Trump says US companies 'hereby ordered' to quit China

@Treflis:

Again you forget who would be making the rich their money. Without the workers to leech off of they are nothing but people respinsible for the current mess the country is in.

What happens is competition enters the picture that offers better pay and leaders willing, or not seeing the need for having trillions of dollars.

It would take years for the US to rebuild the manufacturing infrastructure to compete. And it will cost more since our cost of living is higher and our CEO's are greedy.

@LJS9502_basic:

True, but it would benefit in the long run. I dont think anybody would argue that.

How so?

I'm no economist so I tend to stay out of these debates as I am, but isn't a healthier worldwide economy better for all? Doing what Trump's doing will bring back jobs here sure at the cost of others, but then again, wouldn't outsourcing jobs to cheaper labor reduce costs to consumers here who will in turn reinvest into their own economy which will also work to create jobs? How is isolationism so beneficial to us over globalism?

Yeah perhaps there's inequality and we've been shafted, again I've not looked into this. But it seems to me that Trump's focusing solely on one part of economic policy that has disadvantaged us but is failing to grasp the larger picture and benefits that may help mitigate that issue. But then again, this is probably all complete ignorance, as I don't study this shit as hooray for apathy.

@AlexKidd5000: well, in Trump's case everything's the media's fault so no surprise there.

@mrbojangles25:

Seriously, though..."hereby ordered"?

The nerve of this guy. Doesn't he know we kicked all the royalty out of the US quite some time ago?

You think Trump doesn't consider himself royalty?

@MirkoS77: You realize you can get cheap labor in other countries who don't put Tariffs on our products and engage in massive IP theft? Vietnam actually has cheaper labor then China. There is 0 reason to deal with China anymore when other countries can provide the exact services with less drama.

poor old america 'I hereby tell gamespot to stop reviewing xbox games' wow that was easy :)

@LJS9502_basic: Do I have a choice for most goods?

OP clearly is suffering from TDS.

https://youtu.be/cYVLAF5x_7E

"Free Market Republicans"

Lol they stand for literally zero of the stances that they claim to.

Let's be honest with ourselves, the GOP was never supportive of a 'free market' as they claim. They've just got different beneficiaries to their cronyism and handouts.

Then why aren't they going there? And this kind of works against the entire "anti-globalism" agenda that Trump and his base love. You don't seem to want it cheaper, you want it in America.

International Emergency Economic Powers Act

If he tries to push the issue, companies will probably take it to court, but in order for him to enforce his order he has a few more steps he needs to take besides a tweet.

How is that not the point? Why would the jobs in question, should they exit China, be moved to the US given cheaper alternatives?

Why do you think that introducing unnecessary inefficiencies into the economy would be inarguably good?

-Because its not the point? Im not understanding what you are saying. The point is simply to bring production back to the US. Simple as that.

-producing our own products is inefficient? How is localized production inefficient vs needing the product to be shipped over the ocean?

-And that production won't come back to the US while those cheaper alternatives exist and are viable. It's a direct counterpoint to what you're trying to do.

-Yep, producing products at a higher cost in-country is less efficient than producing them at a lower cost out-of-country. That's why 1990's China had an advantage in luring those jobs from the US in the first place, and why Bangladesh/Vietnam/Africa have an advantage in luring them from China now.

Well, he did declared he was a king a few days ago

@MirkoS77: They actually are going there. Lots of companies are moving out of China. Even big tech companies are moving plants to South Korea. Would it be great for it to be made in America? Sure but realistically that's not going to happen for most things. However I don't mind if it sets China back significantly who's done nothing but steal from other corporations and gets away with it because they offer cheap labor.

@mattbbpl:

-the point is the *goal* is to take the necessary steps to bring production back to the US, as you pointed out there are cheaper alternatives other than China. What exactly are you trying to say? This is about gradually removing the incentive of having US products made in these areas. Why are these products so cheap to produce in other countries? Ask yourself that.

