Donald Trump Begins Inauguration Speech With a Rant Against Free Trade

[ajax]

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/20 ... peech.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Donald Trump is now President of the United States.

In a short 18-minute inauguration speech, Trump spent a remarkable amount of time attacking free trade.

His attack, displaying a complete ignorance of comparative advantage, was fierce:

We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies, and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength...

America will start winning again, winning like never before.

We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth...

We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and Hire American.

What idiocy.

[brianj]

Many countries have tariffs on goods imported from the US far greater than US taxes on their goods imported here. Making matters even worse, some countries have used their economic ability to grossly subsidize their products, making them so cheap that they put foreign competitors out of business. China did this with rare earth metals, pricing them cheaply enough to destroy foreign producers.

Our government needs to help domestic business far more than they have been doing, and provide less help to other countries that plan to compete with US producers. I really do hope to see policies that focus more on helping domestic workers than foreign workers, and I really appreciated that Trump's inauguration speech chastised both parties for placing their own interests above those of the American people.

[Col. Flagg]

Many countries have tariffs on goods imported from the US far greater than US taxes on their goods imported here.

That's because we need what other countries make because we've off-shored and out-sourced everything to cut costs.

[ajax]

Many countries have tariffs on goods imported from the US far greater than US taxes on their goods imported here. Making matters even worse, some countries have used their economic ability to grossly subsidize their products, making them so cheap that they put foreign competitors out of business. China did this with rare earth metals, pricing them cheaply enough to destroy foreign producers. This is all irrelevant. If foreign governments wish to waste scarce resources subsidizing American purchases, so be it.

Our government needs to help domestic business far more than they have been doing, this is not the governments purpose and provide less help to other countries that plan to compete with US producers. I really do hope to see policies that focus more on helping domestic workers than foreign workers, and I really appreciated that Trump's inauguration speech chastised both parties for placing their own interests above those of the American people. I hope to see policies that dismantle government itself, and leads to greater freedom for the average American.

I wonder how a resource poor Hong Kong became the wealthiest and most free city in the world? Very simple. Free trade. Tariff free trade relations with the rest of the world. The ricksha industry may have lost out, but with every increasing wealth and capital, labor is constantly changing.

Manufacturing output is at near all time high levels. However manufacturing jobs continue to decline. This is more due to better technology and machinery than trade. Why do we look to some idealized romanticized past. Are we really trying to get back to becoming the world leader in textile manufacturing?

I found this compelling:

There are two technologies for producing automobiles in America. One is to manufacture them in Detroit, and the other is to grow them in Iowa. Everybody knows about the first technology; let me tell you about the second. First you plant seeds, which are the raw material from which automobiles are constructed. You wait a few months until wheat appears. Then you harvest the wheat, load it onto ships, and sail the ships eastward into the Pacific Ocean. After a few months, the ships reappear with Toyotas on them.

International trade is nothing but a form of technology. The fact that there is a place called Japan, with people and factories, is quite irrelevant to Americans’ well-being. To analyze trade policies, we might as well assume that Japan is a giant machine with mysterious inner workings that convert wheat into cars. Any policy designed to favor the first American technology over the second is a policy designed to favor American auto producers in Detroit over American auto producers in Iowa. A tax or a ban on “imported” automobiles is a tax or a ban on Iowa-grown automobiles. If you protect Detroit carmakers from competition, then you must damage Iowa farmers, because Iowa farmers are the competition.

The task of producing a given fleet of cars can be allocated between Detroit and Iowa in a variety of ways. A competitive price system selects that allocation that minimizes the total production cost. It would be unnecessarily expensive to manufacture all cars in Detroit, unnecessarily expensive to grow all cars in Iowa, and unnecessarily expensive to use the two production processes in anything other than the natural ratio that emerges as a result of competition.

That means that protection for Detroit does more than just transfer income from farmers to autoworkers. It also raises the total cost of providing Americans with a given number of automobiles. The efficiency loss comes with no offsetting gain; it impoverishes the nation as a whole.

