every country has half of the people are below average

even western ones

50/50 chance we have a bunch in here

if you sacrifice the unskilled people. you sacrifice your middle class

you can say you are WHOLLY DEPEND on your Chinese Gods to produce cheap goods to stay competitive

but you sacrifice your weakest citizens

so low skilled labor gets unemployed, and middle skilled labor gets paid poor skilled wages

if you drop a few million low skilled/ no language skilled people on the EU

the system will snap in half

just like health care that nobody talks about

almost no drugs are made in the EU

cause of low profit, and high regulation

so the health care system is reliant on US innovation to stay competitive

if the US were to impose tariffs on medical products the EU socialized system would also break.

that's why Sweden hasn't really grown in a decade https://tradingeconomics.com/sweden/gdp-growth?continent=g20

now drop that on a population of around 10 million. What could possibly go wrong?"

/rant

lol

"Every country has half the people below average"
That's called statistics
>unskilled = middle class
Not really
If you wanna talk about why economies and why they're fucked, look to legislation m8. Why inflation is consistent, why costs for labour and living are so high, how the power and money consolidation happens

true

China is cheaper, even with shipping costs and tariffs, because costs in the US are too high

Because the goal in the west is, in effect, artificial growth

Oh, c'mon, 'costs in the US are too high' is complete rubbish.

Saving money is discouraged, buying on credit is incentivized. Hiring locally is discouraged, outsourcing is incentivized

How so?

If it costs more to hire an American to produce for Americans than it does to outsource to a country halfway around the world and ship everything to/from there, and people will still buy your product, who is going to hire Americans?

My answer to that hypothetical is to either ban offshoring or raise tariffs sky-high.

But you've conceded my point then

There are some things that china are just well placed to produce. Most of that is tech stuff. And thats partly resources they owned inside their borders, and ones they have "secured" outside it.

There are also things that China does a shit job of producing at what would generally be considered acceptable standards in the west, but it hasn't caused people to buy local 🤔

'Buy American' isn't being marketed very effectively.

How much cheap steel and lead paint does it take to cause domestic purchasing? Apparently a substantial amount

Who isn't marketing it effectively?

Consumers have to be informed about cheap steel and lead paint if they're ever going to avoid it.

They are, frequently

How so?

There are news stories about lead paint every time people find out about it

That's obviously not effective marketing.

People stop buying that specific product for a while and then go back to those companies later if they boycotted at all

Again, whose marketing?

American companies or governments.

It's now up to the government to advertise for companies? And domestic production does get put front and center on sites/storefronts where it is utilized, however they make less money than companies that pay cents on the dollar for their products (because Chinese labour, even with the cost of shipping, is far cheaper than an ever increasing minimum wage and the various taxes and expenses small businesses are burdened with, which is also why we see so many companies utilizing tax havens)

Actually screw advertising. If demand for Chinese cheap steal and lead paint is as inelastic as you claim then we can and should be imposing ridiculously high tariffs on them.

Whys that?

Because it's easy revenue.

And?

Easier revenue than personal income tax.

They just move production to Vietnam. It's not like it'll come back here

And we just tariff imports from Vietnam.

Okay, but you're not providing justification. You're just bitching

Let's just tariff the entire third world?

Exactly.

Tariffs on China makes sense because they are an economic competitor.

Vietnam isn't.

Everybody who buys or sells something is an economic competitor.

Don't play semantics. It's childish

>let's have our industry be non competitive because it isn't competitive now

You know what is meant in that statement

I'm speaking textbook economics. I don't know what dialect you're speaking.

Nigger please

Racist

You're speaking "I read a single book about economics"

My car was stolen by a black guy @oprahsminge

You prick

@Existence is identity 10/10

You're speaking in terms of heavy interventionism because the economy isn't working the way you like lol

A lot more than one. And they all define economic activity in the same competitive terms.

Whatever you say bud.

>I don't care what is causing the problem, just tax everyone lol

Lul

Because that works

Who wants our industry to be non-competitive?

You apparently

We are losing to China because we are not competitive

I want as much domestic competition as possible.

Thus the solution isn't to preserve non competitiveness via protectionism

It's to figure out why we aren't competitive

You wanna make people competitive by taking their money?

What the fuck

What you mean is that we're losing a competition with China that we shouldn't even be engaged in.

On what basis?

America does not produce everything it needs, nor is it feasible for it to do so

You dont like global trade?

Competition with the third world to see who can be the most third-world is a fool's game that we shouldn't be playing.

1. You're going to drastically increase the cost of goods
2. You're going to have to heavily industrialize more of your country by a substantial amount, without sufficient monetary inventive existing organically
3. You're probably still not going to have good domestic competition due to the way taxation, lobbying etc works

The purpose is to trade not become like the third world

That and China isn't third world

That makes trade with the third world even stupider then, Make.

Thats a problem with the intellectual state not trade LOL

1. Third world = political affiliation. China is not third world
2. Trade with other nations is beneficial for both nations

China is absolutely third-world. The wage differential between China and the US proves that.

China is 2nd world. Please read about what First, Second and Third world mean. Wage differential is not the key factor lol

It's not beneficial across-the-board for either nation.

By what standard is something 3rd world?

Fine, I'll call China a shithole instead.

1-3 World is Cold War Alliance terminology

It's one of the richest countries in the world, and if the US fucks up it will likely become the dominant power

Which is why the idea of shifting production to another country was floated

lol, dominant in what exactly?

Economy.
China produces most of what the West consumes, has fucktons of money and is currently using that economic power to sway/coerce smaller countries