NE Mo | north1 - 4/25/2025 17:06
Not if our government quit handing out “free” money and people either had to work to put food on their table or go without. This applies to subsidizing businesses to shift manufacturing out of country as well. One can look at it as an investment for our current and future good. Especially for materials deemed essential to our countries well being(food, safety, security, etc). I think most would agree we have gone too far down the path of relying on other countries for essential goods. The Covid conundrum was a clear example of what can happen when the supply chain is disrupted. I for one don’t want to be held hostage for essential goods that can prove detrimental to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. All because we are willing to make slaves of others to buy goods cheaper near term only to become slaves of others long term.
Can you fathom the amount of subsidies and taxes/tariffs it would take to restart these businesses here. Let alone the millions of immigrants it would take and the multitude of other resources we don't have. It would simply be lessoning everyones quality of life to feel good about where something was produced. Protectionism=socialism. Good luck. We are a global society and its best to adapt than think you can turn back time.
Oh and to complain about "free" money handed out when most any farmer beyond "hobbie" has received millions each over the last 30 years (at least I know row croppers have). Seems more than just a bit hypocritical. |
Your farm has a trade deficit
