5 ms·

> It's politically unpopular for the same reason action on climate change is unpopular: it makes everything more expensive. You've got this backwards. Both tak

by jolux 5y ago

> It's politically unpopular for the same reason action on climate change is unpopular: it makes everything more expensive. You've got this backwards. Both taking action on climate change and buying American are popular [1][2]. Furthermore I don't know of much evidence that suggests taking action on climate change will raise prices. But you are right about protectionism in that way. That's the biggest problem here. In the abstract I see no reason that global trade should breakdown if a significant majority of people in the world can agree about labor standards, human rights standards, etc. In the specific, I believe this was one of the major original purposes of the UN, though unfortunately the world we live in remains one in which the abuses of great powers go unchecked because the cost of nuclear war is too high. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate/ https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of... [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-madeinusa-poll/americans-want-the-government-to-buy-u-s-made-goods-even-if-they-cost-more-idUSKBN2BM1DA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-madeinusa-pol...

detaro 5y ago
having the government buy American is popular according to that link, not actually doing it yourself.
- jolux 5y ago
  This is a difficult question to poll because in a great sense actions speak louder than words, but what information I can find suggests similar preferences among consumers themselves: https://review.chicagobooth.edu/marketing/2020/article/made-usa-label-boosts-prices-just-little https://review.chicagobooth.edu/marketing/2020/article/made-... See also: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-buyamerican-poll/americans-want-u-s-goods-but-not-willing-to-pay-more-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1A3210 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-buyamerican-poll/amer...
  - detaro 5y ago
    I just found it funny that your provided link starts with a sentence containing "has not made Americans more willing to pay extra for U.S.-made goods."
    - jolux 5y ago
      Well, I think the government buying American is probably a precursor for anyone else doing so, because they're not at the constraints of the market to find the cheapest viable product.
      - thatcat 5y ago
        I thought the government had to accept the lowest bid that met specs, though one of those specs could be mfg in USA.
    - munk-a 5y ago
      Tariffs and subsidies are tools we can use if we want to make sure that domestic products can compete with those from abroad - but the current wide allowances for lobbying in the US make any sort of move in that direction extremely difficult.
ludocode 5y ago
Of course everyone wants the government to do something about climate change. They're not thinking about what they'll have to sacrifice in order to make it happen. Almost no one is willing to suffer even minor inconvenience in favor of stopping climate change. Let's see the results of a poll that asks if people would be willing to take climate action that doubled the price of airline tickets, or that doubled the price of most fruits and vegetables in the supermarket. I would expect a very different result, yet this is what is necessary to offset the emissions in air travel and international shipping. (I pulled this "double" number out of a hat, but it seems to me to be far less ridiculous than your assumption that action on climate change won't affect prices.) It's the same issue with domestic manufacturing. Of course all Americans want their products to be manufactured in America. But virtually no Americans are willing to pay a higher price for them. Stores long ago stopped bothering to stock American made products next to their cheaper foreign counterparts because no one bought them. What people say they want is irrelevant; what matters is what they actually buy. > In the abstract I see no reason that global trade should breakdown if a significant majority of people in the world can agree about labor standards, human rights standards, etc. If a majority of the world agreed on labor standards and excluded the rest from trade, there would be no need for protectionism. Manufacturing would be a level playing field so Americans could compete directly with foreign companies on price. Unfortunately this isn't the world today. It's not possible to compete in manufacturing with countries where laborers are paid under a dollar an hour, so as long as we have free trade with such countries our manufacturing will never be able to compete.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- LeifCarrotson 5y ago
  > Almost no one is willing to suffer even minor inconvenience in favor of stopping climate change. People aren't taking minor, inconvenient, personal, moral steps to solve these problems because it's obvious that won't do anything to solve the problem. It's irrelevant whether or not I shut the water off when I brush my teeth when the farm over in the desert is subsidized to run a center-pivot irrigation in system in the middle of the desert that pulls 800 gallons per minute. Collective action is required, which means that instead of moralizing we need to fix the incentives. The only incentive that is universal is price. A few people deciding not to fly or buying produce at a local farmer's market instead of the grocery store because they're concerned about climate change is not a signal that's audible to The System.
renewiltord 5y ago
This is one of those revealed preferences things.

by jolux 5y ago

detaro 5y ago

having the government buy American is popular according to that link, not actually doing it yourself.

jolux 5y ago
This is a difficult question to poll because in a great sense actions speak louder than words, but what information I can find suggests similar preferences among consumers themselves: https://review.chicagobooth.edu/marketing/2020/article/made-usa-label-boosts-prices-just-little https://review.chicagobooth.edu/marketing/2020/article/made-... See also: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-buyamerican-poll/americans-want-u-s-goods-but-not-willing-to-pay-more-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1A3210 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-buyamerican-poll/amer...
- detaro 5y ago
  I just found it funny that your provided link starts with a sentence containing "has not made Americans more willing to pay extra for U.S.-made goods."
  - jolux 5y ago
    Well, I think the government buying American is probably a precursor for anyone else doing so, because they're not at the constraints of the market to find the cheapest viable product.
    - thatcat 5y ago
      I thought the government had to accept the lowest bid that met specs, though one of those specs could be mfg in USA.
  - munk-a 5y ago
    Tariffs and subsidies are tools we can use if we want to make sure that domestic products can compete with those from abroad - but the current wide allowances for lobbying in the US make any sort of move in that direction extremely difficult.

ludocode 5y ago

Of course everyone wants the government to do something about climate change. They're not thinking about what they'll have to sacrifice in order to make it happen. Almost no one is willing to suffer even minor inconvenience in favor of stopping climate change. Let's see the results of a poll that asks if people would be willing to take climate action that doubled the price of airline tickets, or that doubled the price of most fruits and vegetables in the supermarket. I would expect a very different result, yet this is what is necessary to offset the emissions in air travel and international shipping. (I pulled this "double" number out of a hat, but it seems to me to be far less ridiculous than your assumption that action on climate change won't affect prices.) It's the same issue with domestic manufacturing. Of course all Americans want their products to be manufactured in America. But virtually no Americans are willing to pay a higher price for them. Stores long ago stopped bothering to stock American made products next to their cheaper foreign counterparts because no one bought them. What people say they want is irrelevant; what matters is what they actually buy. > In the abstract I see no reason that global trade should breakdown if a significant majority of people in the world can agree about labor standards, human rights standards, etc. If a majority of the world agreed on labor standards and excluded the rest from trade, there would be no need for protectionism. Manufacturing would be a level playing field so Americans could compete directly with foreign companies on price. Unfortunately this isn't the world today. It's not possible to compete in manufacturing with countries where laborers are paid under a dollar an hour, so as long as we have free trade with such countries our manufacturing will never be able to compete.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
LeifCarrotson 5y ago
> Almost no one is willing to suffer even minor inconvenience in favor of stopping climate change. People aren't taking minor, inconvenient, personal, moral steps to solve these problems because it's obvious that won't do anything to solve the problem. It's irrelevant whether or not I shut the water off when I brush my teeth when the farm over in the desert is subsidized to run a center-pivot irrigation in system in the middle of the desert that pulls 800 gallons per minute. Collective action is required, which means that instead of moralizing we need to fix the incentives. The only incentive that is universal is price. A few people deciding not to fly or buying produce at a local farmer's market instead of the grocery store because they're concerned about climate change is not a signal that's audible to The System.

renewiltord 5y ago

This is one of those revealed preferences things.