Johnny one thing that seems to be a recurrent theme in your discussion is the rise in costs.
True. And we've seen in throughout history, as well. Sugar tariffs have increased the cost of sugar to the consumer. The Smoot-Hawley tariffs notoriously increased the cost of numerous goods.
Exactly what will rise, who will it effect and by how much?
So that's really impossible to know - other than to be able to predict that prices will increase. Some importers and retailers have slightly larger margins that will allow them to absorb a bit more of the increases than the competition in an effort to be the most competitive. Doesn't mean they won't have to raise prices - most will - just impossible to say by how much. And then, of course, it depends on the amount of the tariff being imposed, elasticity of demand, etc. But, generally speaking, if a tariff is imposed on goods, those goods will increase in price. And, as 99.9% of economists will tell you (not the socialist ones or the couple working for Trump right now), the consumer is the one affected. It's never not happened that way and absolutely no reason to think that it would happen any other way.
By the way you mentioned not having enough laborers for textiles; you don't think we can find the right mix of people and robotics to make it happen?
I think it's a fair argument to say that robotics can play a big role but I also think that we're a VERY long way away from that being the case. More importantly, I think that the resources of US labor are better spent inventing and innovating in the field of robotics, not in making underwear. That's exactly what the principle of comparative advantage is all about - focus resources where they are best leveraged. If it wasn't for global trade over the last century and a half (or more?), we'd still be stuck in factories. Instead, we've offloaded that non value-adding work to the countries with cheaper labor, cheaper land, and overall cheaper costs of production and focused our resources on progress. The world is a better place and more people have been lifted out of poverty because of it.
And, no, I don't think we have anywhere near the capacity to provide the labor required. I only gave one example - textiles - where we're short 60 million laborers. That's just one, single industry and we're not even remotely close to be able to supply the labor for it. Nowhere near it.
As for coffee we don't grow much here so that we'll have to import
OK. So that's exactly the point. There are things other countries are better equipped to do so why on earth are we imposing tariffs on them?! It's craziness! Coffee is just one example. I gave another example of wine, but there are thousands of other industries where we are not even close to equipped to supply the demand, yet we're just throwing down a blanket of tariffs across the globe. Please tell me how that makes sense.
Coffee and other things that we can't grow are pretty obvious examples. But the point is the exact same for labor. Other countries are better equipped than we are to make underwear at a cost that makes sense for the consumer. We're better equipped to make robotics and develop AI and research illnesses and all manner of other things than many other countries are. Let them make the underwear so that we can do the other stuff. Comparative advantage. Again, that's how we got to this point in human progress and prosperity.
but I wouldn't put that on the real need list; to me underwear is more important.
That's funny!
I’d imagine you know the story of how a pencil is made by now. If not, here’s an article that references it:
https://fee.org/articles/elon-musk-channels-milton-friedmans-pencil-the-message-of-free-trade
(The FEE, by the way, is an organization founded on principles of individual liberty, free-market economics, entrepreneurship, private property, high moral character, and limited government)
anti-tariff.org
