zlacker

>>bobcha+(OP)
> That is a factor that’s often overlooked: The Civic Type R—and also many high-end bicycle components—barely make sense from a strict business perspective. ... International trade has made it possible to pool the global demand for such niche products and make them all in one place, achieving economies of scale that make them (almost) cost-effective.

This is such an interesting insight that would never have occurred to me and seems to have a lot of explanatory power.

>>giraff+wu
Of course there are enormous benefits to globalization: economies of scale, efficiency and lower prices, quality from specialization (wine from France, beer from Germany, etc), increased competition, etc. To think protectionism will benefit the economy is ignorant.

The global system of free trade and human rights has been the most free, prosperous, and peaceful era of humanity by far. Whole nations lifted from deep poverty, such as China and India (with still more to be done!). Incredible prosperity for the wealthy. Freedom, self-determination, democracy and human rights as the global norms.

Why are we throwing it away again? Much could be done to reform it, but we'll just throw it out?

>>mmooss+sx
If your country outlaws slavery and child labor, but imports freely (i.e. without tariffs) from countries which allows it, why does your country even have those laws? It’s certainly not to protect children or people from slavery; they’ve just exported the negative effects to other countries.

>>teddyh+fB
Could you apply your hypothetical? What countries are you talking about? How do you balance the benefits and the costs? If you wanted to improve human rights, what would be the best strategy?

Do you think Trump and the GOP are doing it because of labor rights?

>>mmooss+RB
> What countries are you talking about?

I did not have any specific countries in mind; I’m just pretty sure that there are such countries. I’d have to look it up to get any references.

> Do you think Trump and the GOP are doing it because of labor rights?

Nobody knows why they are doing it, since nobody can read their minds. But I was not talking about them, I was addressing your implied argument that all tariffs are bad and abolishing them will lead to global prosperity. I would think that abolishing tariffs would at least give other countries huge incentives to exploit their own populations (including children) in order to get money from countries where such exploitation is illegal.

>>teddyh+rh5
> all tariffs are bad and abolishing them will lead to global prosperity

I think when you get into the realm of extremes, you are no longer debating another human but a strawperson in your mind.