Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 113

Thread: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

  1. #61
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    No company should be propped up with American tax dollars.
    I agree but then you have to ask yourself, when the government puts up trade barriers are they using tax payer dollars to prevent those trying to enter our markets?

    With that you must also accept that government will eventually play the game of picking winners and losers domestically.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Low tech manufacturing jobs are not the only ones being outsourced.High tech have outsourced under the guise of being able to compete globally. If it can be produced then it can be outsourced. I wonder if those who lost their their high tech jobs to outsourcing supported outsourcing.

    All Your Computer Are Belong To Us; One more reason why Outsourcing will bit you in the a** living for the weekend

    R&D the Latest Target of Silicon Valley Outsourcing - InternetNews.com
    Some things are but you can't outsource everything, it's not possible.

    Sometimes the saving on labor aren't made up by the transportation costs.
    Automation is going to put manufacturing wage laborers out of a job anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I considering poor to be about $20,000 or less if you are single and no kids, $30,000 if you have kids.
    That is about in line with what the government says although I believe single is a little bit a lower.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I would rather China not be given a chance to drive any US manufacturing company away.
    If they are more efficient than the manufacturer in the U.S. then why not.
    There are better things we can do here.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    As long as there is a demand for the products those manufacturers make then there is not such thing as a obsolete job.
    Yea but the manufacturing processes can be inefficient and they could do it better somewhere else.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  2. #62
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Scorpion89 View Post
    Yea your right never mind the fact that I had to sit with two GAO Guys and go over some of the items that were billed and have other stuff pulled part by Ground Crews so they can check for certain parts. Yea your right how silly of me. So what time shall I report to your office on Monday so we can introduce each other.
    What was the largest amount for an item they looked at? I don't doubt that you went over that stuff or that stuff was looked at. But it does not address the materiality issue. If the parts were in aggregate sufficiently material, then they did their jobs checking for parts on a certain number of aircraft. However, I extremely doubt that anyone went over immaterial items. If they did that, the audit would take years or would require a literal army of auditors to check every single item, R&D expense and evaluation expense. Did you have 10,000 auditors? Given the size, to check the immaterial items, it would take something like that.

    Imagine this. You have a million individual identical parts that are ordered. Say they cost $30. Boeing tacks on $5 to their cost and justifies it. That actual $5 is for cross subsidization. They just got $5 million in subsidies. And if your materiality levels are $50 million, you're not going to check it.
    Last edited by obvious Child; 09-14-09 at 12:04 AM.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    11-01-09 @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    829

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Explain to me how you think that all government intervention is bad for the market when government intervention is one of the key ways we ensure accurate, honest and timely disclosure of information is made available to the market. [...]
    You've started a separate thread for this, so let's discuss it there.


    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Depends on the goods. Not everything can be quickly built nor can the labor be quickly hired, pooled and moved to the plant. Even worse, after a competition has been eliminated, if that dumper takes market share, it is increasingly hard to get that back if the products are similar in quality and if the dumper is willing to dump again to eliminate any upstarts.
    You're still failing to understand that the dumper is loosing money, not making it, all just so that he could have a window of time during which he can raise prices and not face competition. The dumper can only guess how long he'll have to keep dumping to shake off competition, how long that window of higher prices would be, and how low the sales will drop during that window. A competitor could put out an ad saying "don't buy those overpriced products, we'll have same ones out in two weeks for half the price"!

    Furthermore, the dumper's rise in prices can be anticipated by the competitors, retailers, and by regular folks watching the market. The former can prepare by keeping their production process nimble and ready to switch between multiple types of products as market conditions change. The latter can buy the under-priced products in bulk and then sell them for a middle price during that window when prices are higher, thereby making a profit themselves and further punishing the dumper. And the dumper would also be punished by consumer opinion as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    That makes sense for a product like paper cups. How does one do that for complex manufacturing?
    Like switching a modern automobile factory to producing motorcycles or tractors for a while and then switching it back? That amount of time is already pretty low, and it will continue to get ever-lower as manufacturing processes become ever-more robotized and software-driven.

  4. #64
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    I agree but then you have to ask yourself, when the government puts up trade barriers are they using tax payer dollars to prevent those trying to enter our markets?
    No they are not,tariffs are a form of tax. Nor are they preventing anyone from entering the market by imposing tariffs that make them actually competitive with US companies.



    Some things are but you can't outsource everything, it's not possible.
    If it can manufactured then it can be outsourced. Even some phone technician/customer service jobs and operator jobs have been outsourced.



