I agree we need to be the change we want to see. However taking about dismantling a system is probably going to introduce more pain (in the short and long run). For example capitalism doesn’t need dismantling, it has brought us far more good than bad. However we do need to figure out how to deal with bad actors and net negative behavior (deforestation, over fishing, ocean trash etc).
Among the problems: people refuse to consider reasonable limits.
Let's suppose that we institute an income cap and a wealth cap. For the sake of argument, we'll call that 10 million dollars a year, and 100 million dollars. All the existing taxes apply. Nothing gets treated specially: your income for the year will always be capped at 10MM, and your total wealth will be capped at 100MM. It's a 100% tax and knowingly evading it is a crime. If you hit the income limit in two different years, the mayor of your city will award you a plaque, with an optional ceremony, and if you hit the wealth limit, the governor of your state will award you a plaque.
How much pain does that inflict?
None at all.
But nearly everyone harbors some secret hope of becoming a billionaire right now, and the thought of not winning that lottery is enough to make it politically impossible to enact this tiny reform.
And if you can't make reforms, the whole thing may need to be dismantled.
> For example capitalism doesn’t need dismantling, it has brought us far more good than bad.
The question you should be asking first is, is it sustainable? If you give someone a bank account with a million in it, they can bring a lot of good to themselves by spending it profligately... but then one day it runs out.
Globalization is a big one. There are no good jobs for average people anymore, they all got moved to Mexico or China or Vietnam, etc. Tariffs can help with that if applied correctly.
Sure they will. US car manufacturers ship parts to Mexico where they are assembled and shipped into the US for sale. If that method now costs 25% more, they will probably move some manufacturing back home to avoid the tariff.
Apply that to all companies who ship parts to Mexico for assembly/manufacture, and it will make a difference, assuming the tariffs are high enough to make a difference in the showroom.
Here's the Gore/Perot debate pre-NAFTA. Perot seems pretty spot on in his assessment.
Deliberately making a process inefficient isn't going to fix anything.
More expensive cars means cars are going to be less in demand. Means less cars manufactured, means less jobs for people who make cars.
Also, reworking the auto manufacturing pipeline is going to take decades not days.
Maybe ask yourself if the reason nobody else in the past 30 years has enacted the recent measures of the American government is because they were stupid/lazy/greedy or if it's because they clearly don't work.
>Deliberately making a process inefficient isn't going to fix anything.
Shipping parts to Mexico to have them assembled then shipping it to the US is much less efficient than shipping the parts to the US, manufacturing in the US, then selling in the US.
>More expensive cars means cars are going to be less in demand. Means less cars manufactured, means less jobs for people who make cars.
Less jobs for Mexican labor making cars, more jobs for American labor making cars, that's the objective. It also strengthens unions by increasing headcount and making the threat of moving labor to another country much more expensive. Remember, the discussion is about the plight of the average American worker and how they've been systematically squeezed for 30+ years now due to globalization.
>Also, reworking the auto manufacturing pipeline is going to take decades not days.
Yes, more like years not decades, but ya, not sure why anyone would think it would take days. I suspect a lot of companies will try political maneuvers like waiting out Trump's term, hoping the next guy would be more sensible to their profit needs.
>Maybe ask yourself if the reason nobody else in the past 30 years has enacted the recent measures of the American government is because they were stupid/lazy/greedy or if it's because they clearly don't work.
Companies have a much higher profit margin by using Mexican labor, at the expense of US labor. Those companies also donate a lot of money to campaigns. It's pretty off brand for the Democrats under Clinton/Gore to champion moving thousands of jobs to Mexico under NAFTA. I wonder what motivated them to do that.
It may or may not work, but don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Despair of the average American has a lot of negative, long term social consequences we're currently dealing with, and it's just going to get worse.
Did you know foreign car manufacturers make cars in the US for the US market to avoid tariffs and improve efficiency? They might be on to something.
I'm not repudiating (in this thread) capitalism, per se. Only whatever system it is that's abusing OP's protagonist. If you think capitalism inevitably punches someone in the stomach, well, then yeah; you've got your work cut out for you.
