Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SalmonGod]

To be fair, there's plenty to criticize about free trade.  It's been heavily abused as a way to make it profitable for global corporations to abuse disadvantaged populations around the world, and given them incentive to find ways to make and keep various people around the world disadvantaged, too.  Look at how many of our FTAs are with South America.  It's no coincidence that, for example, those same regions have alarming murder rates of environmentalists.

[WealthyRadish]

*ominous soviet anthem getting closer from behind a door*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCt0DLsn3lM

If they really wanted to hit us where it hurts, they'd put tariffs on movies and electronic entertainment. I feel like that's way more relevant to what American produces than steel, booze and pants.

Honestly those items strike me as someone's out-dated ideas about what represents American production these days.

This is my impression as well. The way Trump also "supports" infrastructure seems very similar; he's following a vague pop-culture understanding that heavy industry and infrastructure are big tough strong governmenty things that will likely play to his base (and feed into his "builder" charade), but that's about the extent of thought that he's put into it.

[redwallzyl]

To be fair, there's plenty to criticize about free trade.  It's been heavily abused as a way to make it profitable for global corporations to abuse disadvantaged populations around the world, and given them incentive to find ways to make and keep various people around the world disadvantaged, too.  Look at how many of our FTAs are with South America.  It's no coincidence that, for example, those same regions have alarming murder rates of environmentalists.

Yes, total free trade should only be a thing between nations of similar wealth. As it is now is mostly neoliberal neocolonialism in the developing world. Companies are "free" to steal all there resources and "free" to not care a bit about the countries they take them from.

*ominous soviet anthem getting closer from behind a door*

More like finally shedding the built up cold war capitalist obsessed bullshit.

[Lord Shonus]

To be fair, there's plenty to criticize about free trade.  It's been heavily abused as a way to make it profitable for global corporations to abuse disadvantaged populations around the world, and given them incentive to find ways to make and keep various people around the world disadvantaged, too.  Look at how many of our FTAs are with South America.  It's no coincidence that, for example, those same regions have alarming murder rates of environmentalists.

I've always felt that a tariff based on environmental standards and relative pay would be the way to go. Goods from places like Europe or Japan would then have very little tariff, while those from China or South America would have greater ones. This would help discourage exploitation of weaker economies while still encouraging investment (if balanced properly), and make sound ecological policies more practical by killing the forces disincentive them.

[sluissa]

To be fair, there's plenty to criticize about free trade.  It's been heavily abused as a way to make it profitable for global corporations to abuse disadvantaged populations around the world, and given them incentive to find ways to make and keep various people around the world disadvantaged, too.  Look at how many of our FTAs are with South America.  It's no coincidence that, for example, those same regions have alarming murder rates of environmentalists.

I've always felt that a tariff based on environmental standards and relative pay would be the way to go. Goods from places like Europe or Japan would then have very little tariff, while those from China or South America would have greater ones. This would help discourage exploitation of weaker economies while still encouraging investment (if balanced properly), and make sound ecological policies more practical by killing the forces disincentive them.

I've thought this before as well, but given how quickly I was shot down by a "It's complicated, you wouldn't understand" on my last economic insight, it's probably seen as a bad idea as well.

I imagine it would never pass mostly because the people who have the most to gain from unethical free trade are the same ones lobbying both sides of congress for even more free trade.

[Lord Shonus]

I'm sure it would be a nightmare to actually pull off, but I still think that it would be worth a try.

[Cyroth]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I spent waaaay too much time looking at that picture.

Or too little.

All hail the mighty Bagger.

Bagger 288 Bagger 288

It just shows again that we germans are not satisfied unless we build impractically huge tracked vehicles.

[Egan_BW]

A glorious machine fit for squishing Vek.

[McTraveller]

Environmental / labor practice tariffs only really work if they are imposed onthe vast majority of the imported volume of the affected goods.

If there is anyone at all willing to buy those goods that are "questionably produced" then any such tariff is largely symbolic.

[Jopax]

It's also rather hypocritical to impose environmental taxes on other countries when your country is doing just as much damage, if not more and is one of the dicks that denies climate change. Then again, hypocrisy is kind of a standard in politics, not an exception it seems.

[martinuzz]

BlackRock, the largest investment company in the world (the company manages over 5000 billion euros worth investement worldwide), announced that it will start offereing stock packages that exclude weapons producing companies.
They also plan on using other means of pressure to influence firearm producers.
BlackRock is majority shareholder in 3 weapons manufacturers, including Outdoor Brands, of whom Smith & Wesson (producer of the AR-15) is a daughter company.
The other two are Sturm, and Ruger & Co.

BlackRock demands to know what measures firearm producers are going to take to prevent guns from falling into irresponsible hands, and warned that if nescessary it will use it's majority position to force down changes.
BlackRock, as a majority shareholder, is worried about reputation damage, and about lawsuits and claims from victims of shooting incidents.

[da_nang]

BlackRock demands to know what measures firearm producers are going to take to prevent guns from falling into irresponsible hands, and warned that if nescessary it will use it's majority position to force down changes.

Because, obviously, irresponsible gun owners buy directly from firearms producers.

[martinuzz]

BlackRock demands to know what measures firearm producers are going to take to prevent guns from falling into irresponsible hands, and warned that if nescessary it will use it's majority position to force down changes.

Because, obviously, irresponsible gun owners buy directly from firearms producers.

Irresponisble hands could just as well translate to 'backwater gun retailers that don't give a wooden nickle about background checks or age regulations'

[Loud Whispers]

They're probably referring to straw buyers, who purchase guns legally which then end up in circulation in the international gun black market. Or could just be as simple as a dodgy looking guy getting his gf to buy a gun for him

[Frumple]

... blackrock, eh? Well now. Considering the president's financial investments I think the chances of trump implementing something that shits on the NRA's goals just bumped themselves up a few good notches. Maybe we'll get something useful out of the top level corruption this time :V