-i disagree. Production out of country has eliminated jobs within the country. Just because it is cheaper to produce elsewhere, how has that affected the economy over a long stretch of time when some of these jobs seemingly dont exist anymore in the US. Under what circumstances are these products in china being made? Are these chinese companies abiding by US labor laws?

A national emergency? Is this how we run our government now?

Immigration: national emergency. Economy: national emergency. I don't know exactly when the definition of an emergency became synonymous with ideology and policy, but apparently under Trump it has.

I mean ffs, I would think even Trump supporters would oppose this. Unfortunately, as Trump has stacked the courts in his favor (and probably will be able to further as Ginsburg ain't in the best of shape), they'll always rule for it and Democrats will be immediately shot down. If Trump tried to claim a emergency (which I don't think he will tbh, he's just full of hot air as usual), that to me would show a fundamental lack of an ability to govern. The guy seems to be able to achieve only through dictate and EOs, of which he'll enforce through the courts. Not surprising for a businessman and bully, but detrimental for our country if he can get away with this.

-What I'm trying to say is that none of this will have the effect of bringing the jobs in question to the US. To do that you either need to effect every country so it's at least at rough parity with the US, or you need to bring the US down their level. Why are they cheaper to produce in other countries? Because they don't compensate their employees as well, largely.

-That doesn't make them less efficient, it merely means the actions have produced side effects whose costs are not borne by the companies performing the actions (sidenote: these are called externalities). Those costs are borne by the losers in the trade deals, but we as a country have historically A) failed to acknowledge that such losers exist (remember the 1980s and 1990s insistence that EVERYONE wins with free trade?) and B) failed to ensure that our domestic policies make these losers winners as well.

@mattbbpl:

So you are saying that when production is done overseas, these companies are bypassing US labor laws? Seems illegal.

I get what you are saying, but i dont see how you can suggest that US production would not create jobs. I dont see how every country would need to yada yada.

Localized production creates competition within the country.

Bypassing US labor laws is called cheating.

So you are saying that when production is done overseas, these companies are bypassing US labor laws?

Yep

Seems illegal.

Nope

I get what you are saying, but i dont see how you can suggest that US production would not create jobs [in the host country].

I'm not saying it wouldn't, it would just result in a net loss of wealth. The country would be poorer because of it.

Bypassing US labor laws is called cheating.

Not really, it's called abiding by the labor laws of the other country (which is where the labor is occurring). In that model, workers who would otherwise produce those goods in the home country lose out, but it's not cheating.

Regardless, the crux of the argument is that we don't have to make the country poorer so that the losers can be not-losers. They can be trade winners too, but we choose not to allow that via the policy decisions we make.

@mattbbpl:

Poorer in what respect? I see it creating more balanced wealth, because it allowd for real competition. When you have a trillionaire making a bajillion forks and knives in china, it makes it next to impossible for competition to enter the market.

What *benefit* does the country see from chinese production?

Poorer in this case equals a combination of purchasing power and earnings. Free trade increases both a nation's earnings and lowers the price of goods that are imported (either from the removal of tariffs on previously imported goods or due to the leveraging of foreign efficiencies in the case of goods that are newly imported).

The benefit of Chinese production is greater efficiencies in the production of those goods resulting in lower prices on them.

This isn't Stormfront forums, you can stop with the Trumpist shitposting.

@mattbbpl:

What is the difference between that and having the products made in the US, when having more jobs in the US would mean more people would have more money to spend. Wouldnt that just make the price of good all relative, if that makes sense?

Is it not important for a country to be self sustainable? Why do we farm our own foods? Worst case scenario and not at all likely but hypothetically speaking lets say China and all these cheaper production countries sink to the bottom of the ocean, then what?

Might as well get this market crash over with while I'm young.

The difference is that you're not leveraging the comparative advantages of each country to become more efficient. You'd be blatantly ignoring those advantages in order to produce less units with less efficiency albeit localizing the entire process. You're better off leveraging your own comparative advantages and producing more of those products you're efficient at producing.