    Sometimes the saving on labor aren't made up by the transportation costs.
    Automation is going to put manufacturing wage laborers out of a job anyway.
    Robots and other machines still require techs to maintain them, I would rather American techs service those machines than Chinese or Indian techs and I would rather American companies make those machines and parts that the automated factories use. Automated factories still require some human interaction(I watch discovery channels "How its made") and someone to buy equipment from.

    If they are more efficient than the manufacturer in the U.S. then why not.
    There are better things we can do here.

    Child labor, underpaid employees, sweat shops and not having to give a **** about the environment does not really make a good poster child for efficiency. Manufacturing jobs, telephone operators,customer service jobs in the US provides decent paying jobs for Americans and ensures that no country will have the ability to cut us off from any goods.

    Yea but the manufacturing processes can be inefficient and they could do it better somewhere else.
    Regardless of the method used to produce goods it is completely dishonest to say that those jobs are obsolete. An obsolete job would be one that produced goods no one uses.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  5. #65
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    You're still failing to understand that the dumper is loosing money, not making it, all just so that he could have a window of time during which he can raise prices and not face competition.
    Not at all. I know what the financials of dumping are. But you fail to recognize the point of dumping. And you are operating on a very strange notion that companies that have been liquidated after losing the war to the dumper can magically come back. That makes no sense.

    The dumper can only guess how long he'll have to keep dumping to shake off competition, how long that window of higher prices would be, and how low the sales will drop during that window. A competitor could put out an ad saying "don't buy those overpriced products, we'll have same ones out in two weeks for half the price"!
    Can that competitor do that when they are shut down? You have this notion that a dumper is going to stop before the competition is badly injured. Thus why I question your capacity to understand what dumping it. If dumping was really what you said it was, there wouldn't be valid WTO claims against it. Dumping it meant to damage and destroy your competitors. Why would you stop before you've done that?

    Furthermore, the dumper's rise in prices can be anticipated by the competitors, retailers, and by regular folks watching the market.
    Again, you assume that competitors will still be around.

    That's the Achilles's heel in your argument.

    Like switching a modern automobile factory to producing motorcycles or tractors for a while and then switching it back? That amount of time is already pretty low, and it will continue to get ever-lower as manufacturing processes become ever-more robotized and software-driven.
    Uh, retooling for new cars is pretty time consuming. What makes you think that completely changing the factory for bikes or tractors is going to be quick? You do realize that many factories today are actually designed from the ground up for specific products no? Intel doesn't refit modules normally. It builds entirely new ones. Furthermore, even on a robotic system, you need new robots. The kind you see in car plants are designed to build CARS. Often they have specific parts for specific cars.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    11-01-09 @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    829

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    [...] Again, you assume that competitors will still be around. [...]
    Successful companies tend to be diversified, so temporarily losing competitiveness in one product area won't put them under. And new ones can enter the marketplace as well.

    The marketplace is very resilient, because it is powered by the most powerful force in the known universe - human greed. When there's money to be made, people tend to jump at the chance, if not one corporation than another.

    A far greater danger to competition comes from things like patents, tariffs, and business regulations, all of which are unnatural constructs backed by government force.
    Last edited by Alex Libman; 09-14-09 at 03:40 AM.

  7. #67
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    Successful companies tend to be diversified
    Possibly, but many companies generally cannot survive a steep drop in revenue from one division. Right now Boeing, who we generally consider as diversified with rockets, commercial jets and military actually derives over 70% of its net operating profit from just military. If that disappeared, Boeing would be toast. Generally the 20-80 rule is operating within most firms and diversification is hardly in the form of GE which has widely unrelated businesses. Many firms diversify within the same branch of business.

    And new ones can enter the marketplace as well.
    Depending on the obstacles to entry. Furthermore, once that dumper gains significant market share from the deaths of its competitors, it's hard to break through unless you have a significently superior product and lots of money to quickly expand production. It's really not as easy as you make it out to be. Countries take hard lines against dumping for a reason.

    The marketplace is very resilient, because it is powered by the most powerful force in the known universe - human greed. When there's money to be made, people tend to jump at the chance, if not one corporation than another.
    While that is true, start up costs for complex manufacturing are high. And if the dumper is willing to dump in the first place, they'll do it again against generally cash poor start-ups. For certain industries, you'd be correct, but for many you're not.

    A far greater danger to competition comes from things like patents, tariffs, and business regulations, all of which are unnatural constructs backed by government force.
    Perhaps, but patents create incentives to innovate. If no one could get IP rights, then innovation would likely decline. Tariffs generally I'd agree with you. And some business regulations are required despite your anarchist views. I don't support removal of business regulations that prevent the export of materials such as uranium, centrifuges, plastic explosives and DOD weapon.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    11-01-09 @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    829

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    I've already debunked your pro-government fear-mongering to pieces, but I understand that you can keep repeating it indefinitely. What you fail to understand is that the government system is far less resilient than the free market, with far more monopolies that are backed by blunt force, and the amount of faith that you're willing to put in it seems to be infinite.


