Trump announces Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum imports

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

John C

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2011
974
1,743
643
63
#64
Well said,

Could be, he also had his favorite saying - if you teach economics in a vacuum, it's not worth the vacuum you're teaching it in.

Two things and then I think we've run our course (not trying to evade and not saying I won't participate in the conversation I am always happy to have a discussion) simply because the conversation has already begun shifting (not from you) from policy to anti-Trump and it will just be a discussion that doesn't interest me, I engaged in this because I'm always fascinated by the business end of this, international trade is something I'm somewhat familiar with.

Our world has shifted, that again was a warning I heard repeated often in school and then have heard again and again in the business world for the past 30+years, that it would continue to shift and the US would have to adapt or at some point even being the largest trading partner opportunity for any country would not be enough. We are poor adapters as a government but thankfully we are excellent adapters as businesses, that is where the rubber meets the road, imo. Not to go get political because I am doing my best to keep this about policy but Trump is not a pol everyone (incl many in his own party) keeps reacting as if he is somehow going to become one, he's not and that's a good thing, we have over 530 pol's in DC already and they get nothing done or when they do it is seldom of much benefit. He thinks and acts as a businessman (sometimes I agree sometimes I don't but at least I pretty much always understand the why), all of the twitter nonsense by him and others is simply noise, I don't pay much attention to it either here or anywhere else because it's of zero importance. Trump is a master of getting your attention to the left (not speaking politically) when he's doing something on the right, twitter is his left and all those who cannot get over their hatred for anything Trump continue to fall for it and that's what he wants. btw that's not an opinion that's pretty much what he has published.

We are in the midst of a shift now, China is becoming increasingly powerful although not as economically powerful as many would be led to believe, Russia is on the rebound again, they tanked and have a huge amount of ground to make up before they are a real economic threat, and were it not for brexit and all the fallout from that throughout europe, they might be a formidable trading adversary (frankly they aren't at this point). As I stated multiple times now, generally speaking I am not in favor of any punitive economic measures because they tend to punish those who are the most vulnerable and they tend to not produce positive results, the H-S references I've seen here a few times are entirely out of context with the conditions of today, the conditions that existed then simply don't today and to provide that as a red flag is misleading.

Where we are at now is not entirely about creating positive results as it is preservation of that which provides us the very liberties that we enjoy, no agriculture because farms cannot survive, no standing on the world market, defense weak because we no longer are capable of generating the materials required and the row decides they don't want to provide it or they do at a massive premium, then we weaken our defense structure and make no mistake, imo, China and Russia would like nothing better than to weaken us beyond what bho and the last several pouts before him did and I'm not talking about defense spending because that's a straw man, do we spend too much, I think so but who am I to say do we spend correctly, no and that I do feel certain I can say.
I'm a Constitutionalist 1st and a Libertarian 2nd and if there is ever a conflict I will always tend to the Constitution (original intent that is).

I enjoyed your comments <sincere>, especially the part about Trump and Twitter. I've been telling people, especially students, that Trump could park a battleship in the Port of Catoosa (not sure whether it's deep enough), send out a tweet calling Rosie O'Donnell disgusting, and the MSM would explode with criticism of Trump for saying that about Rosie. No one would bother questioning why there is a battleship moored in Catoosa.

We absolutely have to do something about securing our intellectual property rights, but I don't think I have the answers for that.
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
15,229
29,462
743
On the highway to heck
#65
As the proposed tariffs progress, it will be interesting to see the carve outs or "walk backs" negotiated. I'd like to think there is a method to Trump's madness whether it's to generate rust belt votes in the mid-terms or genuinely shooting at the bad trade actors. There's not a logical explanation I can come up with so the illogical becomes logical. He's lost some good people (Gary Cohn) in his administration over this move which I suspect didn't surprise him.
 
Last edited:

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
64,325
47,176
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#66
As for China cheating on steel... why should we care about their government pumping money into their steel industry so that they can sell it to us cheaper? It means we pay less for it, they're taxing their own people for our benefit. It's like they're giving us foreign aid money. If our steel manufacturers can't compete then so what, we can focus on producing other stuff.
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
15,229
29,462
743
On the highway to heck
#67
As for China cheating on steel... why should we care about their government pumping money into their steel industry so that they can sell it to us cheaper? It means we pay less for it, they're taxing their own people for our benefit. It's like they're giving us foreign aid money. If our steel manufacturers can't compete then so what, we can focus on producing other stuff.
I'm of the opinion (right or wrong) we shouldn't cede our industrial strength to any foreign country. "Cheaper" shouldn't be the only qualifier to do so. Had we been dependent on one of the Axis Powers for steel, aluminum, etc in WW2 it could have proved disastrous to our war effort.

Just an opinion from a different generation. ;)
 

Bowers2

Stackin' Joe's Cups
A/V Subscriber
Jul 31, 2006
6,266
5,024
1,743
OKC
#68
Here are a couple bits of good information to keep in mind.

Steel Imports Report from Dept. of Commerce

U.S. Manufacturing Isn't Dwindling Away

Some interesting things from the Dept. of Commerce Report (from 2017 I believe):

We're the world's largest steel importer.
Steel imports have doubled since 2009.
We import from 110 countries.
Canada, Brazil, and South Korea are the top three import sources.
China isn't even in the top ten. In fact, in the pie chart they would be listed with "rest of world."



