3 ms·

> ...unfavorable trade agreement wich allowed for assymetrical tariffs, etc. Assymmetrical tariffs are more favorable than symmetrical tariffs, something pract

> ...unfavorable trade agreement wich allowed for assymetrical tariffs, etc. Assymmetrical tariffs are more favorable than symmetrical tariffs, something practically every economist agrees on. Also, why insist on exporting more valuable goods to China, when China remains perfectly content with green pieces of paper instead?

mc32 8y ago
So unfathomably China is against an inverse assymetrical tariff regime which on paper would benefit US but economists would insist actually would counterintuitively benefit China.
- zeroname 8y ago
  It's economically beneficial, but not politically expedient.
mistermann 8y ago
Would it be more accurate to say: "Assymmetrical tariffs are more favorable than symmetrical tariffs, something practically every economist agrees on, for certain situations"? Does there ever come a point where they should be normalized? From most of what I've read in mainstream news coverage, this topic seems to be considered not valid for discussion, as if the answer is self-evident (despite very few of the reporters, or readers, having any serious depth in the subject).
- zeroname 8y ago
  > Does there ever come a point where they should be normalized? The ideal situation is no tariffs on either side, which is normalized. > for certain situations? For any given economic scenario there's a practical intervention that would result in a better result than what the theory suggests is the best expected result. There's also an infinite number interventions that result in a worse outcome. The problem is, how do you know what the right intervention is? You don't. > From most of what I've read in mainstream news coverage, this topic seems to be considered not valid for discussion, as if the answer is self-evident It's not self-evident, the question just has remained settled for over a century. Economists disagree over all kinds of things, this isn't one of them.
  - mistermann 8y ago
    > The ideal situation is no tariffs on either side, which is normalized. Fine, but that's not the case now, correct? > The problem is, how do you know what the right intervention is? You don't. Do you or practically every economist know? > It's not self-evident, the question just has remained settled for over a century. I'm not sure what question you're referring to. China became a member of the World Trade Organization on December 11, 2001, and was given developing nation status which comes with a variety of benefits. Should that status ever change?

mc32 8y ago

So unfathomably China is against an inverse assymetrical tariff regime which on paper would benefit US but economists would insist actually would counterintuitively benefit China.

zeroname 8y ago
It's economically beneficial, but not politically expedient.

mistermann 8y ago

Would it be more accurate to say: "Assymmetrical tariffs are more favorable than symmetrical tariffs, something practically every economist agrees on, for certain situations"? Does there ever come a point where they should be normalized? From most of what I've read in mainstream news coverage, this topic seems to be considered not valid for discussion, as if the answer is self-evident (despite very few of the reporters, or readers, having any serious depth in the subject).

zeroname 8y ago
> Does there ever come a point where they should be normalized? The ideal situation is no tariffs on either side, which is normalized. > for certain situations? For any given economic scenario there's a practical intervention that would result in a better result than what the theory suggests is the best expected result. There's also an infinite number interventions that result in a worse outcome. The problem is, how do you know what the right intervention is? You don't. > From most of what I've read in mainstream news coverage, this topic seems to be considered not valid for discussion, as if the answer is self-evident It's not self-evident, the question just has remained settled for over a century. Economists disagree over all kinds of things, this isn't one of them.
- mistermann 8y ago
  > The ideal situation is no tariffs on either side, which is normalized. Fine, but that's not the case now, correct? > The problem is, how do you know what the right intervention is? You don't. Do you or practically every economist know? > It's not self-evident, the question just has remained settled for over a century. I'm not sure what question you're referring to. China became a member of the World Trade Organization on December 11, 2001, and was given developing nation status which comes with a variety of benefits. Should that status ever change?