1) Those who've followed for me a bit or are readers of my blog are probably aware I'm fully in favor of free trade. I'm also in favor of President Trump's use of tariffs as a negotiating tool.
-
Show this thread
-
2) Imports, of themselves, are not "bad" and can be highly additive to economic growth. At it's most basic level an import is no more than a transaction. It happens to occur between a buyer and seller who reside in differing countries.
2 replies 26 retweets 81 likesShow this thread -
3) The transaction occurs for a reason. Consumers - companies, individuals & governments (theoretically) - look about for the best value for their money. This doesn't necessarily mean the cheapest price. Quality can be a huge factor as well.
2 replies 24 retweets 78 likesShow this thread -
Jeff @ themarketswork Retweeted Jeff @ themarketswork
4) I got a few critical comments on an recent tweet. Being criticized was this: "Keeping all else static - lower imports directly raises GDP." Being ignored was this: Goldberg is making current assumption that domestic production will fall.https://twitter.com/themarketswork/status/1026095768518582272 …
Jeff @ themarketswork added,
Jeff @ themarketswork @themarketsworkIt's exactly how it works: GDP = Private Consumption Spending + Invest + Govt Spend + (Exports – Imports) Keeping all else static - lower imports directly raises GDP. Goldberg is making current assumption that domestic production will fall. Evidence thus far says he's wrong. https://twitter.com/JonahNRO/status/1025906247864934401 …3 replies 22 retweets 68 likesShow this thread -
5) Of course things won't stay static in a real-world complex economy. When trade deficits fall foreign investment also falls. Capital flows shift. Currency rates adjust. Central Banks can - and do - distort markets. The number of variables are simply staggering.
2 replies 26 retweets 71 likesShow this thread -
6) But all of this ignores the broader issue at play. Goldberg is attempting to use textbook economic theory as a means to discredit what President Trump is doing. Goldberg is focusing on short-term pain at the expense of long-term gain. This is immensely misguided.
1 reply 39 retweets 102 likesShow this thread -
7) Goldberg's right about one thing. Tariffs for the sake of tariffs ARE bad economic policy. But so are misguided and unfair trade practices.
3 replies 36 retweets 93 likesShow this thread -
8) I’m NOT in favor of tariffs as an ECONOMIC policy. Sustained tariffs reduce economic activity for all. They are a hindrance to free trade. But in the appropriate circumstances - in the right hands - they can be an effective economic club.
5 replies 30 retweets 100 likesShow this thread
What about to protect strategic indistries in order to avoid dependency on geopolitical rivals? We can accept that it entails economic cost - so does building aircraft carriers. Perhaps useful to classify some tarriffs as strategic/national security policy, rather than economic?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.