There is much talk about improving the efficiency of American car manufacturing. When you have two ways to make a car, the road to efficiency is to use both in optimal proportions. The last thing you should want to do is to artificially hobble one of your production technologies. It is sheer superstition to think that an Iowa-grown Camry is any less “American” than a Detroit-built Taurus. Policies rooted in superstition do not frequently bear efficient fruit.

In 1817, David Ricardo—the first economist to think with the precision, though not the language, of pure mathematics—laid the foundation for all future thought about international trade. In the intervening 150 years his theory has been much elaborated but its foundations remain as firmly established as anything in economics.

Trade theory predicts first that if you protect American producers in one industry from foreign competition, then you must damage American producers in other industries. It predicts second that if you protect American producers in one industry from foreign competition, there must be a net loss in economic efficiency. Ordinarily, textbooks establish these propositions through graphs, equations, and intricate reasoning. The little story above that I learned from David Friedman makes the same propositions blindingly obvious with a single compelling metaphor. That is economics at its best.
https://www.aei.org/publication/economi ... -car-crop/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

also:

Trade by it’s very nature is labor-saving. I could bake my own bread with my own hands and my own pans in my own kitchen. But to do so would take more of my own time than is required for me to earn, by teaching economics, enough income to buy bread from a baker. My specializing in teaching economics and then trading for bread saves me some of my labor.

Or I could bake my own bread by using a fancy bread-making machine that sits on my kitchen counter. But I can’t make such a machine myself; I must trade for such a machine, as well as for the inputs – including the electricity – that it requires to produce yummy bread. So it might fairly be said that any bread that I produce in my own home with my incredible bread machine is the result of trade.

Either way – trade with a baker, or my use of the incredible bread machine – I get bread in exchange for less labor than I would have to use to supply myself with bread were I unable to trade with a baker or to use this machine.

What difference does it make if labor is saved by dealing directly with a machine or with another human being?
http://cafehayek.com/2017/01/42046.html#more-42046" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

By the protectionists logic, Texas would be better off by closing it's borders with all other states. To protect Texas jobs of course. My county would be better to do the same, etc etc. The nonsense of this is self evident.

[ajax]

Many countries have tariffs on goods imported from the US far greater than US taxes on their goods imported here.

That's because we need what other countries make because we've off-shored and out-sourced everything to cut costs.

There is nothing wrong with that. That is what businesses do. The question is what is the burden being placed on business by government. If I recall, American has the highest business taxes in the world, and an heavy regulatory burden to boot. That is where the focus should be. Not some nonsense talk about the ravages for foreigners.

[Silver]

I laughed when I read this from the post above:
First you plant seeds, which are the raw material from which automobiles are constructed. You wait a few months until wheat appears. Then you harvest the wheat, load it onto ships, and sail the ships eastward into the Pacific Ocean. After a few months, the ships reappear with Toyotas on them.

The simple truth of that idea is so refreshing. (I would point out that sailing to Japan from America would require that the ships sail westward, however.)

If the typical argument against jobs going overseas were taken to its logical conclusion then the citizens of Japan must rise up in protest over wheat-growing jobs going overseas.

[ajax]

Haha, good catch on the eastward.

[ajax]

Henry Hazlitt, Economics in One Lesson:

Economics is haunted by more fallacies than any other study known
to man. This is no accident. The inherent difficulties of the subject
would be great enough in any case, but they are multiplied a thousandfold
by a factor that is insignificant in, say, physics, mathematics,
or medicine—the special pleading of selfish interests. While every
group has certain economic interests identical with those of all groups,
every group has also, as we shall see, interests antagonistic to those of
all other groups. While certain public policies would in the long run
benefit everybody, other policies would benefit one group only at the
expense of all other groups. The group that would benefit by such
policies, having such a direct interest in them, will argue for them plausibly
and persistently. It will hire the best buyable minds to devote their
whole time to presenting its case. And it will finally either convince the
general public that its case is sound, or so befuddle it that clear thinking
on the subject becomes next to impossible.

[PressingForward]

No such thing as free trade.

[PressingForward]

.....the burden being placed on business by government. If I recall, American has the highest business taxes in the world, and an heavy regulatory burden to boot..

