Lone Candle
Champion of Truth
China is innovative and excellent at diffusing new technology throughout its economy.
The U.S. innovates to make money. China innovates to enhance China’s global power. The U.S. must adapt to this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlM0hfBs9_E
“Also overlooked by those claiming that 19th-century tariffs made America great is that the country’s biggest import at the time was immigrants, who incurred no tariffs. As economists Cecil Bohanon and T. Norman Van Cott argue in “Tariffs, Immigration, and Economic Insulation,” weighing the impact of tariffs on economic growth without accounting for massive immigration—which increased from about 200,000 individuals a year in 1865 to more than 1,000,000 in 1910—can only lead to questionable conclusions. They explain that “the impact of high tariffs, clearly an insulating policy, was swamped by free immigration, a quintessential policy of economic openness.”
Trump is an avowed restrictionist on both immigration and trade. And so, if a second Trump presidency brings higher tariffs and further immigration restrictions, we won’t be as fortunate as were our 19th century forebears.
Making matters worse is that today’s economy is vastly different from that of a century ago. Globalization has interconnected markets and supply chains in unprecedented ways. Half of what Americans import are inputs they use to produce goods domestically. Tariffs on these imports increase production costs, making American products less competitive both at home and abroad.
Furthermore, the service sector—comprising industries like technology, finance, and health care—now represents nearly four-fifths of the U.S. economy. These sectors thrive on innovation, skilled labor, and access to global markets, rather than on protectionist policies.”
https://reason.com/2024/09/19/no-trump-style-tariffs-do-not-grow-the-economy/
“There’s a straightforward logic to both candidate’s claims. Increased demand for housing, whether from immigrants or corporate investors, would be expected to increase prices.
But increased demand should also be expected to increase supply, bringing prices back down.
Corporate investors and immigrants also play an important, direct role in increasing housing supply. Investors supply capital to build new homes. Immigrants supply labor for the same.
At least one study has found that the labor shortages caused by immigration restrictions do more to raise the cost of housing than they do to lower it through reduced demand.”
…
“one study has found that restrictions on investor-owned rental housing raised rents and raised the incomes of residents in select neighborhoods by excluding lower-income renters. Studies on the effects of rent-recommendation software have found mixed effects on housing costs. In tight markets, such software raises rents. When supply is loose, it lowers them.
As always, the ability of builders to add new supply is what sets the price in the long term. Both candidates gestured at this in their own way, although Walz was more explicit about the relationship.”
https://reason.com/2024/10/01/at-v-p-debate-j-d-vance-and-tim-walz-scapegoat-immigrants-corporate-speculators-for-high-housing-costs/
Mark Cuban & Reid Hoffman Explain Why Kamala Harris is the Key to Economic Growth | BLFH Podcast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECmEdk8-iYU
“whether they are open or closed, many American ports rank among the least efficient in the entire world. The ports in New York, Baltimore, and Houston—three of the largest of the 36 ports that could have been shut down by the ILA strike—are ranked no higher than 300th place (out of 348 in total) in the World Bank’s most recent report on port efficiency. Not a single U.S. port ranks in the top 50. Slow-moving ports act as bottlenecks to commerce both coming and going, which “reduces the competitiveness of the country…and hinders economic growth and poverty reduction,” the World Bank notes.”
…
“The problem is that American ports need more automation just to catch up with what’s considered normal in the rest of the world. For example, automated cranes in use at the port of Rotterdam in the Netherlands since the 1990s are 80 percent faster than the human-operated cranes used at the port in Oakland, California, according to an estimate by one trade publication.
It’s worth noting that the lack of automation, and the resulting inefficiencies, at American ports was a major factor in the supply chain issues that popped up during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.”
…
“Additionally, the tradeoff between automation and jobs is not a zero-sum game. A study published in 2022 found that the partial automation of the Port of Los Angeles had resulted in “significant gains in throughput, productivity, and efficiency, resulting in more hours than ever for workers.” As with other forms of automation, some job losses are inevitable, but efficiency gains benefit dockworkers too—and the truckers, manufacturers, and others in the supply chain who are waiting for goods to be loaded or unloaded.
Indeed, if maximizing the number of union jobs at ports was the highest value to society, Daggett and the ILA might want to change their demands. Why not demand a ban on cranes, forklifts, and tractor-trailers too? It would take a lot more workers to unload a freighter if everything had to be lifted by hand, after all.”
https://reason.com/2024/10/04/automate-the-ports/
“The U.S. government has limited influence over those global prices, which are shaped by market and geopolitical factors. Gas prices dropped during the early months of the pandemic, for example, because millions of people stayed home and dramatically reduced their gas consumption. But as the Bureau of Labor Statistics documented, prices surged as society reopened and the economy started to rebound.
While energy prices have consistently been higher under Biden than they were during Trump’s first term, they have dropped from their heights in 2022, when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent global prices soaring. As the Agriculture Department noted in February, fuel and oil costs saw significant declines in 2023 and are expected to decline again in 2024, thanks to drops in global energy prices. U.S. oil prices in the past few days have dropped to their lowest level in two years as OPEC+ says it will increase its own oil production later this year and fuel demand in China looks weaker.
And it’s not clear green-lighting more domestic drilling would have much impact on energy costs. For one thing, the U.S. is already producing record amounts of oil and gas, not to mention renewable energy like solar, wind and hydropower. The Biden administration has also approved more permits to drill for oil on federal land than many of its predecessors, even as it moves to restrict how much federal land is available for drilling.
