DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus U.S. Allies to Sign Sweeping Trade Deal in Challenge to Trump

j/c

I do love hearing those on the right thumbing their nose at purely Republican ideas on trade and supporting exactly what Democrats have supported on trade just because Trump is president.

You do realize that the left are screaming the tariffs are horrible idea and that cost of goods are going to go up, right?

I find it funny that the left has no issue with taxing us 40% to pay for welfare, but if the idea to tax china to help bring steel industry back and create jobs is pushed, its a problem their car is going to cost a hundred or two bucks more. . ..

GOP decries Trump tariffs on steel and aluminum imports

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/gop-decries-trump-tariffs-steel-aluminum-imports/story?id=53609092

You really need to look at the history of this issue rather than just spouting nonsense.

Free Trade vs. the Republican Party

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/buchanan/free-trade-vs-the-republican-party/

So because some on the GOP are against it that makes the case? I think are missing the point. You complain about party over country, then try to denounce when something is not in party line... hypocrisy.

Free trade - there is no such thing. Not when other countries do not have labor laws, pay overtime, use kids in sweatshops etc to manufacture their goods. let alone when China is PAYING companies their losses to sell cheap steel so they can undercut and hurt the US and its economy.

ITs time we took a stand, I don't care if its Left or Right idea, why do you?

Standing on a fence is hazardous to ones health.

I do think it's funny when people abandon long held beliefs to uphold a single politician. But it's not as important as it is humorous.

Here's actually the puzzling part. When Trump began his statement he described a nation like China who subsidized their steel industry. They have very low wages and these factors certainly give them an advantage over American industry. To that point it made perfect sense.

Then in the next breath, he invoked sanctions that include nations such as Germany, Spain, Italy, The U.K. and many nations of the world that do none of those things.

None of it makes any sense.

Falling on your sword ends much worse.

Some folks don’t realize that the HISTORY of tariffs couldn’t be LESS RELEVANT ... same thing with the TRICKLE DOWN BS ........ both those MODELS have changed so much u can’t draw relevant conclusions from the past ..... actually its more like they’ve been TORN DOWN AND RE-BUILT ..

I know u know what i mean ... i’ll bet u 50 bucks Pit thinks he knows what i just said but has NO CLUE ... paypal wager? ...

What is it when u don’t realize that u don’t know what u don’t know? .. is that hazardous for your health also ... ...

The only real problem with the tariffs is that they should have been more surgical. Sometimes when you paint with a broad brush you can't stay within the lines.

And of course you're the only one who understands that with the global economy and the modernization of China that things have changed. But why is it you never actually address the points in a discussion?

Placing tariffs on China made perfect sense. But doing the same thing on many European nations didn't.

no diam, an article about abe Lincoln and the tariffs he placed and how that reflects to the economy of today is exactly why are we don't need tariffs. . . . . .

Yeah, Diam everyone on the board are dumb but you and your group pf menSas.

This was the exact quote of paul ryan actually - hmmmm, weird you would say it.....

Anywho, of course ryan is going to say this and of course the establishment politicians are going to have a problem with the tariffs. You see, they are in an election year. The economy is going great, tax cuts just passed. The tariffs are def going to have an effect on goods. Now we may agree or disagree if the tariffs work - but stay with me here. Lets say they work, and jobs come back - its going to be awhile before they do. But the price of goods will go up sooner than the jobs.

So in an election year - voters are going to see the cost of goods go up first, and not see the jobs. its all optics, and he is running his mouth simply for that fact.

Paul Ryan

Isn't it a bit difficult to be a free market protectionist?

What the heck is a "pf menSas"?

Between you and Clem's hieroglyphs I'm forgetting how to read!

Yet you've never addressed why nations that do not subsidize their steel industry, who do not pay very low wages and do not dump steel on or nation were included in the tariffs.

Trump described why he was imposing the tariffs and then included many nations that in no way fall under that description he gave. Do you think we may actually stay on track and discuss this?

What discussions? ... u guys know it all ...

This is FLUID ... yesterday was actually the START OF THE NEGOTIATIONS ... he has them (not us) backed into a corner ...

U want a discussion ... ok ...

Why does it make sense to place them on China but not European countries?

Actually ... lets back it up a bit ...

Why do u think the sanctions were placed and what do you think our end game is here? ..

We can have a discussion ... but its gonna be long ... theres ALOT TO UNWRAP here if u want to have a true discussion ... LOTS OF MOVING PARTS AND VARIABLES!!

Let me know ...

Someone has their panties in a bunch ... i remember when u used to have THICK SKIN ... appearantly now u can dish it out but can’t take it anymore ...

