5 ms·

Of course it isn't that simple. If your farm's tomatoes are more expensive than your neighbors' tomatoes, then nobody will buy them. You'll quickly go bankrup

Of course it isn't that simple. If your farm's tomatoes are more expensive than your neighbors' tomatoes, then nobody will buy them. You'll quickly go bankrupt. It is also difficult because of the two tiers of labor. A farmer will try increasing wages by $1/hour, and still struggle to find enough workers. Wages would probably have to be doubled before new workers—Americans—would start to enter the industry.

jandrese 6y ago
This is the reason tariffs exist. You levy a fee that makes the imported food cost as much as food picked using domestic labor.
- mixedCase 6y ago
  Or, you know, you let unprofitable endeavors be substituted by profitable ones, and you just import food from different places where it is profitable. Just make sure not to wage war with them all. That's always an alternative to subsidies and tariffs, but it's not as politically useful.
  - jandrese 6y ago
    This is how the US gave up its ability to manufacture so many goods.
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      It's also in general how we end up with monopolies. Well-funded companies operating at a loss until they're the only noteworthy players ain't exactly unheard of.
    - mixedCase 6y ago
      "gave up" sounds like an unnecessarily ominous take on "delegate". But what's your exact point? Do you believe this is an irremediable situation or that know-how has been lost to time in the age of information? I'm assuming you're implying a conversation about China and their manufacturing capabilities. But worst case scenario short of nuclear war, assuming US-China burns bridges and somehow for some reason now US is fully unable to import Chinese manufactured goods; how does this eliminate the US and all other countries from investing in an area that has now become more profitable? You could argue that prices would increase, but then again you aren't owed cheap manufacturing, and subsidies and tariffs are paid by either the taxpayer or the consumer (which tends to have a knock-off effect on the rest of economy, anyway). There was never a free lunch.

jandrese 6y ago

This is the reason tariffs exist. You levy a fee that makes the imported food cost as much as food picked using domestic labor.

mixedCase 6y ago
Or, you know, you let unprofitable endeavors be substituted by profitable ones, and you just import food from different places where it is profitable. Just make sure not to wage war with them all. That's always an alternative to subsidies and tariffs, but it's not as politically useful.
- jandrese 6y ago
  This is how the US gave up its ability to manufacture so many goods.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    It's also in general how we end up with monopolies. Well-funded companies operating at a loss until they're the only noteworthy players ain't exactly unheard of.
  - mixedCase 6y ago
    "gave up" sounds like an unnecessarily ominous take on "delegate". But what's your exact point? Do you believe this is an irremediable situation or that know-how has been lost to time in the age of information? I'm assuming you're implying a conversation about China and their manufacturing capabilities. But worst case scenario short of nuclear war, assuming US-China burns bridges and somehow for some reason now US is fully unable to import Chinese manufactured goods; how does this eliminate the US and all other countries from investing in an area that has now become more profitable? You could argue that prices would increase, but then again you aren't owed cheap manufacturing, and subsidies and tariffs are paid by either the taxpayer or the consumer (which tends to have a knock-off effect on the rest of economy, anyway). There was never a free lunch.