Several economists also told POLITICO that while energy costs are a factor in every part of the food supply chain, they’re just one of many inputs companies consider when setting prices.”
https://www.politico.com/interactives/2024/food-cost-price-harris-trump-biden/
The demand for protections against automation sound outrageous. Preventing automation costs everyone more money. They are threatening to sharply increase the price of everything temporarily, if we don’t let them gradually increase the price for everyone overtime due to inefficient practices. It’s selfishness–hurting everyone else for their own gain. If we want an economy that grows and creates the most good for the most people, we have to let inefficient jobs die.
“The striking workers essentially load and unload the giant containers that go onto ships, trains or commercial trucks, which can contain all manner of goods, from building materials to auto parts. People expecting new cars may not get them, some factories may not have the raw materials they need and some items, such as bananas, may become hard to come by — especially the longer the strike persists.
Vessels used by other industries — for instance, oil tankers and cruise ships — will not be affected by the strike, because they are not loaded or unloaded by ILA members. And ports on the West Coast aren’t part of the contract dispute.
Even the appearance of such a sharp blow to the economy just weeks before the election presents an enormous opening for Republicans to hammer their message that Democrats are worse for Americans’ wallets. It’s happening just as Harris is trying to convince voters that having her in the White House would mean more jobs and more affordable housing, among other promises.
Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul tried to reassure residents Monday that her state — one of the strike’s biggest targets — has enough essential goods to keep it from suffering the kind of immediate supply chain problems that hit it during the early days of the pandemic.
She said her team is working to make sure the strike doesn’t bleed into people’s lives, and said she doesn’t expect it to affect the election, particularly in the state’s close congressional contests.
“In preparation for this moment, New York has been working around the clock to ensure that our grocery stores and medical facilities have the essential products they need,” Hochul said in a statement shortly after the strike became official. “It’s critical for USMX and the ILA to reach a fair agreement soon that respects workers and ensures a flow of commerce through our ports.”
New York has stockpiles of medical supplies, many prescription drugs come by plane, and the U.S. produces lots of its own food. Even much of the food that the U.S. imports comes through land borders with Canada and Mexico that the strike will not affect.
Still, New York and New Jersey are home to the East Coast’s largest port. One hundred thousand cargo containers are sitting at port facilities in the two states, and dozens of cargo ships are preparing to anchor offshore until the strike ends, according to regional port officials.”
…
“The strike comes after a six-year master contract between the union and the shipping industry expired on Monday. The union has asked for major wage increases and protections against automation. The shipping industry has accused the union of not coming to the table.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/01/dockworkers-strike-east-gulf-coast-00181807
How Chinese Industry Got Too Good, Too Fast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdlKQ6sSb_o
“I like to think of the circular economy as a jacked-up “reduce, reuse, recycle” system. The hope is to keep materials in use for as long as possible with minimal waste, and to do so on a much wider scale.
Right now, there are two main reasons why a lot of what we recycle doesn’t ever actually get made into new things: It’s either prohibitively expensive to do, or we just don’t know how to recycle that material yet (like most plastics). A circular economy also would aim to prevent waste from happening in the first place by designing products made to be recycled.”
…
“The most obvious approach to see — but the most difficult for governments to implement — is to pass regulations that ensure compliance for labor and the environment. Every company that produces would have to adhere to some kind of law that outlines how the waste and the extraction of new materials should be handled. Governments would also have to invest in infrastructure to make it possible to meet those tougher rules, whether that’s scaling up recycling facilities or providing subsidies for innovators to solve a complex recycling problem.
One public policy idea that’s gaining traction is extended producer responsibility (EPR), which shifts the end-of-life management of products away from consumers and governments back to the corporations that sell those products.
Right now, you and I likely pay taxes to our municipal and state governments to handle trash and recycling. EPR laws would require companies to front money for the products they sell into a responsible entity — like a nonprofit organization or government agency — that helps pay for recycling infrastructure, collection, sorting, processing, and sale of recovered materials. (EPR can also look like voluntary take-back programs, where consumers can return their used stuff to the company to recycle into other things.)”
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/370626/consumerism-circular-economy-single-use-recycling-landfill-garbage
“Unfortunately, the poll also suggests that Americans—just like their elected officials—may be a bit confused on the subject.
Seventy-five percent of respondents indicated being “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” “about rising prices of things you buy because of trade tariffs.” But a majority would also support imposing tariffs on certain products, under certain conditions, if they felt it would help American businesses. For example, 62 percent said they would support “adding a tariff to blue jeans sold in the US that are manufactured in other countries to boost production and jobs in the American blue jean industry”—though, notably, 66 percent would oppose a tariff if it raised the price of a pair of jeans by $10.
Further, when asked, “From what you’ve read and heard, who primarily is responsible for paying for the cost of a U.S. tariff,” only 47 percent answered that it was American consumers. The next highest answer was “Not sure” at 20 percent, followed by 15 percent who said the U.S. government pays, 12 percent who said foreign companies pay, and 5 percent who said foreign governments pay the tariffs.
Despite Trump’s claims that exporting countries pay tariffs, it is indeed consumers who pay in the form of higher prices. On the campaign trail in 2019, Biden claimed—accurately—that “Trump doesn’t get the basics. He thinks his tariffs are being paid by China. Any freshman econ student could tell you that the American people are paying his tariffs.” And yet as recently as last month, Biden was proposing 25 percent tariffs on imports from Mexico that use Chinese steel.
While not entirely consistent on the subject, the survey suggests that Americans largely recognize the positive effects of international free trade. It’s a shame, then, that our politicians don’t.”
https://reason.com/2024/08/08/survey-63-percent-of-americans-support-free-trade-why-dont-our-politicians/