|
SE SD | 3.) Smoot and Hawley were both Republicans. Coolidge, a Republican kept tariffs high. President McKinley was a Republican as was Theodore Roosevelt and Herbert Hoover. They all kept tariffs high. Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat signed the Underwood-Simmons Tariff Act which lowered tariffs from 40% to 26%. Franklin Roosevelt signed the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. (RTAA) this gave the executive branch more power to negotiate trade without congressional approval. Roosevelt lowered tariffs due to help get out of the Great Depression. Biden a Democrat kept tariffs on and put a additional 10% on targeted products from China (chips, semi-conductors, solar panels). My point is, Tariffs are hardly a Democrat plank. They've both used them at different times, for different reasons. Republicans have historically been more for Protectionism and Democrats have been more for Free Trade historically speaking going back to the 1890's.
4.) Other countries use tariffs for protectionism just like the USA would use them. BUT here is the difference. The USA is a huge consumer of goods, the largest in the world. We have had the strongest economy in the world going back to 1871. Because of this, we have a much larger tax base for the government to collect revenue. Bangladesh doesn't have that same competitive advantage. Therefore it is more important for their economy of a much smaller scale to use tariffs to protect their industries from the USA and others. Well screw them right? Well not exactly. Bangladesh supplies us with roughly 10% of our garments (clothing) which is manufactured in textile mills. Workers in these textile mills make only $113 U.S. dollars per month!! Who the heck in America would work in a textile mill for $113 per month? Pretty much no-one. They have the labor advantage over us in that industry, so it is cheaper for all of us USA consumers to buy textile products from other countries, pay the tariff and go about our day. IF we made the product here, people would be paying hundreds of dollars for a pair of socks for example. That industry is DEAD, just like many others. Which is why the USA has switched our manufacturing to more high tech, specialty products. Microsoft, Boeing, Lockheed, Themral Dynamics, NVIDIA, GOOGLE. and so on. USA standard of living is thankfully much better than those countries whose economies are based on textiles.
As far as your last paragraph is concerned, I mean no disrespect, but I disagree with you on not having a presence over there. Like I said in another post, be careful what you wish for. It's actually much cheaper for us to be a NATO partner and have a military presence over there, vs. let them be....If we were to pull out of the world stage completely (leave NATO, cut all military aid to Europe) what you will have is a massive rearmament of European nations. Right now we know pretty much exactly what they have, where it came from, how it operates, and even have a set of keys to use it ourselves. ( Because you're right it is mostly our stuff anyway)....I would much rather have that than, some bad actors making their nukes, drones, ships, planes, munitions. Then god forbid if bombs did start flying in western Europe, if they can't hold their own, now you have all the weapons pointed back at us from an adversary instead of the other way around. We've had 80 years of relative peace in the world. Yes there have been hot spots, but nothing to the level of a massive global conflict. This is all because of our presence and alliances we've kept in Europe. I'm not saying we shouldn't hold their feet to fire a little more, but it would be a massive mistake to pull out completely. It would put the USA in harms way.
Just a discussion, I hold no angst in my reply. I don't like paying for all this either, but I worry that not paying it would have grave consequences to our economy, world peace, and our own national security.
Edited by jicasedeere 4/2/2025 22:58
| |
|
Tariff issue is hard for me.....
