Can some of you economics majors explain why protectionism and

sorry hombre i'm too busy trading WoW Gold to give a fuck

>>2367530
A) Beggar-thy-beggar effect and the fact that it would violate WTO/International Free trade agreements (Retaliation)

B) It coddles the native industry to the point that it becomes complacent and noncompetitive to corporations from other parts of the world.

C) You would kill off importers that deal in imports for a living, resulting in mass unemployment with nothing to absorb the recently-retrenched in the Short Term.

D) MNCs and Multi-national Investors would avoid your country (Less FDI and capital inflows)

>>2367597
Thanks you for your time.

>>2367530
Tariffs simulate the negative effects of a lower valued currency (higher costs to consumers and businesses because of more expensive imports) while failing to give exporters the benefits of a lower valued currency.

They also result in businesses devoting more resources to what they're (by international standards) not good at, and hence less to what they are good at.

>>2367530
Tariffs aren't bad, the people are. If only there was way more regulations on the fucking thing nobody would be on welfare more than they should be

Let's say I can produce oranges and you can produce apples.

Now, I can produce apples too, but they shitty, or they cost me way more to produce than it does to you. The same is true for you and oranges.

Now, let's say that for some dumbass reason you think that it's in your best interest to not import oranges from me, but rather impose barriers and make your own. Do you think that anything good would come out of it?

>>2368277
yes
self sufficiency

File: 1496085817558.jpg (234KB, 1440x1440px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 1440x1440px

they arent

you are taught they are bad by the same school system that teaches you about the Holocaust but pretends the Holodomor never happened

How have open borders and "free trade" worked out for America?

GDP went up, but entire parts of the country were destroyed. There is more to life than GDP.

Every President on Mount Rushmore was a protectionist.

>>2369027
It's not that simple. "Open" borders is the government being unable to actually change it's own laws so they pressure the legal system to be lax on illegal aliens to drive down the cost of workers and replace the aging U.S population. The U.S government has done this for about the last 50 years, the liberals are dug in on the race issue and want the new voters and the republicans only back legislation they know they can't pass.
As for 'free trade', the U.S has benefitted the most over the years from exports. We have plenty of oil(so much that the oil industry had to invent new technology to support fracking which already existed to still make a profit with these low oil prices), and ample investing power. No one else in the world invests like the U.S does. There's no "going back" to a protectionist mindset, if you were to look at how many nations need to supply the parts for a single iphone you'd be surprised.
We've been living in a global economy for years now, people who praise protectionism don't understand that it has it's place. When you focus on local economies and you don't need the human capital protectionism worked great in Texas cities to allow them to keep their money local. That's the difference between the places where you live and shop and the people who supply those places. You need a global network to allow for protectionism on a local scale, this is because of the situation of the companies and how they provide the goods and nothing more.
Tariffs are attractive to people who don't understand the modern economy. They hurt because of how the modern economy is set up, which is based on outsourcing jobs to get low priced labor and resources. Why would you want to drive up the price of goods and stifle the circulation of money, especially when you're the reserve currency of the world?
For every dollar the U.S sends out abroad, they get more back. Why would you want to stop that?

>>2367530
>tariffs
Because it makes everything in your nation more expensive and unless you are a completely self reliant nation then it's just hurts your economy. Ideally you want completely free trade, but not free movement.

The problem is minimum wage. Jobs wouldn't go to china if it were legal to pay people to do them in the west what they are actually worth, but many westerners have got a very communist mind set that certain jobs and product should be a certain price, regardless of its actual value or the market.

>>2369027
This guy gets it.
Free movement of goods and capital only works flawlessly when you have free movement of people.
And since free movement of people doens't exist becouse of all kinds of barriers it isnt a bad idea to impose taxes and tariffs to protect your economy.