Post by unlawflcombatnt on Feb 4, 2008 2:44:41 GMT -6
I have a suggestion for an addition to the current "stimulus" package. It's one that actually raises Federal revenue, while not costing taxpayers a dime.
How about putting a 35% tariff on ALL $305 billion-worth of Chinese imports—which is justifiable because of their currency manipulation? This would raise over $100 billion in new revenue. It would make Chinese products more expensive for Americans, thus reducing their purchase by Americans. It would make American products comparatively cheaper, increasing their purchase as a result. This would increase demand for American-made substitutes for Chinese-made products, and increase demand for American workers to produce these substitutes.
Anything increasing demand for American-made goods, at the expense of Chinese produced goods, would direct "stimulus-package" money toward purchase of American goods, and employment of American workers to produce those goods.
It might also drive Walmart out of business, allowing local retailers to take back the local market from Wal-Mart, and hire back ex-Wal-Mart workers for higher wages than Wal-Mart paid.
A higher number of local retailers creates more local competition for workers—putting upward pressure on wages. This is new upward pressure, which did NOT exist when Walmart monopolized the entire local labor market.
More competitors in the local retail market increases competion for sales, which lowers prices as a result. More competitors trying to hire workers increases competion for workers—raising wages as a result.
The replacement of Walmart by multiple local retailers is a win-win situation for both local retailers, workers, and consumers. The only losers are the shareholders of Walmart and their mega-rich Corporate management.
Though it may take some time for these tariffs to increase employment of American production workers, the effects on retail workers would occur much sooner. Whenever a local Walmart goes under, it increases the market share for the remaining local retailers, and creates opportunities for new retailers. Though a Walmart collapse reduces local employment temporarily, the loss is soon offset by local retailers' demand for workers.
Again, the loss of Walmart increases the market for local retailers—increasing their demand for local workers—who'll likely be paid more due to increased competition for labor. The new higher wages increase spendable income in the local market, increasing the $ value of consumer production demand. Thus the $ value of the local consumer market is increased above that existing under Walmart.
There may or may not be price increases on Chinese imports. However, the huge profit margins achieved by replacing $140/day American workers with $4/day Chinese workers, allows a lot of room for Chinese producers to maintain current prices, while still remaining profitable. If they sell goods for 10x the cost, and tariffs double their cost, maintaining current prices would still allow them to sell goods at 5x the cost. Thus many could still remain profitable without raising prices any.
Hopefully, however, many will become un-profitable, and allow American-located producers to take back the market stolen from them by Benedict Arnold American multinationals, who've reduced costs by using Chinese worker to replace American workers—the same American workers who fund their consumer market—thereby reducing the very consumer spending power that creates their market.
Multinational Corporate traitors have continued to shoot themselves in the foot—reducing aggregate American labor income by replacing American workers with Chinese workers. That foot has now become gangrenous, and needs to be amputated. And if not amputated soon, the gangrene will spread, making further amputation necessary, and possibly killing the patient if left untreated.
A 35% tariff on Chinese imports might provide the needed "amputation," preventing an even larger spread of the gangrenous loss of American consumer spending power.
How about putting a 35% tariff on ALL $305 billion-worth of Chinese imports—which is justifiable because of their currency manipulation? This would raise over $100 billion in new revenue. It would make Chinese products more expensive for Americans, thus reducing their purchase by Americans. It would make American products comparatively cheaper, increasing their purchase as a result. This would increase demand for American-made substitutes for Chinese-made products, and increase demand for American workers to produce these substitutes.
Anything increasing demand for American-made goods, at the expense of Chinese produced goods, would direct "stimulus-package" money toward purchase of American goods, and employment of American workers to produce those goods.
It might also drive Walmart out of business, allowing local retailers to take back the local market from Wal-Mart, and hire back ex-Wal-Mart workers for higher wages than Wal-Mart paid.
A higher number of local retailers creates more local competition for workers—putting upward pressure on wages. This is new upward pressure, which did NOT exist when Walmart monopolized the entire local labor market.
More competitors in the local retail market increases competion for sales, which lowers prices as a result. More competitors trying to hire workers increases competion for workers—raising wages as a result.
The replacement of Walmart by multiple local retailers is a win-win situation for both local retailers, workers, and consumers. The only losers are the shareholders of Walmart and their mega-rich Corporate management.
Though it may take some time for these tariffs to increase employment of American production workers, the effects on retail workers would occur much sooner. Whenever a local Walmart goes under, it increases the market share for the remaining local retailers, and creates opportunities for new retailers. Though a Walmart collapse reduces local employment temporarily, the loss is soon offset by local retailers' demand for workers.
Again, the loss of Walmart increases the market for local retailers—increasing their demand for local workers—who'll likely be paid more due to increased competition for labor. The new higher wages increase spendable income in the local market, increasing the $ value of consumer production demand. Thus the $ value of the local consumer market is increased above that existing under Walmart.
There may or may not be price increases on Chinese imports. However, the huge profit margins achieved by replacing $140/day American workers with $4/day Chinese workers, allows a lot of room for Chinese producers to maintain current prices, while still remaining profitable. If they sell goods for 10x the cost, and tariffs double their cost, maintaining current prices would still allow them to sell goods at 5x the cost. Thus many could still remain profitable without raising prices any.
Hopefully, however, many will become un-profitable, and allow American-located producers to take back the market stolen from them by Benedict Arnold American multinationals, who've reduced costs by using Chinese worker to replace American workers—the same American workers who fund their consumer market—thereby reducing the very consumer spending power that creates their market.
Multinational Corporate traitors have continued to shoot themselves in the foot—reducing aggregate American labor income by replacing American workers with Chinese workers. That foot has now become gangrenous, and needs to be amputated. And if not amputated soon, the gangrene will spread, making further amputation necessary, and possibly killing the patient if left untreated.
A 35% tariff on Chinese imports might provide the needed "amputation," preventing an even larger spread of the gangrenous loss of American consumer spending power.