40% Tax on Goods Imported into the USA - What would it mean for guitars?

[DaleH]

Their thinking of a $5 charge on people flying into the US. But not if we drive across because our cross border shopping and the fact we have a highter dollar than the US would make that bad for business .

 

Guess they figure tax those that can't vote against them.

[DTrane]

 

if you are complaining about chinese goods, theres not much point blaming free trade because the US doesnt have a free trade agreement with china. the US also uses more slave labour than china via the prison system and is usually the one holding the world back with environmental regulations - most of which china has signed. it ultimately boils down to whether a business is viable, and if not, whether that business is valuable enough for the government to prop it up via tarrifs or subsidies. basically an addmission that free market capitalism has failed in that area and the government needs to step in. guitars are not one of the business sectors worth propping up. most things arent. really its just food, some transport and millitary that warrant protectionism because they are key to soveriegnty and security.

 

 

yeah, keep believing your PC bull{censored} that america is bad

[ihavenofish]

 

yeah, keep believing your PC bull{censored} that america is bad

 

 

uh, how is the fact that athe united states has a massive prison labour system and no free trade agreement with china PC?

[billybilly]

I know one thing, it wouldn't make guitars made in america cheaper to buy.

 

It is very complicated to draw a 40% import tax across the line. There are particular agreements with different countries. If the US exports to a particular country, who don't have am import tax from the US, they will expect the same. If the US imposes an import tax on their products, they will do the same...blah...blah...blah....

[soundcreation]

 

I hate the PhD economists from ivy league skools saying how great free trade is. Their colleges get donations from the super rich and will say whatever they want them to say. Im for equal trade thats on a level playing field. America shouldnt trade with China that has slave labor and no pollution laws. Thats impossible to compete

 

 

Most economists and economics students are fully indoctrinated by Chicago school (milton freidman) economic theories. They buy into that bull{censored} like good little robots. Just listen to people with economic degrees. They are hilarious. They argue their points as if they are backed up by some scientific law. In fact that's one of their strategies...convincing people their is a "science" to their ideas...when in reality they don't know {censored}, can't predict {censored} with any kind of reliability, and don't know what to do when things go to {censored}. The worst thing about it though is because they are so THOROUGHLY propagandized they ACTUALLY really believe they are being helpful to the world....as chomsky mentioned in the vid. It's really quite insane.

 

Economists and economic students are the LAST people that should be listened to about trade policy.

[Doctor49]

 

yeah, keep believing your PC bull{censored} that america is bad

 

 

I thought the PC idea in America was to blame China for everything?

 

Bit silly to pick a fight with your banker IMHO

 

Anyway 40% import duty will not work any better than currency manipulation by quantitative easing ie not at all.

[Alex_SF]

 

^ I remember the US govt trying to pass something similar for Harley Davidson and them saying they didn't need it.

 

 

Not exactly. The US did pass one to protect Harley in 1983, about 45% on imported motorcycles over 700cc. That's why in the mid-80s, a lot of Japanese bikes that would have otherwise been in the 750 class had their engines modified so they could be sold in the US as 700s. At the time, Harley was in the {censored}ter quality- and business-wise, and Japanese made bikes were just fantastic, way ahead of Harley on pretty much every quality, reliability, and performance metric you could think of. Lots and lots of 80s Hondas, Kawis, and Yamahas still out on the streets now being ridden every day; AMF-era Harleys not so much.

 

During that time, Harley restructured, I think was purchased from AMF by a new group of investors, and in 1987 they introduced a new engine (the Evolution) that actually put out a bit of power and didn't turn your garage into one big oil slick. Their QC has had a much better reputation since then, and the company came back and has been doing well ever since.

 

But also in 1987, Harley told the government that they didn't need the protection anymore, and sometime around 1988 the tariff was lifted. Harley's been competing against imported bikes and doing pretty well. A big part of that is its brand image and the loyalty it engenders, kind of like Gibson and Fender -- if you've gotta have one, nothing else will satisfy you.

 

Not sure what the lesson of that is for tariffs in general, other than perhaps that some temporary protection for domestic industry may give it some room to recover. But I doubt Harley would have recovered if it had merely hidden behind the protectionist wall and not focused on improving the quality of its product so it could compete against imports without the tariff: its reputation was seriously bad back then, and I don't think it would have come back without the Evo and the other business decisions it made around then (e.g., making its shops more inviting and less scary to those who weren't serious outlaw bikers, trading heavily on its brand image to sell almost as many belt buckles, Zippos, logo jackets & other stuff as bikes, etc.). Protectionism by itself would have probably allowed the company to just further stagnate instead of improving itself.

[ExiledCrow]

 

Economists and economic students are the LAST people that should be listened to about trade policy.

 

 

Plus who do most economists usually work for? Here's a quick hint almost none of them are employed by non-partisan non-profits. Now tell me, do you REALLY think their opinions and research are independent and free from bias?

[flummox]

 

my cat could have told me that. now put that economics degree to use and fix the economy!

 

 

Economists can't fix the economy any more than meteorologists can fix the weather.

[Grantus]

 

Economists and economic students are the LAST people that should be listened to about trade policy.

 

 

Yeah, guitar players have a much better grasp of macro economics:poke:

[ihavenofish]

 

Yeah, guitar players have a much better grasp of macro economics:poke:

 

 

when government is working, they simply look at whats been done before, and whats new thats being proposed, and implement what they think has the best chance of doing whats needed. then come up with something else when the previous solution starts to unravel. the solution needs to change constantly, and what worked brilliantly 5 years ago may be useless or even damaging today.

 

the problem is government hasnt been working lately, especially not in the US. every decision is based on either self interst of the politician, or playing an ideology of buzzwords thats locked in stone. lower taxes, raise import duties, socialism is evil, corporations are satan.... etc. ironicaly all said by the same person sometimes!

 

canada's prime minister is an economist, and when hes not busy being a religiously biassed dickhead, he actually does a decent job keeping canada financially sound. an economist who doesnt live in a bubble and understands politics has alot of potential.

[Doctor49]

^^^^^^

 

Personally I believe that the time for governments to govern is long past.

 

Governments now are elected by vested interests, not electorates, and consequently have little interest in policies that interfere with their backers. This is the new world order mentioned by George W in his inauguration address. US is not alone in this of course.

 

Internationally. all governments act in only self-interest, so talk of economic cooperation and level playing fields is fatuous. No one country wants a level playing field and trade imbalances are what made Britain and then US into great cheap producing countries. Now its China's turn. Later it will be some one else.

 

Taxes on imports are the second shot in provoking a trade war which the US can only lose now. The first shot on currency manipulation was neutralised recently by the four Treasury Dept reports just published and absolving all US trading partners from manipulation. Tough call for Geithner who has spent so much time in Japan lobbying ASEAN countries to blame China for the US balance defecit, much to their amusement.

 

Much better to look at three decades of failed policies and address those. External threats and sanctions won't cut it.

[soundcreation]

 

Yeah, guitar players have a much better grasp of macro economics:poke:

 

 

LOL....and quantum mechanics!

[DaleH]

The global economic downturn is way bigger than the US government. If some party says they can fix it if in office, they are either ignorant or liars.