Do you agree with trade restrictions?

Answer 1

NO! They never solve anything. You realize that as a consumer every trade restriction increases your costs? Don't buy into the propaganda. It is usually rich lobbyists that sell you and the government their platform. So the trade restrictions don't even make economic sense, they are political.

Under a global economy you can't get around all the loopholes either. And if the US is selling coca-cola to the world (there isn't anything more useless) then live and die by the sword!

Here's one case. The strong sugar beat lobby has trade restrictions on outside sugar sources. It ensures and protect the helpless farmers get fat. Saves jobs right? US candy makers realize their costs of their main ingredient is a lot cheaper elsewhere and moves candy manufacturing plants out of the country. You loose more jobs than you save.

Here's another case: The US forest lobby had the US government tax Canadian lumber $4 Billion dollars as it was cheaper priced than US lumber. That means that if Canada is 10 percent of the market as an example, ten Americans are paying $40 Billion too much for lumber to build new homes. Can you afford a home? This type of policy doesn't help the average American.

Answer 2

NO NO NO NO NO

JuanB is absolutely correct. I live in a sugar producing state. Trade restrictions prop them up. Tax dollars are spent by politicians to make these farmers dependent on government. Candy producers leave the country because of the high sugar prices. Jobs gone.

Another example is the steel tariffs of a few years ago. A few thousand steel jobs were saved. Only problems is that every product with steel increases in price. Everything from cars, oil rigs, trains etc.... And there many, many, many more people who work with steel products than actually produce steel. Jobs losses occur there because costs have now risen.

Furthermore, only politicians can place trade restrictions. They will always do what is best for their own reelection.
---
And most importantly:

“When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will.”
Frederic Bastiat

Answer 3

The answer to this question depends on the country in question and the economic benefits to the country imposing those restrictions. I believe that trade restrictions when used in an attempt to influence or coerce other nations is unethical, as it is usually the general population that is affected by these restrictions. When trade restrictions are imposed on totalitarian-type regimes they rarely affect the government as much as it does the people. I think we can do better than impose trade restrictions on countries just because we can't get our way.

Answer 4

That is a complicated issue. I know when I was a young man and we imported very few items our economy was very good. People were talking about lowering the standard work week with full time benefits to 30 hours a week.

Now we are helping very poor people in the world improve their lives. That can't be too bad of a deal. IT has seemed to come at the cost of employment security and a lessing middle class.