You are right that the US was helped a lot by the fact that the rest of the world was hurt badly by WWII. Other things also helped a lot though such as... 

1. Women started entering the workforce, which meant less people sitting around doing nothing. 

2. Interstate highway system (authorized in 1956) made transportation of goods, and building materials easier. 

3. Regulation of markets to help protect against things like pollution, low pay, and a ton of other things that can slow down an economy. 

4. Heavy government investment in R&D. 

5. More people going to college thanks to the government subsidizing education. (G.I. Bill and the like)

I'm not going to pretend to know exactly how much of it was a result of the rest of the world being bombed out, and exactly how much of it was a result of the above 5 things. But to just say it was all just a result of the rest of the world being bombed out is not the whole picture. 

"Government funding for research has only ever proven to be effective at the large scale when attempting to reverse engineer goods from current market leaders to be able to catch up to them."

We were the current market leader in computer technology when ARPANET was being built, and that research eventually gave fruition to the internet as we know it. When we landed on the moon, we didn't just catch up to Russia in space tech, we blew right by them. Same goes for when we developed nuclear bombs. Government research didn't merely allow us to catch up. We passed current market leaders. Russia didn't have the bomb until 1949. 

In 1989 there were 13.54 million people attending college in the US. In 2018 there were 19.83 million people attending college in the US. https://www.statista.com/statistics/183995/us-college-enrollment-and-projections-in-public-and-private-institutions/ The population of the United States was 246.8 million in 1989. So that makes the college enrollment rate about 5.4% in 1989. Using the same math the enrollment rate was almost exactly 6% in 2018. That's an 11% increase in almost 30 years. Now look at the  following graph. 

And, yes that graph is adjusted for inflation. It's all in 2018 dollars. Why has the cost of public four year schools nearly tripled, while enrollment hasn't grown all that much? Why has price exploded, but demand has not? 

Yes, all those things out listed about China suck. Slave level working hours, no ability to move in country, income inequality, anti-union laws, etc. But that doesn't make them not a mixed economy. Mixed economy simply means the government, and businesses work together to sustain or grow the country's economy. You can be a mixed economy, and still be anti-freedom, high poverty, no workers rights etc. 

P.S. Trump's overall policies are extremely damaging to the U.S. economy as a whole. Even if he managed to reel in China, we'd still be going down the toilet fast thanks to his other policies. But let's not make this thread about that. That would be a whole other thread topic. 

You are right that the US was helped a lot by the fact that the rest of the world was hurt badly by WWII. Other things also helped a lot though such as... 

1. Women started entering the workforce, which meant less people sitting around doing nothing. 

2. Interstate highway system (authorized in 1956) made transportation of goods, and building materials easier. 

3. Regulation of markets to help protect against things like pollution, low pay, and a ton of other things that can slow down an economy. 

4. Heavy government investment in R&D. 

5. More people going to college thanks to the government subsidizing education. (G.I. Bill and the like)

I'm not going to pretend to know exactly how much of it was a result of the rest of the world being bombed out, and exactly how much of it was a result of the above 5 things. But to just say it was all just a result of the rest of the world being bombed out is not the whole picture. 

We were the current market leader in computer technology when ARPANET was being built, and that research eventually gave fruition to the internet as we know it. When we landed on the moon, we didn't just catch up to Russia in space tech, we blew right by them. Same goes for when we developed nuclear bombs. Government research didn't merely allow us to catch up. We passed current market leaders. Russia didn't have the bomb until 1949. 

In 1989 there were 13.54 million people attending college in the US. In 2018 there were 19.83 million people attending college in the US. https://www.statista.com/statistics/183995/us-college-enrollment-and-projections-in-public-and-private-institutions/ The population of the United States was 246.8 million in 1989. So that makes the college enrollment rate about 5.4% in 1989. Using the same math the enrollment rate was almost exactly 6% in 2018. That's an 11% increase in almost 30 years. Now look at the  following graph. 

*snip*

And, yes that graph is adjusted for inflation. It's all in 2018 dollars. Why has the cost of public four year schools nearly tripled, while enrollment hasn't grown all that much? Why has price exploded, but demand has not? 

Yes, all those things out listed about China suck. Slave level working hours, no ability to move in country, income inequality, anti-union laws, etc. But that doesn't make them not a mixed economy. Mixed economy simply means the government, and businesses work together to sustain or grow the country's economy. You can be a mixed economy, and still be anti-freedom, high poverty, no workers rights etc. 

P.S. Trump's overall policies are extremely damaging to the U.S. economy as a whole. Even if he managed to reel in China, we'd still be going down the toilet fast thanks to his other policies. But let's not make this thread about that. That would be a whole other thread topic. 

I think Venezuela is a good choice.

Countries destroyed by communism are always great for producing crap.

Or Africa! Countries destroyed by capitalism are always great for producing crap.

KManX89 said: These "taxation is theft!" GOPers have no leg to walk on now.

That's more of libertarian thing.

I'm kinda indifferent about this because democrats admit they want raise taxes significantly. So its not like the alternative is a better scenario per se. Frankly, they want people to have less buying power.

So... lets see how this ends I guess.

You wouldn't be affected by US tariffs on Chinese goods no matter where they are manufactured.  You live in Brazil. Tariffs are a tax paid by local import companies, not the actual nation the tariffs apply to. 

He is talking about our grey market. Most of it comes from Paraguay, that import from USA (from regular stores).

So they would need to change the way to import (Paraguay) from China directly.

1). You must not be too familiar with the growing Chinese economy.  They already passed the US GDP under purchasing power parity indicators and will pass the US by 2026 using non-purchasing power parity indicators.

Also, the reason we import a lot of products in not just for the sake of cost but because it's not manufactured in the US at all.  You can't just buy US manufactured Sony, MS or Nintendo consoles because they aren't manufactured here. And that's just talking final products.  When you start talking about components, we would get our asses kicked. Want US rare Earth minerals?  Good luck.  80% came from China.  And the 10% or so we do mine ourselves, we ship to China for processing...which is now subject to the tariff anyway.

By the way, we are not China's only export market. Not only can they win this trade war, but it could easily make their ties to other markets stronger making them and those other markets themselves stronger.  While we lose because we do not have the materials, infrastructure or markets to make up for the difference or lost access to minerals and products.

And finally, you (and Trump) need to recognize that we are a global market.  You cannot isolate yourself anymore.  That ship sailed decades ago. 

Only if the digital game comes from China.  And, at this time, they're only talking about consoles anyway.

Wouldn't most parts come in from China and hence get slapped with tariffs? Sony afaik still has some assembly lines in Japan they could expand to atleast lessen tariff impact on a part of their US bound consoles.

Problem is, that the incentives for that are made from us, not China.

Customers in general rather buy cheap products than long-lasting ones. Which pushed the producers to keep things running just as long as they need to, aka as long as it's under some kind of warranty.

So, either the whole population shifts its consumerism to long-lasting products, or there need to be legal changes in the length of warranties to make that happen.

The importing costs get eaten up by wages, so doubtful that they'll do so. Also, new factories would need to get build, which takes a while and is expensive.

However, there's a possibility that the final assembly moves to another third world or developing country, like India, Indonesia, Philippines... to get around the tax. And if it's just the final assembly, China wouldn't loose much of it.

Not really, you can always use a proxy in the middle.

Or you can use the plants of Sony and MS in Brazil.