Cafe Hayek - Latest Comments in What Protectionists Intend

Re: What Protectionists Intend

medusa — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 04:53:09 -0000

"Let's reveal the ugly underbelly of Sen. Barbara Mikulski's"

ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...

Seriously, she perfectly represents her constituency. Very charitably their motives are considered ignorant or misguided but at their heart is thievery. Oh, how shall we divvy up the booty??

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Kent Gatewood — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 17:58:49 -0000

I take it that there are no tariffs on steel now?

If you would compensate unemployed steel workers, would you compensate the owners of the steel companies?

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Christina — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:37:28 -0000

I once told my brother (who works in the steel industry) that it would be cheaper for the US to continue to let other countries "dump" their steel on the US market, let American steel companies collapse, and put all unemployed American steelworkers on welfare, than it would be to "protect" the American steel industry.

He was absolutely livid at the suggestion, probably because I basically told him that sitting on his butt all day drinking beer and watching TV would be more beneficial to the country than the 12 hours a day he puts in at the steel mill.

Despite taking offense, he still didn't have a rebuttal.

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Xmas — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:55:32 -0000

Tarran,

So what you're saying is that the protectionist measures destroyed a number new and growing, steel-using companies in order to protect steel workers and a handful of large, yet stagnant steel using companies.

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Mr. Econotarian — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 06:31:36 -0000

Best...letter...ever!

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Chris Meisenzahl — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 16:51:20 -0000

Are these people that ignorant, or that crooked? Which is worse? ;-(

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Peter — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:40:02 -0000

It might be due to the fact that I just read Atlas Shrugged, but does her letter appealing for protectionism not sound like something taken directly out of that book? It was written 50 years ago, and what have the people in power learned?

Re: What Protectionists Intend

tarran — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 12:06:30 -0000

As an ex-steelworker, I saw first hand how much havoc was wreaked by Sen Mikulski, Geroge Bush and their socialist friends.

Not only did the price of steel go up in 2002, but there were massive shortages. We were able to concentrate on long term orders, and companies that did not have long term cotnracts (generally small businesses whose consumption was too small or irregular to justify such contracts) found themselves unable to get steel: they had to wait six months for their orders of steel to be delivered, and what small businessman can afford to keep customers waiting for half a year?

The result of these shortages was quite predictable, the number of jobs lost in the steel-consuming industries far exceeded the number of jobs "saved" in the steel industry. We all paid higher prices for goods and services in order to "protect" an industry that has been screaming for federal protection from foreign competition since the 1820's.

In the end, the politicians, and steel-maker lobbyists didn't save the industry, but only delayed necesarry contraction and consolidation in the U.S. steel industry, and left consumers poorer.

Re: What Protectionists Intend

KRM — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 12:04:12 -0000

Last week I bought a stainless steel toaster oven made by LG. I wanted to get the American stainless steel toaster, but I couldn't find any. Thanks to U.S. steel companies and their union workers, I have to use a Korean made toaster. On the bright side, it's (so far) the best and nicest looking toaster oven I've ever used.

Re: What Protectionists Intend

liberty — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:34:06 -0000

Even more straightforward, you could explain how this sentence is the exact opposite of the truth:

"I stood up for steelworkers and steel companies to ensure that government rules don't exacerbate the economic difficulties of a sector struggling to compete."

She actually ensured that government did exacerbate the economic difficulties within the sector - both by straining the steel companies by forcing them to pay for pensions they could not afford and by subsidizing the companies in the sector to the detriment of entry, innovation and competition.

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Adam — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 10:55:23 -0000

I'm curious as to whether you sent this letter to the senator's office, and what response (if any) you might get.

Re: What Protectionists Intend

triticale — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 08:51:55 -0000

It should still be within peoples' memory that the last time such protection was put in place it did serious harm to the steel-using industries.

There is a company in the Milwaukee area, P&H Mining Equipment, which went into reorganization a few years ago and it looked like the employee retirement fund was at risk. Right now they are again in excellent shape, and actively seeking to hire welders, mostly because of overseas orders. Drive up the price of the steel they buy, and those overseas orders will be put at risk.

Re: What Protectionists Intend

Cris — Sun, 24 Sep 2006 08:36:35 -0000

[applause]. Well said, as always.