This is THE problem. If all partners in trade agreed to the same regulatory rules, AND abided by them(#1 for the US is environmental, followed by minimum benefits for workers.....) then possibly free trade could be explored.

[ajax]

This is nonsense. It doesn't matter what the other person does, or what he is labeled (american, chinese, japanese, whatever).

There is also no prerequisite that the other guy be as free as me. (Just because the other guy is not free, doesn't mean I limit my freedom). If we are both willing to trade, we are both made better off, by definition. Or the trade would not occur.

It is presumptuous for third parties to butt into the affairs of others under the guise of said third party knowing what is better for them.

[ajax]

Trump's Appalling Inauguration Speech

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/20 ... h.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Economist Robert Higgs, author of the important work, Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government, writes:

Somewhat under duress, because Elizabeth insisted on listening herself, I also listened to Trump's inaugural speech. I would rank it among the very worst political speeches I have ever had the displeasure to hear. Its recipe seems to have been: combine three parts mercantilist fallacies, three parts offensive nationalist bombast, and four parts sheer populist hot air about how great the American people are and how great they will soon be again, thanks to Trump. Serve accompanied by half-hearted applause from the assembled members of the political criminal class. All in all, simply an appalling performance, even by the abysmally low standards applicable to such egregious ceremonies.

[paulrobots]

[youtube]Donald Trump Oprah Winfrey Interview 1988: http://youtu.be/0CIlHKF_uOA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;[/youtube]

For better or worse, trade has been his thing for a long time, vid is from 1988.

[ajax]

Reality check: US factory jobs lost are due overwhelmingly to increases in productivity and they’re not coming back
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=44758" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Thomas]

So great for the few corporate farm owners that can trade their wheat for cars made in Japan. Meanwhile 320 million other Americans need a job to buy one of those cars made overseas. So those corporate farm owners will buy a Mercedes or Lexus, duty free, while an American made car will have a$10,000 tax added at the border of Germany or most other countries and that is what is so called "free trade".

[ajax]

Meanwhile 320 million other Americans need a job to buy one of those cars made overseas.

I see lots of affordable Hyundai's, Kia's, Toyota's, Honda's, Mazda's in my neighborhood many of which are made in the USA.

...while an American made car will have a$10,000 tax added at the border of Germany or most other countries and that is what is so called "free trade".

Said countries actually hurt themselves by doing this. Not us. Tariffs are akin to putting sanctions on yourself. It is that simple. We do to us in peace what we do to others in war, stop the inflow of goods, and call this prosperity? You implicitly propose to restrict you fellow American's freedom due to some imaginary hobgoblin shouted from a bullhorn. Trumpism has really warped the LDS Freedom fighters.

[Thomas]

Meanwhile 320 million other Americans need a job to buy one of those cars made overseas.

I see lots of affordable Hyundai's, Kia's, Toyota's, Honda's, Mazda's in my neighborhood many of which are made in the USA.

...while an American made car will have a$10,000 tax added at the border of Germany or most other countries and that is what is so called "free trade".

Said countries actually hurt themselves by doing this. Not us. Tariffs are akin to putting sanctions on yourself. It is that simple. We do to us in peace what we do to others in war, stop the inflow of goods, and call this prosperity? You implicitly propose to restrict you fellow American's freedom due to some imaginary hobgoblin shouted from a bullhorn. Trumpism has really warped the LDS Freedom fighters.

My bad. I should have voted for more government regulation, carbon taxes to curb imaginary, man caused, global warming, higher payroll taxes, higher personal income taxes, more government debt, more useless government employees, making life harder for small business and watched the good times roll.

[Silver]

Meanwhile 320 million other Americans need a job to buy one of those cars made overseas.

I see lots of affordable Hyundai's, Kia's, Toyota's, Honda's, Mazda's in my neighborhood many of which are made in the USA.

...while an American made car will have a$10,000 tax added at the border of Germany or most other countries and that is what is so called "free trade".

Said countries actually hurt themselves by doing this. Not us. Tariffs are akin to putting sanctions on yourself. It is that simple. We do to us in peace what we do to others in war, stop the inflow of goods, and call this prosperity? You implicitly propose to restrict you fellow American's freedom due to some imaginary hobgoblin shouted from a bullhorn. Trumpism has really warped the LDS Freedom fighters.