1520436662522.png
 

Bowers2

Stackin' Joe's Cups
A/V Subscriber
Jul 31, 2006
6,266
5,024
1,743
OKC
#70
Everyone does realize this whole tariff is about NAFTA right.
Yep. Kind of my point in posting the 2017 report. People too often go straight to talking about China when it comes to trade. Mnuchin said this week that Canada and Mexico would be spared these tariffs if we can reach an agreement on NAFTA.
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,594
9,448
243
51
Bixby-Bristow OK
#71
Yep. Kind of my point in posting the 2017 report. People too often go straight to talking about China when it comes to trade. Mnuchin said this week that Canada and Mexico would be spared these tariffs if we can reach an agreement on NAFTA.
China is back channeling goods through Mexico and Canada to avoid tariffs we already have in place on Chinese goods. NAFTA allows them to do this. Read an article on it the other day will dig around and see if I can find it.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
64,325
47,176
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#72
I'm of the opinion (right or wrong) we shouldn't cede our industrial strength to any foreign country. "Cheaper" shouldn't be the only qualifier to do so. Had we been dependent on one of the Axis Powers for steel, aluminum, etc in WW2 it could have proved disastrous to our war effort.

Just an opinion from a different generation. ;)
We wouldn't be. China is a small fraction of where we get steel.
 
Sep 6, 2012
1,486
747
743
Edmond
#74
Here are a couple bits of good information to keep in mind.

Steel Imports Report from Dept. of Commerce

U.S. Manufacturing Isn't Dwindling Away

Some interesting things from the Dept. of Commerce Report (from 2017 I believe):

We're the world's largest steel importer.
Steel imports have doubled since 2009.
We import from 110 countries.
Canada, Brazil, and South Korea are the top three import sources.
China isn't even in the top ten. In fact, in the pie chart they would be listed with "rest of world."



View attachment 59364
China ships their steel through other countries to sell it to us. We get their steel in one shape or another.

https://www.trade.gov/steel/countries/pdfs/exports-china.pdf
 
Last edited:

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
64,325
47,176
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#77
From WSJ:

How a Trade War Escalates
Europe retaliates against U.S. exports and Republican states.

By The Editorial Board
March 7, 2018 7:04 p.m. ET

The European Union on Wednesday released its target list of retaliatory tariffs on American exports worth $3.5 billion if President Trump pushes ahead with his steel and aluminum tariffs. This is how Mr. Trump’s trade irruptions could imperil American exporters and become a destructive spiral.

The EU is acting with some restraint—for now—in crafting a narrow list of items on which to impose tariffs, including bourbon, orange juice, corn, ladders and motor boats. None are vital to European industry, but they are politically shrewd in targeting exports from states represented by Republicans on Capitol Hill. The point is to punish voters in states Mr. Trump carried in 2016 and Republicans running for re-election this year. Too bad Europe can’t impose a tariff on Wilbur Ross and Peter Navarro, the architects of this fiasco.

The danger for the EU is that this will inspire Mr. Trump to indulge his schoolyard impulses and hit back at the EU again. “The European Union has been particularly tough on the United States. They make it almost impossible for us to do business with them,” Mr. Trump said at a White House presser with Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven. He’s also threatened tariffs on European cars.

Since White House aide Gary Cohn soon won’t be around the White House to explain how unconnected to reality this is, we’ll try. It is not “almost impossible” for American companies to do business in Europe. The bilateral trading relationship between the U.S. and the combined EU states is the largest in the world. In 2016 American companies sold goods worth $270 billion in the EU and services worth $231 billion. America has a bilateral trade deficit in goods with the EU—$147 billion in 2016—but a services surplus of $55 billion.

The flip side of the trade deficit is a substantial flow of investment into the U.S. from Europe. Around half of new direct investment in America (measured as acquisition of an American firm, or creation or expansion of a subsidiary) came from Europe in 2016—nearly $200 billion.

Such investments, made over decades, supported roughly 4.7 million jobs of Americans employed directly by affiliates of European companies as of 2015, according to U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis data (counting all of Europe, including some countries that aren’t EU members). And that ignores Americans employed by companies that sell to those European affiliates, and those who work for U.S. firms that benefit from European investment in equity markets and so on. This is what economic “winning” looks like.

American leaders at least dating to George Marshall have understood that close economic ties between the U.S. and Europe are necessary to support the trans-Atlantic military alliance. Not coincidentally, the Continent’s most vigorously pro-trade politicians also tend to be its most pro-American. A perverse consequence of Mr. Trump’s trade wrangling is that he’s alienating them. That includes French President Emmanuel Macron, a rare European leader to eschew outright hostility to Mr. Trump.

There’s plenty of scope to improve the U.S.-EU trading relationship. One sore spot on both sides remains agricultural protectionism, often related to dubious safety concerns. Another is Europe’s treatment of American tech companies such as Microsoft , Amazon, Google and Apple on questionable antitrust and tax concerns.

Those and other issues are best addressed through negotiations rather than tariffs. Mr. Trump would better serve American workers and businesses by urging the EU to join him in dusting off stalled free-trade talks. If he persists instead in stoking a trade war with America’s most important strategic and economic partner, he and America will lose—and big.

Appeared in the March 8, 2018, print edition.
 

John C

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2011
974
1,743
643
63
#78
Gee. If only someone could have predicted this retaliation. And a tip of the hat to Europe for knowing to punish Republican states.


How long until someone retaliates against American companies who are exporting products to their country? The things we export are the things we are best at producing. David Ricardo began explaining that back in the 1830s (comparative advantage). We don't operate in a vacuum and, unfortunately, too many people still think we are in that 1945 to 1960 period when we were the only industrialized country who came out of the war with our production facilities in tact and we could basically do whatever we wanted without any major impacts on our industrial base.