    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    [...] Perhaps, but patents create incentives to innovate. If no one could get IP rights, then innovation would likely decline. [...] And some business regulations are required despite your anarchist views. I don't support removal of business regulations that prevent the export of materials such as uranium, centrifuges, plastic explosives and DOD weapon.
    Those issues deserve separate threads. (And I only have so much time I can spend on this forum. You could simply eliminate the middle-man and read some Rothbardian books for yourself...)
    Last edited by Alex Libman; 09-14-09 at 03:56 AM.

  9. #69
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    I've already debunked your pro-government fear-mongering to pieces, but I understand that you can keep repeating it indefinitely.
    Like Voidwar did in defending his claim he's not pro-killing Cops?

    Sure you did.

    Just pretend you do and you never have to address it.

    What you fail to understand is that the government system is far less resilient than the free market, with far more monopolies that are backed by blunt force, and the amount of faith that you're willing to put in it seems to be infinite.
    That doesn't explain why we should just sit down and take dumping.

    Those issues deserve separate threads. (And I only have so much time I can spend on this forum. You could simply eliminate the middle-man and read some Rothbardian books for yourself...)
    Given how poorly you have argued your points, I'll pass.

    Please educate yourself as to how a business actually works.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  10. #70
    Advisor LennyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-16 @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    393

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing - Yahoo! News







    This is really bad policy considering China owns a ton of our debt and they are about to introduce some low cost econo cars to the U.S. either this year or early next.

    All this crap does is penalize low income people in favor of union interests by raising costs on car and tires.
    I believe your thoughts on the future effects of creating a more level playing field for US workers and manufacturing to be a little alarmist, and slightly off base.

    For some years now there seems to have been some propaganda spreading within our country about how our people and companies can not produce an affordable and quality product, and that is not only wrong and inaccurate but also has fueled a growing problem where our workers are losing in every way due to competing directly with third world nation and other workers who do not enjoy nearly the quality of life that American workers did previously.

    It does not seem to matter if the product is autos, textiles, machine tools, heavy equipment, or any other product type, and the point of origin (country) could be any that the labor rate and quality of life is so much lower than that enjoyed in America. It is not just China as previously stated in this thread, and it is also not just tires (though rubber products are a large problem).

    What many seem to miss and especially those who cry protectionist etc is that while the exploitation and even slavery of workers in third world nations has produced reduced costs, lower prices and largely increased corporate profits (have to wonder if the threats to these profits is not why there is so much opposition to stopping the dumping of products and foreign government subsidized manufacturing and products) while completely changing the face of America from the loss of manufacturing, shutting down of entire communities, reduced wages, lost wages, and right on down the quality of life for many Americans.

    Maybe because my career is deeply rooted in industrial production I have been able to witness things others may not have etc, and this includes not only countless plant shut downs and job losses, but also various different tariffs that are applied to products beyond the normal duties placed on imports.

    Dumping duties as they are called have been in place for many years, and though like most things that happen in Washington are a result of lobby efforts etc the purpose is to create a level playing field where an obvious imbalance existed where/from foreign manufacturers and even countries were dumping their products at insanely low prices only to destroy the American companies and competition so that there could be a turn to profitability in the future after there was no US based competition.

    Should there not be the same level playing field when US corporation have joined with these foreign interests (manufacturers and governments alike) to increase their profits? Should we sit back and just say things are OK when there are companies like GE, Dewalt, Westinghouse, ATT, and so many others of small and large size that are profiting off the backs of foreign labor while devastating domestic manufacturing and the American worker?

    Though I agree with many of the concerns of conservative beliefs this is one area that I can not. Who in their right mind could ignore the changes in the landscape of our own country just to support continued increased imports and the export of the wealth of our country?

    Things seem to have some potential for a healthy correction, and considering that at one point our military could not even source the products and parts needed to keep its equipment running from domestic manufacturers (US or foreign owned) including nuclear class subs the government is aware of the depth of the problem, and maybe these current changes in trade with China are an indication that some are aware and willing to address things even if on a small scale.

    It would seem obvious that there is no need to close down imports completely, and I do believe even the most hardcore true protectionist would agree this would not be healthy, but it would also seem most would agree that there is a problem that needs to be addressed and that stopping the destruction of domestic manufacturing by creating a level playing field for all is not such a bad idea.
    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
    Albert Einstein


    **Question Everything**

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •