I don't know the first thing about submarines, so I doubt I would characterize you as being on a high horse if you corrected me on something to do with this topic.
I've spent 25 years in investment banking, financial operations and markets. I was owner and a finop for an nasd broker dealer and had economists on the payroll, I owned a commodity brokerage company, I sit on the board of an investment firm and sit on an advisory board to a small hedge fund. It's not just a difference of opinion. Your opinion on economics / markets is simply poorly informed and smells only of political rhetoric.
I understand that you hate them. I'm sorry that this is the response you find most available. That said, I share the frustrations of the things you mention above.
In all honesty, you come off clearly as a right winger. Of course, that doesn't mean that you support
everything on that side. Pointing this out does nothing to lessen your general stance.
This is GFY.
Look, last time we discussed inflation it was going down the same road as seen in this thread. I pointed you directly at the numbers and all you could do was put your mental earmuffs on and point to gas and food. (notice that you have been quiet on oil prices recently since the last time you started that thread. hmmm.)
Then we had the discussion about outsourcing and free trade where you displayed another narrow view.
I think I offered a simplified example like this:
Vendzilla makes dildos. They cost you $10 to make and you sell them for $20 and earn $10 in income.
Jang can make them for the equivalent of $5. She sells them for $10 and the shipping cost to Jang's country is $1.
Julie wants to buy a dildo.
Before outsourcing: Vendzilla earns $10. Jang earns nothing. Julie spends $20 on a dildo.
After outsourcing: Vendzilla earns nothing. Jang earns $5. Julie gets a dildo for $11 and therefore saves $9.
Vendzilla is $10 worse off. Jang is $5 better off. Julie is $9 better off.
Suppose we want to restore Vendzilla's income, even without asking you to do anything for it (rather generous . . . but then Jang wasn't doing anything before was she). Then via an internationally-applied PVAAC ("Protect Vendzilla At All Costs") tax, we transfer $7 from Julie to Vendzilla and $3 from Jang to Vendzilla.
After side-payments: Vendzilla "earns" $10, Jang earns $2 and Julie still saves $2.
Vendzilla is as well off as before. Jang is $2 better off than before. Julie is $2 better off than before.
Opposition to oursourcing/offshoring is only ever based on the distribution of income. Protectionism can redistribute income but only by lowering it overall, which is wasteful for the world.
Then, of course, empirical observation is overwhelmingly that Vendzilla does find alternative income and such transfer payments are rarely necessary.
I tried to explain to you that you outsourcing / free trade were good for society globally and that there were benefits of lower manufactured goods prices that you were ignoring or hadn't factored in to your analysis.
IOW, there are larger gains than losses. They don't accrue to everybody equally, but it would be theoretically possible for side-payments to make everybody better off including the person whose labor was outsourced.
Your attitude was more mental earmuffs.
So, please either get a clue or go fuckyourself as well with your $20 dildo.
.