It seems a nobrainer now. But why were Chinese manufactured goods being imported into the USA with such low tariffs. They were literally dumping their goods in your land and no one thought to raise tariffs.
Whose or what policy decided to turn a blind eye to this for all these decades?
Because Americans by and large don’t like spending more on stuff.
Chinese manufacturers weren’t dumping goods. They were selling them to people who wanted to buy them. And people like low prices. Tariffs raise prices. So the government has kept tariffs low.
Both the US and China are members of the World Trade Organization, which has the reduction of tariffs and the encouragement of free trade among nations as its main purposes.
And most economists agree that the benefit of having cheaper goods due to free trade generally outweighs any harm it might cause to specific businesses. The thing is it’s difficult for people to see this because the benefits are spread out across the entire population, while the harm is usually highly concentrated among relatively few people, i.e. when a factory closes.
Free trade is good. However, it needs to be both ways. China systematically denies us access to their market, hence us playing a bit of hardball.
Turn a blind eye to what? It’s bad to sell things to people who want them now? I just don’t get this attitude.
To the fact that China does NOT allow the same level of free trade/low tariffs for US imports into their country.
Yes cheaper goods at the cost of destroying local industries. Besides most of the goods were sub par quality.
The tariff income would have swelled the central bank reserves and the government could then decide how to spend it in the economy.
Not forgetting that China was taxing US imports all the time.
Were you guys taken for mugs for a very long time?
So? Which is it? Is free trade good or bad? You can’t say “protectionism is bad, so we’re going to engage in protectionism”. I mean, you can say it, but it isn’t very logical.
Do you have any cite that shows the trade imbalance is mainly caused by unfair trade practices by China rather than market forces?
Can you name some of those US goods that are prevented from being imported?
Yep, just like speeding is bad but police also speed to catch the bad guys.
Should we eliminate that also because it violates some naively simplistic notion of “logical”?
It sounds like you’re saying the USA is allowed to do “bad” things because it has special authorities other countries don’t have? Why?
The goods were exactly as good a quality as the importers were willing to pay for (which in turn reflects what the consumer is willing to pay.
High tariffs tend to reduce imports; that means you DON’T have high tariff income long-term, as the buyers choose to purchase from other sources instead (or not purchase at all [cf. Smoot-Hawley tariffs, widely blamed for exacerbating the Great Depression]).
China was taxing US imports at the most-favored-nation rate as required by WTO rules, which is the same rate at which the US was taxing Chinese imports. Do you have a cite of a disparity in taxation?
Yes! Now you’re getting it. If speeding is bad, it’s bad. Cops aren’t specially trained stunt drivers. They’re regular dudes with a regular license who decided they can just drive whatever speed they want without consequence, while doling out the consequences to others who do the exact same thing. It isn’t justifiable.
I was expecting something about violence. Yes, unprovoked violence is bad, but violence in self defense is good. This isn’t logically inconsistent, because violence in self defense is not unprovoked or directed against the innocent.
But the tariff situation isn’t a case of lashing out at China in some form of economic self defense. It’s a case of shooting yourself in the foot in response to someone else stepping on your foot. That’ll show them!
A free, voluntary transaction has two good things: The* customer* walks away with something he finds more valuable than the money he paid, and the seller walks away with more money than he valued the object he sold. Both sides benefit! This is called consumer surplus and producer surplus.
If China wants to eliminate its consumer surplus by charging Chinese consumers more than they would pay in a free market, that sucks for them. It doesn’t make sense for us to eliminate our own consumer surplus in response. It’s like breaking your own window because you didn’t like that your neighbor broke his window.
If selling things to China didn’t benefit Americans, we wouldn’t do it. Whatever they do on their end of the transaction isn’t going to change that fact. And if buying things from China didn’t benefit Americans, we wouldn’t do it. So why eliminate the benefit we get from the goods China sells us? Because they stupidly eliminated the benefits they receive from the goods we sell them? It makes no sense.
Since it has gone on for “all these decades,” the answer is obviously, both Democrats and Republicans had “blind eye” policies.
I’m not talking about the balance of trade, I’m talking specifically about how they exclude our products from the market completely unless we partner with a local company. You can sit down today and write a piece of software and distribute it freely in the USA. You can do the same thing from China, nobody cares where software comes from here. But in China they care and you can’t release things on the market without partnering with a local company and getting government approval.
Given that the highest value exports we do are IP you can see how that might be an issue.
If the goods were of sub-par quality, why would people buy them?
Each consumer gets to weigh cost against quality. If most consumers favour lower quality over cost, why should the federal government intervene in the consumer market and essentially say they’re making the wrong choice, and should pay more?
Since tariffs are paid by the importers and consumers, not the Chinese, you’re again saying that you think the federal government makes better spending choices for the American consumer, than do the American consumers themselves.
Plus, the US tariffs don’t occur in an economic vacuum. The Chinese have responded by increasing tariffs on targetted US products, like soybeans. That means the federal government has had to start giving subsidies to soybean farmers. I think in the last fiscal year it was about $12 billion. So, increasing tariffs has resulted in increased US government spending. Who’s the mug here?
Some of the goods made in China are high-end and first-rate quality. Like my iPhone for instance. This and this article talk about why the iPhone is assembled in China and why they’re not going to be assembled in the US. The second article talks about how fast Chinese factories can scale up production. One example is a last-minute change to the design of the iPhone when Steve Jobs decided that he wanted a glass screen on the front of the device. After the cut glass for the screens was delivered to the factory in the middle of the night, “A foreman immediately roused 8,000 workers inside the company’s dormitories, according to the executive. Each employee was given a biscuit and a cup of tea, guided to a workstation and within half an hour started a 12-hour shift fitting glass screens into beveled frames. Within 96 hours, the plant was producing over 10,000 iPhones a day.”
I can’t imagine a US factory scaling up that fast.