To be clear, the current tariff execution is reckless and poorly planned. But I hear a lot of total tariff opposition from the same people who demand we continue to escalate with China over control of Taiwan, up to a potential hot war.

So what’s the plan? Western economies were brought to their knees during just a momentary interruption in shipping during the pandemic. How do you wage a war with a country that does all of your manufacturing? China could defeat most western countries without firing a single shot, just by cutting off their access to Chinese exports.

If you don’t support tariffs to bring back manufacturing jobs domestically, how do you think we could make it through a war with our manufacturing partners? I can’t reconcile the two ideas, and I don’t understand how some of y’all are.

  • SouthFresh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Manufacturing is costly in the United States because enforced minimum wages, enforced safety protocols (enshrined in the blood of lost workers), and regulations brought about as a reaction to violations of those safety protocols by management of the local companies have necessarily increased the cost of manufacturing locally.

    In a totally free market, the owners of the businesses would be “free” to abuse their workers how they see fit. Thankfully, most of the people in the U.S. have recognized that safety of workers is an important factor. The ability to enforce safety is likewise necessary when some company managers/executives have shown disdain for safety routinely.

    The infrastructure required to implement the wages and safety has increased the cost to the companies in question. No business will last very long if increased costs aren’t passed on to their customers in some way. This leads to manufacturers having to face the choice of increasing the passed on cost of working within the U.S.'s regulations and requirements, or moving their manufacturing process to countries with lower standards of wages and regulation. Most companies have chosen the latter. If the purpose of owning and running a business is to increase the profit it makes, then additional costs to the business are necessarily not absorbed by the company and allowed to eat into profit

    A tariff is likewise only seen as a regulation for which the cost will be passed on to the consumer by increasing the retail price of a product, and is typically seen as a regressive action.

    If one wants to increase manufacturing in the U.S., one has to provide incentives for manufacturers to do so. margin, they are simply built into the final price of the service/product provided by the business. These incentives could take many forms, from tax breaks in some ways, to more favorable interest rates for specific loans (given criteria relevant to the specific market).

      • mmddmm@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I see. So you are ready to try the “increase all costs” route now…

      • SouthFresh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Tariffs aren’t the way either.

        The problem with incentives isn’t that they “can’t” work, it’s that they need to be at a level that makes using foreign manufacturing unattractive.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          16 hours ago

          The problem is, they will leave the moment you cut off the incentive. So it becomes a permanent subsidy.

          • SouthFresh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 hours ago

            I don’t disagree with that, but it assumes the incentives are intended to expire. If the aim is to bring manufacturing back to the U.S., then one has to ensure manufacturing in the U.S. is profitable.

            Tariffs do nothing for that.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              16 hours ago

              That’s not correct. Almost every single manufacturing industry that was outsourced was plenty profitable here in the states. They were outsourced because it was more profitable to do it overseas. It’s a race to the bottom.

              I agree tariffs aren’t the right move. Personally, I would support nationalization and import bans on certain industries.

              • SouthFresh@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                14 hours ago

                I think you missed where we’re in agreement about it being more profitable outside of the country. I was only suggesting that a better way to combat that would be incentives that are designed to maintain a status where the process of manufacturing remains profitable within the U.S.

                • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  14 hours ago

                  I didn’t miss anything. I just don’t think any domestic industry required for economic & national security should hinge on something as precarious as incentivizing. If they’re that critical, it needs to be nationalized, with strict import bans. Fuck the profitability or buttering up capitalists in hopes they’ll do the right thing for us.

                  • SouthFresh@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    10 hours ago

                    What are the industries you’re concerned about? I’m unclear on how a country would actually accomplish your goals without becoming imperialist. No country has every resource it needs in the abundance it needs.