A one world nation would solve many economically complex issues.

If we had a world where there were no import/export tariffs and economics was purely about trade between consumers and providers of goods/services, economics itself would ve both simpler and in fact more closely linked to productivity than it currently is.

Yes, but a one world nation would be structurally complex, as it is comprised of former independent nations, consisting of even enemies bordering each other.

@RatMan

 Wouldn't a pure socialist utopia be fabulous?

Just won't work though, until we've genetically engineered out all our antisocial traits and got robots to do all our dirty work. 

Though thinking about it.......For the system to work, we would have to cede all social control to an Alternative Intelligence, because human hierarchy would be a thing of the past.

So who's going to be doing all the scurrying around in sweatshops when the Robots are wielding the stick?

I'm not sure if that sounds like a utopian or a dystopian future.

We do not need one worldwide nation to accomplish that. Just abolish trade tariffs. Trade should be successful for a nation based on the quality and reliability of goods and services, period. Cost is not so great a factor when the q/r of a product/service is superior to another's. Customers define quality, and the reliability of a product is proven by customers. Let the trade market be driven by those principles, and stop trying to make of us a one-nation world. Nations are defined by variable culture. The richer our cultural differences, and our ability to appreciate those differences, the better for humanity as a whole.

Do you think Tariffs are sometimes necessary to protect domestic industry?

In a situation of forced trade imbalance where import value highly exceeds export value, yes, but that does not make it an ideal trade factor. Trade balance does. And, yes, the trade imbalance is forced, by virtue of dumb trade negotiations, like NAFTA.

I mean suppose there was a domestic industry that was under threat of a foreign product undercutting it. Would a tariff be justified to artificially raise the price of the foreign product, allowing the domestic product to compete domestically?

No. the domestic product maker should overcome the competition by improved quality and reliability, thus making its cost more justified to the consumer. Q&R, as I've already stated, have little in the consumer's mind to cost. We expect greater performance to have a higher cost. It is why I prefer Apple to Windows. Better performance over a longer period. I have owned, in my lifetime, fully seven Windows-based computers and laptops. Over the same period, I have owned three Apples [and only two Macs]. They were each more expensive than their competition in their time, but are more reliable and last longer. My original Apple II still functions. Every Windows product was replaced by necessity by failure. Actually, I now own two Macs, a desktop and a laptop, and I have never owned a tablet, but that it was an iPad, of which I own two, a 5-gen mini, and a 7-gen regular, which are both still functional.

Suppose the product is already more quality and reliable, but it's more expensive without the tariffs for that reason

Not sure what the point of this comment is. The whole "no tariffs" thing RM advocates for in the OP would seem to be a hardcore capitalist's wet dream. Am I missing something?

Because nations exist, I therefore am pro-tariffs if used for protectionism. 

I wouldn't look at this economically, I would look at in civil terms, with a one-world government we could actually improve the quality of life for so many people! We could more easily address poverty, and starvation in countries without sufficient infrastructure, we could actually have consequences for regions who would violate human rights without, "Im going to threaten to blow you up" and all that. Of course there are blockades and things of that nature as well, but those are typically less effective in stopping these sorts of violations. Furthermore, I believe that such a paradigm would dramatically reduce xenophobia, of course not completely, but at least help reduce it.

This will happen, but it won't be for about 200 years from now. There only way this would work is if AI controls the government.

First, China has to be the leading economic power which it will be in about 5 years once it has perfected fusion power.

Yes.

You're missing the whole bigger picture, relating to "One World".

"One World Nation" is a utopian dream and  "Tariffs" are something of a huge contradiction of the utopian dream.

What you are alluding too is One controlled  World......Controlled by whom?

As such, nothing is being "solved".....Just power shifting.

No, I don't think I am. Look back at my post. I never at any point said I agree or disagree with with you or RM on whether eliminating tariffs and making a world government is a good idea, I just asked how it is socialism since you brought socialism up out of the blue lol.

Hmmmm.

I explained the contradiction in my previous post.

Did you fully read and evaluate that post?

One World is a controlled World and isn't One world, it's someone's controlled World...Wet dreaming, hardcore, hypocritical, oppressive, corrupt, pseudo-capitalists probably.

"One world" is a socialist utopian dream....Nothing more than a dream.....Of which, the manifestation, becomes a controlled nightmare.

What use is capitalism in a "One World Society"?......  What use capitalism without competition and diversity?

I agree in principle.

Thats good as we only have this Earth to make it on.  Mars, Earths moon,  Saturn's Europa. 

And if you think we 500, 1000, or more years to have time to invent a technology that would give habitat for humanity of any significant length of time, on in of those planets, then you I think  your ill-informed of the magnitude such and endeavor would take.

We have workable options on this Earth, but even if we figure a way to preserve our hospitable ecological environment on Earth, we have to all agree on who is going to live here in harmony, because, if it aint all for one, and one for all in spirit, then there is still plenty of nukes to crash this human species on Earth party.

Mutually Assured Destruction { M.A.D. } becomes No Unification Today Sucker { N.U.T.S. }

Actually what use is Capitalism if it's not everyone in the world competing with everyone in the world on equal, fair footing?

@RatMan

Well, someone is always going to win the race.....That's human nature.

Doesn't matter how you dress up the system, there's always going to be winners, runners up and losers.

I would suggest, that a fair and equal footing, doesn't even start a birth.

A one world nation would be so fucking corrupt and evil it would make Nazi Germany look like a utopia. Ya, one person in charge of the whole world. That is the poster child for absolute power absolutely corrupts. Can you say mass genocide.