There are a few products that are of a strategic advantage to produce ourselves despite inefficiencies, and we do that for many of them such as food and energy. Outside of a few exceptions like PVs and rare earth metals (which we unwisely ceded to China) there aren't many products of a critical strategic advantage that China exclusively produces. But yes, you're right that that is a consideration when crafting economic policy.

Regarding the hypothetical, I'm not sure what you're getting at. If Poseidon arose and sank all the developing countries to the bottom of the oceans, then a country with those comparative advantages would no longer exist and production would shift. This actually happens in a less dramatic and more gradual fashion all the time - China is in the process of losing it's status as a low wage country (it's arguably already lost that status).

@mattbbpl:

What advantages? What is the advantage of paying someone else to make something you are perfectly capable of making yourself? What do we even produce in china that is of the upmost importance that we need SOOOO many of and so quickly? You dont think that its just a matter of these companies wanting the best profit margins?

Doesnt the US complain that China steals IP and/or technologies? Well, if we arent abiding by our own labor laws, why should they abide by our IP laws? Im not seeing the benefit other than X trillionaire can make a billion of X product for cheaper amd thus sell cheaper on US markets. That in and of itself hurts our own market because it eliminates competition when something is 90%cheaper.

You dont think that its just a matter of these companies wanting the best profit margins?

It is, of course.

Doesnt the US complain that China steals IP and/or technologies?

Yes, but this hurts business/IP owners, not workers. Frankly, if China didn't insist on IP transfer there would have been even more labor transferring to China. As China advances down the path of educating their workforce this remains a risk for some sectors.

Well, if we arent abiding by our own labor laws, why should they abide by our IP laws?

We are abiding by them (at least in theory at a high level - there are individual exceptions and recent decisions that have undermined that assertion), China isn't because they're not China's laws. China also doesn't have to abide by our IP laws, and they're not.

Im not seeing the benefit other than X trillionaire can make a billion of X product for cheaper amd thus sell cheaper on US markets.

In competitive markets it drives down prices. A good highly visible example is televisions. Naturally, in a noncompetitive market this simply drives up profit margins in the form of additional rents.

That in and of itself hurts our own market because it eliminates competition when something is 90%cheaper.

Of course it does. This is because, as mentioned previously, we can't compete in that market because we aren't as efficient at producing those products.

@mattbbpl:

But we cant compete because we know full well that we are taking advantage of labor laws. It is almost akin to backdoor slavery, but because it isnt occuring on US soil we do not care.

So how exactly does the US benefit. Its about profit margins, and for what? Buying a bigger boat and control. Exponentially more money, but ultimately for what? A lobsided market controlled by the super rich? More money in this case doesnt appear to be benefitting the country.

What are the negative effects of paying Americans for similar manufacturing jobs? That it costs more money to pay them? But where does that more money ultimately go? Into other markets. This has a positive effect not only in creating more jobs but also in helping other markets flourish because the money becomes circular. Compare that to the chinese kids making pennies; wheres that money go?

No doubt there would be transitional periods but i dont see the negatives.

(Wonder what will happen when a lot of these products end up being made by computers, but thats for another discussion)

@heirren: We're just going in circles now. Ruminate on the concepts for a few months, preferably while occasionally reading reputable articles on the matter. It took a while for me to get grounded in the concepts as well back in the day.

@mattbbpl:

Nah i dont think we are. Like i said, wheres the positive? theres something fundamentally wrong with how things are done in the now. Understanding flawed concepts is pointless. Administration after administration and its the same bs, year in year out. These clowns, while educated, have become so aloof to reality. More jobs equals a lot less of the bad stuff.

In your words, what are the real world advantages that you witness on a day to day basis, of having goods made in china?

From the US citizen's perspective, lower prices leading to greater purchasing power. From the Chinese citizen's perspective, increased development.

Thus my comment about coming full circle.

@mattbbpl:

Purchasing power is all relative to wealth distribution.

Not full circle in the US. Not in the slightest.

