User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 93

Thread: Tariffs

  1. #41
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    I guess we never should have had railroads in this country, then.
    How exactly would a government put a tariff on a railroad? Tariffs are applied to foreign goods, not domestic infrastructure.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  2. #42
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Not paid for by government.
    Yes it was. Read up on your history.

  3. #43
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    How exactly would a government put a tariff on a railroad? Tariffs are applied to foreign goods, not domestic infrastructure.
    Not related to tariffs - it was an example of a heavily-subsidized private industry, much like the automotive industry is today.

  4. #44
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    The national defense argument is backwards.

    If you want to promote peace, then fewer tariffs (and quotas) are the way to go. Trade partners have a greater incentive to avoid violence.
    Until one trade partner decides it's strong enough to conquer the other and get a bigger slice of the profits.

  5. #45
    Senior Member avolkiteshvara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    YaYa
    Posts
    895

    Default

    Gov did build the rails. We borrowed from the british.

  6. #46
    Senior Member avolkiteshvara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    YaYa
    Posts
    895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    The national defense argument is backwards.

    If you want to promote peace, then fewer tariffs (and quotas) are the way to go. Trade partners have a greater incentive to avoid violence.


    This is a myopic statement.

  7. #47
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    The national defense argument is backwards.

    If you want to promote peace, then fewer tariffs (and quotas) are the way to go. Trade partners have a greater incentive to avoid violence.
    Well, you are right to a degree... the creep at the corner probably won't stab you as long as you keep playing his three card monte.

    But the best solution would be not to get involved with him in a first place.
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

  8. #48
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Until one trade partner decides it's strong enough to conquer the other and get a bigger slice of the profits.
    And what would happen without trade? Even when one trade partner is significantly more powerful than another, there is a greater incentive to avoid violence. It doesn't mean that conflict and aggression will not occur, but it raises the costs and reduces the benefits for all involved.

    Quote Originally Posted by avolkiteshvara
    This is a myopic statement.
    No, it's not. Nations with strong trade relations cannot usually afford to go to war, and political support is rarely forthcoming from the populace -- Napoleon discovered this when he tried to restrict trade with Britain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar
    But the best solution would be not to get involved with him in a first place.
    But then what has he to lose from stabbing you when you aren't looking? Free trade is a civilising force in the world.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  9. #49
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    And what would happen without trade? Even when one trade partner is significantly more powerful than another, there is a greater incentive to avoid violence. It doesn't mean that conflict and aggression will not occur, but it raises the costs and reduces the benefits for all involved.

    No, it's not. Nations with strong trade relations cannot usually afford to go to war, and political support is rarely forthcoming from the populace -- Napoleon discovered this when he tried to restrict trade with Britain.

    But then what has he to lose from stabbing you when you aren't looking? Free trade is a civilising force in the world.
    Economic ties tend to foster cooperation between nations. "Tend to" is the key phrase. However, just because there are economic transactions going on, doesn't mean there are no nefarious reasons behind it, or possible potential long term detriment to one of the parties.

    For example, are you familiar with Russia's tactics of using energy as an offensive political tool?

    Also, you do understand that if we outsource all our, say, steel production, and there is an outbreak of hostilities we will be at a severe disadvantage?
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

  10. #50
    Senior Member avolkiteshvara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    YaYa
    Posts
    895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post

    No, it's not. Nations with strong trade relations cannot usually afford to go to war, and political support is rarely forthcoming from the populace -- Napoleon discovered this when he tried to restrict trade with Britain.
    They don't have to go to war. The capability is enough.

Similar Threads

  1. Tariffs
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-09-2011, 02:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO