We’re supposed to take economic advice from the guy that said this?
Clearly, he thinks price levels cause inflation. I suppose he also thinks the reading on his thermometer in his house makes it warmer or colder outside. :rolleyes:
I don’t even understand what his ‘China. Right now’ comment means. He’s not even speaking English at this point.
Do you need a bib, little baby? You’re drooling again.
Or, in other words: ‘I got nuthin’.
I’m sure you’ve seen this before - perhaps you could just append this to all of your future posts where you don’t even attempt to refute my points?
Elsewhere: US jobless numbers announced just now better than expected. Continuing claims lowest since Oct 2008.
Yes, offshoring is really killing US jobs.:rolleyes:
First, point to where I said ‘everyone gets a severance.’ Or prove that no one gets a severance. Or shut the fuck up. Or continue to babble about that which you nothing about.
I already linked to a cite that refutes your “China now” answer.
China’s economy has been growing like crazy since they lifted tariffs and opened trade relations. And they continue to increase imports. Quite the opposite of what you are claiming.
So if you have anything relevant to share with the class, take that eraser out of your nose and show us some cites.
And no, political cartoons don’t count. 9 pages now and we have yet to see a cat.
You know what, I need to apologize. I have a tendency to assume people participating on this message board follow a similar sort of etiquette. When someone makes a claim (ie the price of oil is $88 per barrel) they are generally back it up (see www.cnbc.com).
You have your culture, and that’s fine. We’re all about providing a safe and positive learning experience were people of all sorts of different backgrounds are welcomed and encouraged to participate.
But with that said, I feel you should respect that I’ll continue to provide sites that counter the unsubstantiated claims that you make. For example a very brief google search turned up this:
"In 1998, China was in its 12th year of negotiations for accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO)—formerly the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and had significantly reduced import tariffs. Previously in 1996, China had already introduced cuts to more than 4,000 tariff lines, reducing average tariffs from 35% to 23%; further tariff cuts that took effect October 1, 1997, decreased average tariffs to 17%. "
“In 1999, Premier Zhu Rongji signed a bilateral U.S.–China Agricultural Cooperation Agreement, which lifted longstanding Chinese prohibitions on imports of citrus, grain, beef, and poultry. In November 1999, the United States and China reached a historic bilateral market-access agreement to pave the way for China’s accession to the WTO. As part of the far-reaching trade liberalization agreement, China agreed to lower tariffs and abolish market impediments after it joins the world trading body”
See, that cite describes China reducing tariffs. Now I’ll post a second article talking about how China’s economy grew by 9.8 per cent in the fourth quarter of 2011.
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110120/dollar-falls-110120/
Together, that paints a picture of lower tariffs being good for the economy.
So what was it about China that you thought blustered your argument? Or is this another one of your “traps?”
Yeah, I’m sorry I zoned out of this thread for a couple days. That “China is rich because they have tariffs” thing is out-of-one’s-mind wrong.
In addition to what has been stated already, look at the track record of US complaints against China in the WTO:
So, pretty much every unfair trade practice (including subsidies and tariffs) that rise to the WTO are being struck down.
If China wanted to keep its trade barriers, it never would have joined the WTO.
Plus, there’s this:
Does LJ just randomly decide on a position by pulling a feather out of his ass? Clearly he’s not looking at any actual facts.
For further reading, consider
http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2010/10/04/the-high-cost-of-tariffs/
A diagram??? A freaking DIAGRAM??? Supply and demand models??? O…M…G!! This was probably done by one of those friggin’ ‘economics experts’ (checks sure enough, a freaking teacher of economics!! As if they would know anything about this stuff) who don’t know what the fuck they are talking about! :smack:
None of this will be convincing to the horned one, at a guess. Such things are for turd burglars and pussyboys who go to school, instead of learning the real life lessons about hard economic facts from the masses, yearning to pay more for good ole American products and services! For one thing, it’s not in the form of either a blog or a YouTube video. For another, The People™ obviously aren’t going to trust the world of some shaggy haired and probably dirty Swede academic who merely teaches economics…
-XT
China still has tariffs, whether they’re reducing them or not. Plus they have another de facto supertariff in the form of their still-devalued currency. All tariffs that have not totally fucked China. In fact their economy grew while they had bigger tariffs.
