes, make their own cars, make tires for domestic sales, but stay out of my country.  Not because I don’t like the Chinese, but because their country is being used as slave labor to further enrich the few, their environment is being devastated, and there is no benefit in continuing this “free trade” system.  It’s a disaster.

I just finished rereading “Travels with Charlie,” by John Steinbeck.  When he drives through Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and Illinois he comments repeatedly on the congestion and activity around the industrial heartland of America.

Who would have dreamed that we would, 50 years later, know that part of the country as the “Rust Belt” and that all our manufacturing base would be gone?  It happened because we had a string of traitorous leaders, beginning with Ronald Reagan, to whom it meant more to break unions than it did to keep our country strong.  Leaders who would rather see our products manufactured using slave labor in a communist country just so they could break unions and avoid raising wages, paying for health care, and providing pensions.

I say more power to Obama and that we should defy the WTO and look out for the United States instead of Wall Street for a change.

I say this owning two cars which have cheap Chinese tires on them, and yes, I did save $100 or so on each one of those cars’ tires.  I would gladly pay a bit more if it means our country’s workers are a little better off.

It’s a very complicated problem that has to be clarified by radical economists before all the pros and cons are understood.  In general, the plutocracy, under both the Dems and Gops, have stripped tariffs to destroy US unions and decrease the wages of industrial labor.

but how this is to be corrected is not yet worked out.  If, for example, Chinese tires are replaced and produced by other foreign producers, nothing is gained, and at the price of irritating the Chinese.  Or this could be a bargaining chip.  Or it could be perfectly justified or justified on balance.  Or it could be a terrible idea.  I don’t know.  radical economists who do should say.  Orthidox econimists should be ignored.

I notice in this Union versus China narrative, Walmart is not even mentioned.