I hate to call you out on this but i just saw you created a topic on detaining illegals. You seem to think this is cruel, yes? How is that different from what the US dollar is doing over in china when the people making our goods are in that same cruelty boat?

@heirren: continuing the circle, total wealth grew, wealth distribution suffered, growth can be maintained by retaining trade access while wealth distribution can be improved via domestic policy decisions.

Trade with China is making them wealthier as well, so if you have some other metric in mind you'll have to let me know what it is.

@mattbbpl:

At the expense of our own citizens. Circular in terms of the extreme upper class and the same for china. Where they have kids working for pennies on the dollar, we have kids resorting to crime.

@heirren: "At the expense of our own citizens."

Only because we make it so via policy choices.

"Circular in terms of the extreme upper class and the same for china. Where they have kids working for pennies on the dollar, we have kids resorting to crime."

Chinese workers are getting wealthier off of trade, not poorer. Their economy is advancing, their earnings are advancing, and they're transitioning to a developed economy similar to ours and Europe's.

@mattbbpl:

So, no positives? And you dont think our policy choices are dependent on the super rich?

What happens is they'll try to ensure they get the same beneficial situation back in the US as they had when they sent their production offshore. Cheaper labor doing more work so to increase revenue.

If companies are put in a highly competitive market then it's the one with the highest income and lowest expenses ( salaries, workers benefits, Insurances etc ) that will come out on top because they'll create the highest financial buffer for themselves in case they get a rough patch.
It's not going to be the one that don't.
It's the whole reason companies have sent their production offshore, lower wages, longer hours = more product, less benefits for employees the company needs to provide/pay for. Which equal to increase revenue for the company.

In the perfect world, I'd be wrong and you'd be correct. But we ain't in one.

And Trump is dumber than a wet paper bag, but his idea is if possible would be great but in this day and age, it´s impossible when Nike can make a shoe or Apple can make an Ipad in Asia for 1/1000+th of what they would back in the US.

@heirren: I literally just listed the positives for the second time. As for policy choices being influenced by the rich, I'm stating what the best policy path is - not self immolation via destructive trade policy but rather shared growth via positive domestic policy. The way to counteract negative influences is to become informed on the options and properly asses them - and then vote, of course.

@mattbbpl:

Real world positives that are seen on a day to day basis in the US. Theres a difference between that and saying "make the rich richer and china richer" which is not even a positive to start with because it is clearly having a negative effect on social economics within the US. Numbers might say one thing but when you look at the homeless situation in the US and kids resorting to alternate means to make an income, theres a problem. This is partially because there are less jobs to go around.

@Treflis:

And you are referring to US production, now, yes?

@heirren: And I've stated how to share those benefits more equitably. You're just ignoring that fact.

You're off by 2-3 orders of magnitude in your guess here. Like you are overdoing it by 2-3 orders of magnitude.

Those that mention prices of 10 000$+++ for iPhone states it isn't the increased labour costs that drives the prices up so much. It's the lack of expertise in US to make it. The phone would be a product for the 1%, as only they could afford the new price equilibrium due to complete lack of supply.

@mattbbpl:

The dollar has a great effect on policy direction. When the super rich would rather pay kids pennies overseas it gives them far more money which then in effect gives them greater weight in policy decisions, or makes making changes far more difficult because theres a system already in play which is extremely lobsided(if im wording this ok).

In the end it is somewhat eliminating the point of voting alltogether because these systems are so firm and locked down by the dollar that it makes any realistic competition next to impossible.

Im not ignoring what you say. Im saying those facts are part of the issue. They are not a positive. Its like saying "lets make the US 10x richer but lets do this by putting our own country at war with itself."

@heirren: but one does not follow from the other. Civil war does not follow from trade.

@mattbbpl:

it directly affects the people. I dont see how you can say otherwise.

@heirren: because we don't have broad based domestic policies. Instead we look at such policies and yell, "Socialism," and then proceed to shovel even more money upwards.

Our issue is with domestic policy. If we don't fix that it doesn't matter what your trade policy is.