My bad. I should have voted for more government regulation, carbon taxes to curb imaginary, man caused, global warming, higher payroll taxes, higher personal income taxes, more government debt, more useless government employees, making life harder for small business and watched the good times roll.

Please just stop and consider what Ajax is proposing. If the US military erects a naval blockade around an enemy, it is harder for imported goods to arrive in that country. Of necessity, those now scarce goods will be higher priced. War caused those higher prices. Why would we let politicians erect a "legal" blockade around us causing the prices of imported goods cost more? That would be the same effect as if some country had blockaded our ports. Don't you want to keep more of your hard-earned money in your pocket and not in the hands of another? You're poorer when you have less money.

As for your comment about more government regulation and carbon taxes, etc., I think you know very well that Ajax is not in favor of those things either. Just because Ajax (and I) criticize Trump's policies, doesn't mean we are in favor of Hillary's tyrannical ways. The creation of false dichotomies is not helpful.

[Thomas]

Meanwhile 320 million other Americans need a job to buy one of those cars made overseas.

I see lots of affordable Hyundai's, Kia's, Toyota's, Honda's, Mazda's in my neighborhood many of which are made in the USA.

...while an American made car will have a$10,000 tax added at the border of Germany or most other countries and that is what is so called "free trade".

Said countries actually hurt themselves by doing this. Not us. Tariffs are akin to putting sanctions on yourself. It is that simple. We do to us in peace what we do to others in war, stop the inflow of goods, and call this prosperity? You implicitly propose to restrict you fellow American's freedom due to some imaginary hobgoblin shouted from a bullhorn. Trumpism has really warped the LDS Freedom fighters.

My bad. I should have voted for more government regulation, carbon taxes to curb imaginary, man caused, global warming, higher payroll taxes, higher personal income taxes, more government debt, more useless government employees, making life harder for small business and watched the good times roll.

Please just stop and consider what Ajax is proposing. If the US military erects a naval blockade around an enemy, it is harder for imported goods to arrive in that country. Of necessity, those now scarce goods will be higher priced. War caused those higher prices. Why would we let politicians erect a "legal" blockade around us causing the prices of imported goods cost more? That would be the same effect as if some country had blockaded our ports. Don't you want to keep more of your hard-earned money in your pocket and not in the hands of another? You're poorer when you have less money.

As for your comment about more government regulation and carbon taxes, etc., I think you know very well that Ajax is not in favor of those things either. Just because Ajax (and I) criticize Trump's policies, doesn't mean we are in favor of Hillary's tyrannical ways. The creation of false dichotomies is not helpful.

So what's your point? It was a binary choice. Trump or Hillary so why complain?

[Silver]

I see lots of affordable Hyundai's, Kia's, Toyota's, Honda's, Mazda's in my neighborhood many of which are made in the USA.


Said countries actually hurt themselves by doing this. Not us. Tariffs are akin to putting sanctions on yourself. It is that simple. We do to us in peace what we do to others in war, stop the inflow of goods, and call this prosperity? You implicitly propose to restrict you fellow American's freedom due to some imaginary hobgoblin shouted from a bullhorn. Trumpism has really warped the LDS Freedom fighters.

My bad. I should have voted for more government regulation, carbon taxes to curb imaginary, man caused, global warming, higher payroll taxes, higher personal income taxes, more government debt, more useless government employees, making life harder for small business and watched the good times roll.

Please just stop and consider what Ajax is proposing. If the US military erects a naval blockade around an enemy, it is harder for imported goods to arrive in that country. Of necessity, those now scarce goods will be higher priced. War caused those higher prices. Why would we let politicians erect a "legal" blockade around us causing the prices of imported goods cost more? That would be the same effect as if some country had blockaded our ports. Don't you want to keep more of your hard-earned money in your pocket and not in the hands of another? You're poorer when you have less money.

As for your comment about more government regulation and carbon taxes, etc., I think you know very well that Ajax is not in favor of those things either. Just because Ajax (and I) criticize Trump's policies, doesn't mean we are in favor of Hillary's tyrannical ways. The creation of false dichotomies is not helpful.

