[hodgesrm]

Cars are not really a valid analogy here because we're talking about services with network effects that impose behavioral norms for all users regardless of location.

To use your driving example it would be like saying that to use a car everyone has to drive on the same side of the road or accept identical pollution control standards. That's obviously not the case. Cars are adapted--sometimes quite substantially--to local jurisdictions.

[drawnwren]

Korea and Japan actually did this with cars. Enforcing extremely high tariffs on all imported vehicles. It seems to have worked well for their automotive Industries.

[dilemma]

The US economy was founded on tariffs. No such thing as a free market in North America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariffs_in_United_States_histo...

[petre]

Tariffs in cars in a big market such as the US encourage foreign car companies to set up locally or at least in a NAFTA member country.

[dilemma]

So?

[petre]

So you get competitive technologies built in your market with local workforce by foreign companies.

[dilemma]

My comment is about the US not being for free trade. Your comment is irrelevant.

[bhalp1]

AFAIK the US also has significant tariffs on certain kinds of imported vehicles, namely pickup trucks.

[kalleboo]

I think it's a tariff on commercial vehicles in general. Which Ford worked around by shipping over "passenger cars" and then tearing out the extra seats in the US, turning them into vans http://blog.caranddriver.com/feds-watching-fords-run-around-...

[tryingagainbro]

Can USA wake up one day and decide to impose a 40% tariff without repercussions? Aren't there rules and international trade agreements backed by enforcement mechanisms?

[adventured]

> Can USA wake up one day and decide to impose a 40% tariff without repercussions? Aren't there rules and international trade agreements backed by enforcement mechanisms?

You could debate how far the US could go with it before there are serious repercussions. However, several of the big auto-making countries go a great distance out of their way to shield their own domestic auto industries from foreign competition at home, including Germany and Japan. The US should behave exactly as they do and for exactly the same reasons.

What has the US gained by allowing foreign auto competitors such equal footing? Japan and Germany are widely regarded as having the two best auto industries overall, it has clearly has worked out just fine for them (insert the replies about correlation/causation). Why is the US held to a very different standard than China, Germany and Japan (3 of the 4 largest economies) when it comes to trade? That should and will end by necessity, whether it's a Trump or a Bernie Sanders that does it. It's a cultural wave that can't be stopped.

The US should use every lever at its disposal to compete, including strategically manipulating the global reserve currency (eg it's crazy that the US isn't running a $2 trillion, ten year, infrastructure QE program; the USD as the global reserve currency is unlikely to last more than a few more decades, we should leverage it while we have it to increase US competitiveness).

[wbl]

You're ignoring the US consumers who get cheaper and higher quality vehicles from abroad because we don't have protectionist politics on vehicles. Why should I pay more for inferior Detroit cars?