Feel free to get mad now that you fell into your OWN trap.
Edited: oh and China’s growth rate is now LOWER than it was in 2010:
Apparently they got stung BADLY by our recession. Which probably explains why they lost 20 million jobs when we stumbled…
Their growth rate was 14% back in 2007 when their tariffs were much higher.
So China has used tariffs to dominate the world market except when they haven’t. Gotcha.
Quoted for fun.
Were you serious about what you just wrote? Unless you say otherwise I’m going to assume that was all sarcasm, and that this is all a big whoosh.
What I want to know is how can you seriously ask for proof of tariffs that didn’t fuck up a country when history shows China did in fact have higher economic growth rates when their import tariffs were higher. 14% in 2007 versus 9.8% now with lower tariffs.
You can’t even understand simple facts like that. On your planet higher import tariffs and 14% growth means a country is being fucked up.
Iggy time. Only an idiot claims tariffs fuck up a country after seeing 14% economic growth in a country with tariffs AND currency pegs like what China had in 2007. You’re an idiot. Bye.
Glad that tariffs were the only economic variable that has changed in the past four years.
Kiss of death time. I do believe you have just joined the growing ranks of 'dopers on Le Jac’s ignore list! :eek:
Welcome aboard. 
-XT
Since I know I’m on his ignore list, will someone please point out to you-know-who that China was a member of the WTO in 2007 (well, since 2001, really) when they achieved that vaunted 14% growth rate?
Will someone then explain that joining the WTO means that the country has to abide by the same set of regulations that other members have to in terms of market access, tariffs, subsidies, etc. Sure, there’s fudging around the edges, but China and the US are pretty much playing by the same rulebook.
The idea that China suddenly dropped tariffs in 2008 is just a fantasy.
Well, he’s right (much as that hurts to say) about the currency thing, and they certainly have used protectionism to shield their home grown industry while using every advantage they can to augment their exports. But they are starting to feel the effects of their protectionist measures and I think come to realize that they are really only hurting themselves in the long run if they continue (on a similar note, they need to clean up environmentally and need to start respecting international patents and intellectual property or it’s going to seriously bite them in the ass). Le Jac doesn’t get that either, obviously.
I’m not sure how many folks still in this thread aren’t on his ignore list. I think DragonAsh and kidchameleon might still be in the horned one’s butter zone, though.
-XT
No, what I asked for was proof that tariffs helped an economy. Are you shocked that someone asked you to prove your assertions? Are you offended that I dare challenge your fragile belief system? If you need to look in a magic hat to read some gold plates be my guest.
I don’t give a fuck what “history shows” all I care about is what Le Jacquelope shows. If you can’t show me a cat, I won’t believe that it’s behind the door.
As per the link I gave you, China has been making dramatic cuts to their import tariffs lowering them from 34% down to 17%, and then continuing to lower them as required by the WTO.
Can you show us where China has RAISED tariffs?
What the rest of the world sees is a country that made dramatic cuts to tariffs, and then had massive economic growth. You seem to agree with the second part of that, since you claimed China has your example. But yet you disagree with the first, which makes me wonder why you believe China has increased tariffs over the past 2 decades. If that is the case, all you have to do is open the door and show us the cat.
Is there a cat? Or are these simply more unsubstantiated claims?
The simple fact is that China used to have import tariffs over 34%, and lower them, resulting in 14% growth. We call that correlation. When two things occur together. You have yet to show correlation, yet you’ve spent 10 pages here, and multiple threads elsewhere, claiming causation. Show us a cat.
14% economic growth represents a rate of change. Over the past two decades China has REDUCED their tariffs, and that resulted in 14% economic growth.
I asked for country that increased tariffs and saw growth. Can you name a country over the past 20 years that has made significant increases to import tariffs and realized economic gain?
You know what, know that we’re all on ignore this could actually turn into a meaningful discussion about the appropriate level of protectionism a country should employ–interspersed with random nonsense from Le Jacquelope directed at no one in particular.
Life on planet emacknight:
“If we didn’t have offshoring no one could afford iPods!”
“If we didn’t make the Model T overseas no one would have afforded Fords!”
“If we didn’t send jobs overseas all technological developments would stop and we’d all be poor!”
“Tariffs fucked up China! 14% growth! See how fucked up that is!”
