>>86583
>Wealth generation has nothing to do with population if productively is un-tethered from the lower classes, which it is.
Say what? Without lower classes in China, we wouldn't be getting the cheap electronic gadgetry, and without Mexicans the cost of food would be significantly higher. Meanwhile many billionaires have contributed jack-shit to the economy, the Ogre who currently infests the White House arguably being one of them.
>Cheaper foreign goods of the kinds not currently targeted for tariffs.
So why is President Dumbfuck yammering about Canadian milk?
>Unless you buy an industrial furnace every other week, the consumer is unlikely to see significant boosts- except for corporations trying to maintain status quo while they work on migrating back to the US. Bad for 5 years, good for 25, bad for the rest of 50 that we'll never touch.
Ah, so they close the car plants in Oshawa, Oakville, and Brampton (Ontario cities), go back to the US, likely the South. They make cars to export to Canada. Ah, but thanks to Trump, the Canadian dollar has fallen and now the American imports cost a lot and some of the plants closed are re-opened by competitors which sell to Canadians and perhaps other countries we made decent trade agreements with.
>Nothing I'm saying is too far from a standard protectionist argument, this is the natural conclusion of the argument for foundling industries. Economists are prone to focusing on the businesses (micro), while a nation should be concerned with the resources and overall pie (macro), and protectionism is a way to do that.
I see it more of government is more a tool for business. The competitive ones don't need protection. The non-competitive do. Protectionists had (relatively at least) little support from Reagan and the two Bushs and Democrats since Bill. Some thus threw in their lots with Trump and now a few businesses are benefiting. America will produce more steel; aluminum; and coal, clean clean coal (as for global warming, it's a Chinese Hoax, god-emperor said so and he never bullshits or lies).
The problem is, America will have to be its own market, and after consumers experience more price hikes.
>You addressed an argument about how American goods tend to be consumer-grade by listing consumer-grade goods and then assume the Canadian dollar will move dependent on its imports and not its exports or internal market.
Where did I say any of those things? The OP asked what I thought was going to happen with Trump's tariffs. I said OP mostly made good points and said more stuff.
The Canadian dollar will move (i.e. fall) because Americans won't want it as much, because President Dumbass has made it harder for Americans to buy the Canadian goods they would buy with such (Americans will more likely be buying domestic). If traders can't sell the Canadian dollar as much as before, it falls.
That seems to be a result of restrictions of Canadian exports—apparently at least, contrary to your statement. (Why would Trump restrict Canadian imports—i.e. make it harder for Americans to sell us Canadians stuff?)
The kickback comes when American goods coming to Canada require more of those fallen Canadian dollars. Most Canadians will react with, "Fuck it, I used to buy the American product but it's too expensive these days." Tariffs against American goods wouldn't even be necessary; and then there's the antipathy resulting in President Dumbfuck's charm offensive.