The Return of Protectionism

[LnGrrrR]

Not everyone is smart! GASP! The horror!

You mean all men arent created equally? No kid, they arent. Some are smarter, some are stronger, some are both, some are even better than that.

But if you take a population of 400 million, you can bet at least 10% of them are complete simpleton morons. Look around you, you dont have to be a calc major to notice this fact. It isnt lack of education or parenting, its most of the time lack of brain power from birth. Theyre not smart, they'll never be smart and no amount of tutoring/teaching/coddling will ever change this.

To be honest, I think I am being conservative with 10%.

I think that's the point Manny and Darrin are both saying. Yes, there are idiots, and they won't be able to keep pace. That doesn't mean we should try to protect their jobs at the expense of other things. It's their fault for not educating themself enough to get such a job.

And if they're too dumb to educate themselves to that degree, then why should America slow down for them? Survival of the fittest, and all that.

It's somewhat callous, but it does have a libertarian ring to it.

[MannyIsGod]

Also, what makes you so sure that manufacturingas a productive base is "outmoded", besides the flight of capital to cheaper conditions?

Do we really need more of a reason?

[DarkReign]

Until it happens we suffer. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. If this country does not have the will to take the steps to move forward then it will suffer.

Does making car tires equate to making a cotton gin? Not totally since car tires are still used a great deal and the cotton gin is gone but the fact of the matter is that progress will happen whether you want it to or not. Trying to hold it back is futile.

I think it sucks for those people in Georgia and I hope they're all able to land on their feet, but the idea that we try to protect every manufacturing job in this country is one that is simply unsustainable when people overseas are making tires for much cheaper.

You and WH both have said we just "let that happen in the name of progress" a couple of times in this thread. Its not that we're letting it happen its that we can't stop it from happening.

Well, I like your idea in theory, I really do.

But what you propose is a zero sum game. This country does not and will not ever educate its populace to the level your proposed Professional Economy would need to sustain itself.

More over, and this I ask honestly, what are the professionals selling that the world is buying, exactly?

What can lawyer sell?
What can a scientist sell that cant be pirated?
Same question for an engineer, sure you can design it and hold copyright, but what makes everyone think the world is just going to abide that US IP law?

This is what baffles me. Its what baffles me about people that think a society full of bankers/lawyers/scientists/engineers would even work. They dont sell the world will even buy.

And lets just say you had something of value, it would just be copied and reproduced by the rest of the world with no value given to you.

Like nuclear technology. That was one GIANT intellectual property the US had there....for about 5 years (iirc).

[DarrinS]

Didn't Intel and AMD create a load of manufacturing jobs that didn't exist prior to the invention of PC's?

That's an area where the US still dominates, right?

Who's to say a newer technology won't come along that will create even more jobs.

[MannyIsGod]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it seemed the point of the OP was that we could at least ease up somewhat on the manufacturers with a tariff. Of course, if we don't innovate, we'll stagnate. But tariffs would be a way to try to at least bleed out slowly.

The conversation has evolved to a much broader approach than the OP.

I get the point of the tariff I just don't believe it will be effective in securing any American jobs. If it was, I would probably be more in favor of it but I just think we're going to see the Chinese tire prices go up. That doesn't necessarily mean we'll buy American tires because Chinese and American tires aren't the only ones in the marke

[DarrinS]

I think that's the point Manny and Darrin are both saying. Yes, there are idiots, and they won't be able to keep pace. That doesn't mean we should try to protect their jobs at the expense of other things. It's their fault for not educating themself enough to get such a job.

And if they're too dumb to educate themselves to that degree, then why should America slow down for them? Survival of the fittest, and all that.

It's somewhat callous, but it does have a libertarian ring to it.

Things change and sometimes we are powerless to stop it. That is a huge point that Manny brought up. Robots do spot welding on assembly lines and replace people. Sucks for the guy that lost his job, but that's progress.

[Winehole23]

Who's to say a newer technology won't come along that will create even more jobs.

It could happen. And I could win the lottery tomorrow. (fingers crossed)

[DarrinS]

It could happen. And I could win the lottery tomorrow. (fingers crossed)

I have about the same odds of winning if I don't buy a ticket.

[Winehole23]

What can lawyer sell?

What can a scientist sell that cant be pirated?

Same question for an engineer, sure you can design it and hold copyright, but what makes everyone think the world is just going to abide that US IP law?

This.

[SpurNation]

Nah. we've basically become fat and/or lazy and spoiled. People in third world or communist countries don't know or have privelages to those concepts.

Also our government programs that were originally brought about to help the truly needy have turned into mainly providing for those who don't want to work.

As a consumer...would you buy product that cost more because of being made in the US compared to product that costs less made in China or elsewhere?

Myself...I just might if the amount of taxes I have to pay would leave more of my dollar in my pocket. But hey...it is becoming more and more relevant that we don't even have the option to buy American.

[MannyIsGod]

I think that's the point Manny and Darrin are both saying. Yes, there are idiots, and they won't be able to keep pace. That doesn't mean we should try to protect their jobs at the expense of other things. It's their fault for not educating themself enough to get such a job.

And if they're too dumb to educate themselves to that degree, then why should America slow down for them? Survival of the fittest, and all that.

It's somewhat callous, but it does have a libertarian ring to it.

