If Economists Wrote the News on Protectionism
WASHINGTON POST (Reuters) - A U.S. trade panel gave final approval on Wednesday to
Read more here at the Enterprise Blog.
CARPE DIEM
Professor Mark J. Perry's Blog for Economics and Finance
Monday, January 04, 2010
Read more here at the Enterprise Blog.
About Me
- Name: Mark J. Perry
- Location: Washington, D.C., United States
Dr. Mark J. Perry is a professor of economics and finance in the School of Management at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan. Perry holds two graduate degrees in economics (M.A. and Ph.D.) from George Mason University near Washington, D.C. In addition, he holds an MBA degree in finance from the Curtis L. Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. In addition to a faculty appointment at the University of Michigan-Flint, Perry is also a visiting scholar at The American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.
Previous Posts
- There Are Innate Gender Differences in Abilities, ...
- Meet The Lipstick Entrepreneurs and "Femterprise"
- Sonic Boom: Dramatic Global Economic Growth
- The Nanny State and The Complacent Citizenry
- Canada, Not China, Is U.S.'s Largest Trade Partner
- Cracks Emerge in North Korea's Communist Regime; C...
- Markets in Everything: Cosmetic House Calls
- Random Roundup
- Humor: Why Men Shouldn't Write Advice Columns
- Green Technology is a Scarce Resource Hog; And Mov...
10 Comments:
So does this mean you price out non-economic freedoms(the ones you don't see in China) for economic freedom(smoother transactions)?
...whether they just want to spite the US, or have no problem peddling junk.
I support the tariff as a US citizen that wishes to make our Benedict Arnolds think twice.
See the earlier post on rare earths for a good reason for the tarrif. Otherwise the chinese will monopolize an area by driving the us competition out of business and then charge an arm and a leg for the product. So the posts here are a bit contradictory.
I don't think the problem is a Chinese monopoly. The problem is the west has banned businesses from mining for these metals. The same goes for steel. The US is whining to the WTO because China isn't exporting enough coke for the US to make steel.
For the most part, the wests material shortage problems are self imposed.
Ha ha, great job professor. It's amazing the lens through which journalists view the world. It's like learning history from Howard Zinn.
China doesn't have a monopoly on rare earths because of our policies. They have a natural monopoly because of the relative difficulty of separating rare earths from other minerals. In short, their supply is better quality, similar to light, sweet WTI. As RE prices go up, it will become cost effective to extract from other sources. But technologies dependent on RE will become much more expensive, e.g. Hybrid vehicles. The next gen of computer memory will also depend on RE metals. We are also dependent on Bolivian lithium.
Quote from sethstorm: "I support the tariff as a US citizen that wishes to make our Benedict Arnolds think twice."
How does making something that is already scarce and expensive even more scarce and more espensive through a government enforced embargo help anybody (other than the politically connected cronies of the government)?
So your logic is that the only way industries in the US can survive is to have all of our manufacturing materials substantially more expensive than those materials used by the rest of the world.
I support the tariff because all the protectionist policies China imposes on the US.
Whether its the much higher tariffs it places on US imports or its foreign exchange policy which keeps its currency artificially low to maintain an export advantage, China engages in rampant protectionism against the United States.
This creates unsustainable dynamics such as China produces to feed our consumption. It then takes the money it makes from its production and lends it back to us so we can consume some more.
"I support the tariff as a US citizen that wishes to make our Benedict Arnolds think twice"...
So this is your declaration sethstorm that your grip on basic economics is nil, eh?
Funny how your nickers are in a twist about the supposed lack of freedoms of the Chinese but you seemingly ignore the coming American Enslavement via Taxation...
Quote from Machiavelli999: "China engages in rampant protectionism against the United States."
The monsters! They sell us stuff we want really cheap.
"The monsters! They sell us stuff we want really cheap."
No, what I meant is that they put high tariffs on goods that US manufactures and tries to export to China. Also, its cheap imports are cheap because it doesn't let its currency appreciate. Now you might think what's wrong with that. And I agree at first there is nothing wrong with a country that wants to be our virtual slaves, voluntarily taking less dollars for its goods.
The problem is this sets up large account deficits that tend to self-correct rapidly and cause recessions.
Quote from Machiavelli999: "The problem is this sets up large account deficits that tend to self-correct rapidly and cause recessions."
The only problem with this has been that China has been spending their dollars on US treasury bonds to support a bloated US government, but that's hardly China's fault. They were just looking for the best return on their investment of dollars. The real problem is the deficit spending and bloated US government. Had the US government not been deficit spending, then those dollars going to China would have been spent on something more worthwhile than bureaucracy.
Post a Comment
<< Home