So what's your point? It was a binary choice. Trump or Hillary so why complain?

That's another false dichotomy.

[Patriot16]

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/20 ... peech.html

Donald Trump is now President of the United States.

In a short 18-minute inauguration speech, Trump spent a remarkable amount of time attacking free trade.

His attack, displaying a complete ignorance of comparative advantage, was fierce:

We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies, and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength...

America will start winning again, winning like never before.

We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth...

We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and Hire American.

What idiocy.

"We will bring back our jobs." Hunh? Jobs lost to automation will never come back.
"We will bring back our borders." Another 'hunh?' Our borders didn't go anywhere. They're still where they were to begin with.
"We will bring back our wealth..." So, is Trump going to tow his overseas properties back to the U.S.?

What sixth grade class did Trump subcontract with to write this speech?

Patriot16

[Bronco73idi]

Who is going to police China Ajax???? I have posted economic truth from CNN about China stealing 200 billion a year in another thread you were preaching in!!!! Countries have gone to war for far less!!!! There are 2 sides to every story but keep preaching your side. Trump didn't win because of his 4th grade speeches, i.e. "Build the Wall". He won because of people like you. The people are sick of hearing people like you who imply that your way is the only way and if you don't agree you are stupid!!!! That's exactly why there are deplorables lol.

[Todd]

Meh. I don't know why everyone's getting so wound up about Trump's speech. It was typical Trump -- lots of hot air flamed by his super-charged ego. Trump is a showman and his speech was a shout-out to the deplorables who voted him in.

We live in a hyper interconnected world that will never go back to the nostalgic leave-it-to-beaver-days of the 50's. I don't care how much Trump pumps his little thumbs at his chest, America will never experience the low-education, factory-job lifestyle of the post world war II era again. It was an anomaly. The rest of the world was in tattered ruins and Britain had essentially transferred a great deal of it's wealth to the United States to survive Hitler. We were the only game in town.

It only took a generation, but the rest of the world rebuilt and challenged America's industrial strength. Unencumbered by unions and labor laws, they could make things cheaper and faster. Prices came down on everything. Great for the gods of industry. Great for the Wal-Mart lovin', sweatsuit sportin' masses of the USA -- even though they complained that instead of working on the assembly line, they were now collecting unemployment or saying, "you wanna super-size that?"

So, unless the rest of the world gets shredded again in a global conflict and America is spared, I don't see any way Trump can make good on his "rant".

Or maybe that is the plan of the Pentaverate -- use the Donald to fan the fires of nationalism, spread it to the rest of the world, provoke war, and watch the world burn. It's the only way you're going to get Geneva Steel back on the shores of Utah lake.

[ajax]

Meanwhile 320 million other Americans need a job to buy one of those cars made overseas.

I see lots of affordable Hyundai's, Kia's, Toyota's, Honda's, Mazda's in my neighborhood many of which are made in the USA.

...while an American made car will have a$10,000 tax added at the border of Germany or most other countries and that is what is so called "free trade".

Said countries actually hurt themselves by doing this. Not us. Tariffs are akin to putting sanctions on yourself. It is that simple. We do to us in peace what we do to others in war, stop the inflow of goods, and call this prosperity? You implicitly propose to restrict you fellow American's freedom due to some imaginary hobgoblin shouted from a bullhorn. Trumpism has really warped the LDS Freedom fighters.

My bad. I should have voted for more government regulation, carbon taxes to curb imaginary, man caused, global warming, higher payroll taxes, higher personal income taxes, more government debt, more useless government employees, making life harder for small business and watched the good times roll.

Standing for liberty and sound economic thinking is blind to whoever is in office. It doesn't matter if "my team" wins. I'm guessing the left will become anti-war once more and the right all in favor of running peoples lives.

[ajax]

Trump didn't win because of his 4th grade speeches, i.e. "Build the Wall". He won because of people like you.

Um, that's exactly how he won. "Build the wall", "Drain the Swamp", "Lock Her Up"

It's tapping into base emotion. It's pure political theater. And the ldsff'ers lap it up because the other team lost.