|
| ▲ | ants_everywhere 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| I think with all economic policy it's good to weigh the pros and cons and have a serious discussion of them. What I object to is that in practice people just side with their politics "team" like in sports and create post-hoc justifications for policy created for unrelated reasons. I'm in favor of evidence-based trade policy, but this isn't that unfortunately. The closest thing we have to evidence-based policy is the economic consensus, and the current administration is making a big show of disagreeing with the consensus for non-evidence-based reasons. |
| |
| ▲ | evidencetamper 3 days ago | parent [-] | | It is impossible to establish causality in complex economic systems to be able to have evidence based decisions. The current economic direction is not a consensus. The Western democracies are increasingly politically polarized and economically volatile. Between the many different crises (unaffordable real estate, populational collapse, unsustainable environmental practices and global warming, increasing inequality, hollowing out of small and medium sized cities, and the list goes on), it is very difficult to justify the status quo. | | |
| ▲ | maxerickson 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | There's also not really an objective outcome for a given policy, because you don't have a single grouping with aligned preferences. You can estimate the impact objectively, but not whether that impact is good or bad. | |
| ▲ | ants_everywhere 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | If you don't like democracies or science then what is your proposed solution? | | |
| ▲ | evidencetamper 3 days ago | parent [-] | | That's an unfortunate and charged statement that misrepresents what I said. A fundamental aspect of science is rigor. And a fundamental aspect of democracy is opposition. | | |
| ▲ | ants_everywhere 2 days ago | parent [-] | | But your position is that you're opposed to evidence based policy. Which means you can't realistically hope to be in favor of an informed populace or democracy. And you don't understand what the economic consensus is so you don't know what you don't know and aren't in a position to assess the level of rigor. Plus your other comments, e.g. calling drug users zombies and criminals, make it clear that the anti-democratic impulses shown in this thread aren't just a one-off accident. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | mmcwilliams 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The alternative here is the exploited worker will no longer have any job. Doesn't seem like that is a legitimate concern for their well-being. |
|
| ▲ | RobotToaster 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Your right, it's obviously much better to give money to bezos' warehouses that underpay exploited workers instead. |
|
| ▲ | gruez 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| But it's not like as if ending de minimis would mean those goods will stop coming over. It still will, just through brick and mortar retailers and amazon FBA. |
| |
| ▲ | kevinmchugh 2 days ago | parent [-] | | De minimis also impacts all goods, including those made by well-paid laborers and from countries that meet our exceed American labor standards. |
|
|
| ▲ | rcpt 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I'm sure those workers that you genuinely care about can't wait to put down their soldering irons and get back to sustenance farming. |
