Fishy Laws

After observing our government in action for many, many years, I have now come to believe that laws and regulations are like fish; after a certain number of days, they begin to stink. For that reason I now advocate that all rules and regulations should come with an expiration date.

Case in point:

...much of the footwear sold in America would be instantly more affordable if not for a Depression-era tariff that keeps the price of imported shoes artificially high. For the past eight decades, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 has raised the price of footwear from overseas by as much as 67.5%.

Back in the 1930s, when there was a U.S. shoe industry, it might have made sense to protect it from foreign competition. Free trade advocates will, of course, disagree, but the point here is not to discuss the merits of protective tariffs. It is instead to highlight the folly of passing laws that remain in effect long after the (perceived) need for them has passed.

Today, 99% of the shoes sold in this country are imported. Why on God's green earth do we still need tariffs on imported shoes? That does nothing but increase the cost to us, the consumers. And the tariffs are on top of (1) the taxes we pay on our income, and (2) the sales tax we pay when we buy our shoes.

Got that? First we're taxed for having a job, then we're taxed when buying necessities. Adding insult to injury, we also have to pay extra to protect a non-existent industry.

When the average American family buys 144 pairs of shoes for each child over the course of childhood, and when the average American buys eight pairs of shoes annually, price considerations are hardly a minor matter. The economy is inching its way back from a severe recession and the purchase of essential items is still difficult for many U.S. households. So as cost-conscious Americans clip every coupon, they might well wonder about government policies that no longer make sense and take needed money from consumers.

Worse, the system is regressive. That is, more expensive, high-end luxury shoes are taxed at the lowest rate, usually around 12%—while more basic, mass-produced shoes are taxed at higher rates: 37.5%, 48%, etc. The Wall Street millionaire is paying a lower duty rate on his Italian leather loafers while low-income parents are paying four or five times the duty rate for their child's shoes.

I won't even get into the idiots who riot for the privilege of paying hundreds of dollars for footwear just because some overpaid jock slapped his name on a pair of sneakers.

No word on whether they used their EBT cards to pay for the shoes...