Hmm, I'm not saying that exactly. I believe there is a ton of room for improvement in our countries education system and I beleive that our population can be much smarter as a whole. I see it in other countries and the population is irrelevant unless you believe that larger countries are somehow less intelligent?

I believe its up to our society as a whole to secure its future because you can't hold onto the past. We either will do that or we won't. I don't think that has anything to do with being callous because I believe that's the simple truth. Even if you wanted to sugar coat it, how do you go about doing so?

[Winehole23]

I believe its up to our society as a whole to secure its future because you can't hold onto the past. We either will do that or we won't. I don't think that has anything to do with being callous because I believe that's the simple truth. Even if you wanted to sugar coat it, how do you go about doing so?

This doesn't preclude protecting our asses for the foreseeable present IMO.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, I like your idea in theory, I really do.

But what you propose is a zero sum game. This country does not and will not ever educate its populace to the level your proposed Professional Economy would need to sustain itself.

More over, and this I ask honestly, what are the professionals selling that the world is buying, exactly?

What can lawyer sell?
What can a scientist sell that cant be pirated?
Same question for an engineer, sure you can design it and hold copyright, but what makes everyone think the world is just going to abide that US IP law?

This is what baffles me. Its what baffles me about people that think a society full of bankers/lawyers/scientists/engineers would even work. They dont sell the world will even buy.

And lets just say you had something of value, it would just be copied and reproduced by the rest of the world with no value given to you.

Like nuclear technology. That was one GIANT intellectual property the US had there....for about 5 years (iirc).

You can say that about everything. We invented the airplane and the car yet other people around the world make those as well, correct?

[DarrinS]

One out of every five persons in the world is Chinese.

This doesn't help either.

[MannyIsGod]

This doesn't preclude protecting our asses for the foreseeable present IMO.

No, it doesn't. But when is someone going to come along and actually make the changes for the long term? We've been trying to avoid the short term job losses for as long as I can remember without making an actual effort to prepare for the long term because we're so focused on the present.

Also, that's assuming we're capable of protecting ourselves. What good does this protection do us if we gain nothing from it?

[DarrinS]

We invented the airplane and the car yet other people around the world make those as well, correct?

I think that was his point.

And I believe Karl Benz invented the automobile. (Not trying to be a smartass)

[MannyIsGod]

DR, what do you believe should be done? I've seen you be critical of the elimination of manufacturing jobs in this country but I'm wondering what your view on saving them is?

[LnGrrrR]

Hmm, I'm not saying that exactly. I believe there is a ton of room for improvement in our countries education system and I beleive that our population can be much smarter as a whole. I see it in other countries and the population is irrelevant unless you believe that larger countries are somehow less intelligent?

I believe its up to our society as a whole to secure its future because you can't hold onto the past. We either will do that or we won't. I don't think that has anything to do with being callous because I believe that's the simple truth. Even if you wanted to sugar coat it, how do you go about doing so?

That's why I didn't mention the population in my quoted marks. I agree that higher education is necessary, but I think there will also be a need for American manufacturing. I like to have backups at home, in case we piss everyone off abroad.

[LnGrrrR]

You can say that about everything. We invented the airplane and the car yet other people around the world make those as well, correct?

Technically, we didn't invent the car... or at the least, we invented it the same time the Germans did. We did invent the assembly line though.

[LnGrrrR]

I think that was his point.

And I believe Karl Benz invented the automobile. (Not trying to be a smartass)

LOL I see you beat me to it.

[LnGrrrR]

To DarrinS and Manny;

Ok, I will give it to you that America needs to get smarter for future techie jobs.

With this as a given, two questions.

1) Do you think we should try to ease the bleeding using some form of protectionism or not?

2) If you answered yes for the first question, why not use tariffs as a means?

[SpurNation]

No, it doesn't. But when is someone going to come along and actually make the changes for the long term? We've been trying to avoid the short term job losses for as long as I can remember without making an actual effort to prepare for the long term because we're so focused on the present.

Also, that's assuming we're capable of protecting ourselves. What good does this protection do us if we gain nothing from it?

Our internal bickering almost makes this impossible to achieve.

[MannyIsGod]

To DarrinS and Manny;

Ok, I will give it to you that America needs to get smarter for future techie jobs.

With this as a given, two questions.

1) Do you think we should try to ease the bleeding using some form of protectionism or not?

2) If you answered yes for the first question, why not use tariffs as a means?

If protectionism actually works then maybe. Saving 2000 jobs is great if you can do it, but you have to also factor in the cost. If it costs 100,000 Americans extra money to spend on those items is that money that is no longer being spent on another companies items?

[DarrinS]

To DarrinS and Manny;

Ok, I will give it to you that America needs to get smarter for future techie jobs.

With this as a given, two questions.

1) Do you think we should try to ease the bleeding using some form of protectionism or not?

2) If you answered yes for the first question, why not use tariffs as a means?

I guess I would be for it if I actually thought it would help. With the economy the way it is, people are just getting more frugal.

[Winehole23]

No, it doesn't. But when is someone going to come along and actually make the changes for the long term? We've been trying to avoid the short term job losses for as long as I can remember without making an actual effort to prepare for the long term because we're so focused on the present.

True. Maybe the lack of a tangible political payoff in the present has something to do with it. Politicians no less than citizens have short attention spans. It's a shame. We're already paying for it.