I don't think so. I'm certainly somewhere "on the right", but I wouldn't consider myself a populist. I'm too unpopular and won't cater to most Trump-Left policies or Right-Authoritarian policies. I'm not going to support protectionism, and protectionism always has some amount of popular support.
My complaint is that I'd go a lot further in tearing apart the government's regulatory system as it stands because most of those jobs were intentionally disincentive from working in the US, and government agents were actively supporting Chinese interests. Trump did engage in protectionism, but the real damage he did to China came from not supporting them so thoroughly.
Again, the government system incentivized China taking all available manufacturing jobs. Trump disincentivized it. My argument would be be break the restrictions and regulations that form protectoinism within the US so that there would be a larger profit incentive for manufacturing to function in the US. Incentivizing China intentionally and immediately kills manufacturing in America. Disincentivizing China only hurts manufacturing in the long run. The correct answer is to incentivize manufacturing in the US by allowing it to function in a free market where the government doesn't take their shit.
It's kinda like this argument about the stimulus checks. The Democrats want to strengthen the lockdown and give out a pittance of people's money back. Trump wants to give more of people's money back. I want to end the lock down and stop stealing people's money. To me, that's way better than taking their money and giving some of it back to them... but it starts out with me saying "I'm not giving you any money".
Which, if you think about it, is exactly how the Dems hit Trump on his tax cut. The Dems screamed that Trump had caused people's Tax returns to either not go up, or even go down. Yes: because he withheld less of their income from them. Some voters got confused because their return went down, but they kept $50 more with every paycheck. Their feedback mechanism was being intentionally confused by the state. That's why I object to Tax Returns altogether. If you had to pay the feds all of your taxes, all at once, on April 15th, you'd be screaming "taxation is theft!" too. You would sit there and think: "I'm not paying Barack Obama $10,000!"
Populism is just a slur used on democracy when the public doesn't vote the way the ruling class like.
Market signals are necessary for an economy to function but protectionism doesn't erase those signals. At worst it can keep bad businesses afloat when better ones could do better with their market share. But do you think America could outdo China when China is communist and protectionist? China's cheating.
Do you consider yourself a right wing populist? If so, you're proving yourself correct.
I don't think so. I'm certainly somewhere "on the right", but I wouldn't consider myself a populist. I'm too unpopular and won't cater to most Trump-Left policies or Right-Authoritarian policies. I'm not going to support protectionism, and protectionism always has some amount of popular support.
Would it be protectionism for America to bring American jobs back to America and way from China?
Yes.
Again, that's why I'm not a populist.
My complaint is that I'd go a lot further in tearing apart the government's regulatory system as it stands because most of those jobs were intentionally disincentive from working in the US, and government agents were actively supporting Chinese interests. Trump did engage in protectionism, but the real damage he did to China came from not supporting them so thoroughly.
Again, the government system incentivized China taking all available manufacturing jobs. Trump disincentivized it. My argument would be be break the restrictions and regulations that form protectoinism within the US so that there would be a larger profit incentive for manufacturing to function in the US. Incentivizing China intentionally and immediately kills manufacturing in America. Disincentivizing China only hurts manufacturing in the long run. The correct answer is to incentivize manufacturing in the US by allowing it to function in a free market where the government doesn't take their shit.
It's kinda like this argument about the stimulus checks. The Democrats want to strengthen the lockdown and give out a pittance of people's money back. Trump wants to give more of people's money back. I want to end the lock down and stop stealing people's money. To me, that's way better than taking their money and giving some of it back to them... but it starts out with me saying "I'm not giving you any money".
Which, if you think about it, is exactly how the Dems hit Trump on his tax cut. The Dems screamed that Trump had caused people's Tax returns to either not go up, or even go down. Yes: because he withheld less of their income from them. Some voters got confused because their return went down, but they kept $50 more with every paycheck. Their feedback mechanism was being intentionally confused by the state. That's why I object to Tax Returns altogether. If you had to pay the feds all of your taxes, all at once, on April 15th, you'd be screaming "taxation is theft!" too. You would sit there and think: "I'm not paying Barack Obama $10,000!"
I'm not a populist, because I think you need negative feedback. Protectionism intentionally stops negative feedback, even if you really should have it. It's like being unable to feel pain. If you can't feel pain, you might not realize when you've been set on fire.
Populism is just a slur used on democracy when the public doesn't vote the way the ruling class like.
Market signals are necessary for an economy to function but protectionism doesn't erase those signals. At worst it can keep bad businesses afloat when better ones could do better with their market share. But do you think America could outdo China when China is communist and protectionist? China's cheating.