Do tariffs violate the Catholic principle of subsidiarity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Theo520 said:
40.png
stinkcat_14:
I am not sure what your point is? Who says I must buy from Walmart?
Click to expand...
You referred to ‘Individuals’ and in general their choices are dictated by their local shops

How is it that you don’t get that?
Click to expand...
You might want to look up consumer sovereignty. If consumers only would buy screwdrivers made in America, that I should what they would sell. The fact that Walmart sells screwdrivers from China or Mexico is evidence that consumers just don’t care. If I buy a screwdriver made in China and Walmart sells it, what business is it of yours? Why should busybodies be interfering with trade?
 
stinkcat_14 said:
40.png
Theo520:
40.png
stinkcat_14:
I am not sure what your point is? Who says I must buy from Walmart?
Click to expand...
You referred to ‘Individuals’ and in general their choices are dictated by their local shops

How is it that you don’t get that?
Click to expand...
You might want to look up consumer sovereignty. If consumers only would buy screwdrivers made in America, that I should what they would sell. The fact that Walmart sells screwdrivers from China or Mexico is evidence that consumers just don’t care. If I buy a screwdriver made in China and Walmart sells it, what business is it of yours? Why should busybodies be interfering with trade?
Click to expand...
Once again, why should busybodies be interfering with trade?
 
stinkcat_14 said:
If I buy a screwdriver made in China and Walmart sells it, what business is it of yours?
Click to expand...
If you use other people’s money (government transfers) because you are unemployed or under-employed then other people have a say.
 
o_mlly said:
If you use other people’s money (government transfers) because you are unemployed or under-employed then other people have a say.
Click to expand...
So how would we impose a tariff that would only hit social security recipients?
 
Social security recipients are an effect; not the problem. The problem is unfair trade by some countries in some goods. Targeted tariffs.

Of course, the alternative is do nothing so we could still trade on the grief of the Chinese slave labor used to make cheap hammers.
 
o_mlly said:
Social security recipients are an effect; not the problem.
Click to expand...
You said that people who spend other people’s money shouldn’t make their own financial decisions.
o_mlly said:
The problem is unfair trade by some countries in some goods. Targeted tariffs.
Click to expand...
Who defines fair? Shouldn’t fairness be between the buyer and seller, since each of them have veto power over the transaction?
 
stinkcat_14 said:
You said that people who spend other people’s money shouldn’t make their own financial decisions.
Click to expand...
No, I wrote “other people” have a say in the decision as well.
stinkcat_14 said:
Who defines fair? Shouldn’t fairness be between the buyer and seller, since each of them have veto power over the transaction?
Click to expand...
Yes. The definition of “buyer” who uses other people’s money also includes the “other people.”
 
o_mlly said:
Yes. The definition of “buyer” who uses other people’s money also includes the “other people.”
Click to expand...
So if I am using my own money to buy a hammer, what business is it of yours who I buy it from?
 
stinkcat_14 said:
So if I am using my own money to buy a hammer, what business is it of yours who I buy it from?
Click to expand...
None of my personal business but if what you buy came from outside your state of residence then the transaction may be part of the public’s business.
 
o_mlly said:
None of my personal business but if what you buy came from outside your state of residence then the transaction may be part of the public’s business.
Click to expand...
Why would it be the public’s business if I buy a hammer in California and I live in New York?
 
I have a bigger problem with government bailouts of companies that shouldn’t need to be bailed out. GM anyone? I will never buy another general motors product. The fact that they paid it back is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
JanetF said:
I have a bigger problem with government bailouts of companies that shouldn’t need to be bailed out. GM anyone? I will never buy another general motors product. The fact that they paid it back is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
I agree. Of course it was a classic case of tone deafness when the CEOs flew to Washington on private jets claiming they needed a bailout.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
Ok, why do we need those regs? Shouldn’t we deregulate the economy and trust people to make their own decisions?
Click to expand...
Those ‘regs’ weren’t created initially by way of pro-action. They were created by way of re-action. By this I mean they were not created with the mindset that someone, somewhere would attempt to interfere with free-market principles,…….They were created because somewhere, someone did just that. We are a reactive nation, not pro-active in regulation.
 
Last edited:
stinkcat_14 said:
Ok, why do we need those regs? Shouldn’t we deregulate the economy and trust people to make their own decisions?
Click to expand...
We have the regs because we are democratic republic. If one does not agree with the regs then the process to change exists. In the interim, disobedience is not an option to laws that are moral.
 
o_mlly said:
We have the regs because we are democratic republic. If one does not agree with the regs then the process to change exists. In the interim, disobedience is not an option to laws that are moral.
Click to expand...
I never suggested we should disobey regulations. Now, is there a reason why we need tariffs to drive up the price of imported screwdrivers? What is the economic rationale for such tariffs? From a purely economic point of view, there are no externalities, positive or negative in my purchasing of a screwdriver. So there is no justification for a tariff.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top