will mexican companies absorb the 20% tariff trump puts on their goods?

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
We could just grow our own avocados domestically, you're ignoring that it would be more profitable.
You don't know very much about this.

It's always the most ignorant who says "you just" in a declarative statement.

You just arrest them.
You just cut taxes.
You just let the free market decide.

You just grow all avocados domestically. LOL

Avocados aren't such a big deal. You just raise prices to cut demand to US production levels. See how stupid and easy that is? I'll miss my guacamole but I'm not paying $10 for one. I was in Japan a while ago. One apple was $10 in US currency. It was a nice looking apple. Protectionism only means higher prices. And less demand. Sort of a lose-lose-lose-lose proposition.
 

doublejj

Well-Known Member
You don't know very much about this.

It's always the most ignorant who says "you just" in a declarative statement.

You just arrest them.
You just cut taxes.
You just let the free market decide.

You just grow all avocados domestically. LOL

Avocados aren't such a big deal. You just raise prices to cut demand to US production levels. See how stupid and easy that is? I'll miss my guacamole but I'm not paying $10 for one. I was in Japan a while ago. One apple was $10 in US currency. It was a nice looking apple. Protectionism only means higher prices. And less demand. Sort of a lose-lose-lose-lose proposition.
that's trumps trickle down policy....lose-lose-lose
 

Milliardo Peacecraft

Well-Known Member
there is a reason we don't grow more avocados in the us.....it's called climate.....OH there's that dirty word again!!:cuss:
false. It's a price issue. We'd extract gold from sea water if price justified the cost.

Except there's much more to it than that. Maybe you want to read "The Wealth of Nations" and Ricardo's work on international trade. The economics of the thing means that we lose as a country even if some industries win. The efficiencies offered by international trade outweigh all your protectionist bullshit, infant.
That's also false. "Efficiencies" are almost impossible to determine with trade and oil subsidies as they sit right now. Is it more efficient to grow apples in California, ship them to Africa to be processed and waxed, and then ship them back the NYC for sale? That's our current system, it makes a few people really rich, but it isn't efficient in terms of real cost, externalities, and energy.

If prices go up, the industry becomes more profitable, and more players enter the market. More diversified production, more supply, prices then drop and stabilize. They might stabilize higher than they were, but more people are employed and can afford to pay them.
 

doublejj

Well-Known Member
false. It's a price issue. We'd extract gold from sea water if price justified the cost.



That's also false. "Efficiencies" are almost impossible to determine with trade and oil subsidies as they sit right now. Is it more efficient to grow apples in California, ship them to Africa to be processed and waxed, and then ship them back the NYC for sale? That's our current system, it makes a few people really rich, but it isn't efficient in terms of real cost, externalities, and energy.

If prices go up, the industry becomes more profitable, and more players enter the market. More diversified production, more supply, prices then drop and stabilize. They might stabilize higher than they were, but more people are employed and can afford to pay them.
have you ever grown an avocado?....
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
false. It's a price issue. We'd extract gold from sea water if price justified the cost.



That's also false. "Efficiencies" are almost impossible to determine with trade and oil subsidies as they sit right now. Is it more efficient to grow apples in California, ship them to Africa to be processed and waxed, and then ship them back the NYC for sale? That's our current system, it makes a few people really rich, but it isn't efficient in terms of real cost, externalities, and energy.

If prices go up, the industry becomes more profitable, and more players enter the market. More diversified production, more supply, prices then drop and stabilize. They might stabilize higher than they were, but more people are employed and can afford to pay them.
the shit is coming out of your eyeballs already. calm down.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
lose, lose, file for bankruptcy, lose, screw over your subs, lose.
Absolutely. Trump is talking about trade wars with China and Mexico. Plenty of economists have warned that exactly these actions will reduce US GDP, otherwise known as recession.

The problem with the US economy isn't trade with other nations, rather it's the subsidies that US corporations receive when doing that trade. Yet, Trump is talking about tariffs, not ending corporate welfare.

Its as if he wants to trigger a recession. Then again, maybe he does. he wanted the last one too.
 

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Yeah, this makes sense. :???:

So, since the Mexican product is taxed to produce an -- what? 20% -- higher price then companies are going to invest in new factories and staff in the US to produce something they are already making in Mexico, after investing in new factories and staff. Ummm, no. We'll just pay the tariff. Meanwhile, Mexico will start dealing with China.

Not saying it's all going to go that way. Some industries will relocate here and make a larger population of people seeking to sneak across our border.

The only long term solution to illegal immigration from Mexico is to work with Mexico to improve it's economy. Trump's wall is forecast to cost up to 50 billion in wasted dollars. Maybe we can put that money to better use. Also end the war on drugs, which is dragging Mexico down by funding criminal organizations there.
The 50 bill won't buy a "wall" BTW.

The 50 bill estimate was for a single layer fence.
 
Top