Your not aging well in this regard Pit ...

My skin is very thick. I just throw trash back. Life isn't a one way street my friend. You reap what you sow.

It seems like you still have this idea that the Democratic party is for protectionist immigration policy and trade deals, better working conditions, and generally sticking up for the common man. I am sorry to break it to you but that party is dead.

It's too bad because it actually would be nice to have a reasonable opposition to Republicans instead of the one that is obsessed with identity politics, open borders, anti-free speech, anti-gun, etc. Go down the list of Democratic policy positions and talking points and you'll this for yourself.

It seems like you're like Vers and a lot of other old school Democrats and Independents in that you don't really have a party.

Actually it's turning into quite the opposite. It was Trump who took a protectionist stance to help out the the United Steelworkers Union. I don't have a problem leveling the playing field against nations like China who skew the market and have an unfair advantage.

And yes, that's a part of the reason I don't really have a party. Both are taking things more and more to the extremes. I have issues that go along with the GOP and issues that go along with the Dems.

Being convinced to be led around by the nose on every topic like I'm some kind of zombie isn't something I find appealing.

Here's what I believe about both major political parties. They give a lot of lip service to the people they wish to convince they are serving. They are both actually serving those who sponsor them in their campaigns and through lobbyists.

Neither party really cares about the average American. They use fear and hate to divide us because it serves their best interests.

You would have to ask trump that question, I am no privy to the discussions with his trade policy team.

I can go OUT ON A LIMB and say that I would not be surprised if there was thought CHINA would just send steel to those nations who then would in turn be a middle man for them? do I believe this, not really. But its a possibility.

Another possibility is that just because china uses child labor doesn't mean those other countries are not still gaming the system in other ways to get an advantage on their exports. Quality steel only comes from the US. Why would we want their steel anyway?

So you have no idea. Neither do i.

unlike some here, if i am not certain on something, i will admit it instead of just boast personal opinion and claim it as fact.

You just said you have no idea, but you criticize it....weird, if you don't know why, how can you have an opinion.

in 2016 we had a 65 billion trade deficit w/ Germany according to politifact, which ranks 3rd of all our trade partners.



Trade specifically w/ Germany has effected our auto industry greatly. Which in turns effects steel. Germans sell a lot of cars here, maybe tariffs on them have to do with that

But idk, neither do you. All conjecture at this point. But I bet their is reasoning behind it.

Asking questions and trying to get an answer from the people who support it is not criticizing anything. And you're right, I don't know. Yet if I actually claimed to support it I would know why I support it.

Here's the thing about what you posted. He didn't put a tariff on German cars. He put a tariff on raw steel. We actually import four times more steel from Canada and Mexico than we do from China. So the more I learn the more confusing it actually becomes.

China dumps its cheap steel on those other Nations forcing them to dump their steel on the US.

China dumps very little steel on us these days. They are masters of finding their way around the system.

Once China has put everyone out of business with their cheap steel, they will charge what they want and control the worlds steel supply.

I have a feeling that is what is happening. However deductive reasoning does not really take to some on this board.

I bet if Trump signed into law Single Payer, Free education, and bathrooms for any tom dick and sally to use at their pleasure, the left would still complain.

It's so simple yet complex - it's lucky we had you to solve the problem for the world while every great economist and country in the world missed the plot and how to fix it.

You are blessed to have someone with a clue on these boards.

European Union Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstroem speaks after the EU introduced new duties on steel products from China on Friday, June 9.

China’s hold over the international steel market is pretty clear. It produces half the world’s steel and in 2015, finished imports from China to the EU were up 140% on 2013. Imports now account for a quarter of the EU market, and at the same time, prices for a range of major EU product classes have collapsed.

This trend, replicated to differing degrees worldwide, has led to accusations in the US and elsewhere that China is selling its steel at a loss, or more accurately in this case, keeping costs artificially low so that other producers cannot compete, in a practice widely known as “dumping”.

In the EU, tariffs have dented Chinese imports but it’s a bit like plugging one leak only to find another. Chinese imports are replaced by products from places like Iran, Russia and Ukraine. Imports from Iran have increased almost tenfold since 2012. The EU has numerous trade defence measures on other nations, and not just on a range of Chinese steel products.

In the UK, imports are also on the up. According to UK trade association UK Steel, imports accounted for 60% of UK demand in 2015, up from 57% in 2012. Chinese steel imports accounted for 11% of 2015 UK steel demand, up from 2% in 2011. UK imports from the EU remain twice as high as from the rest of the world, but no one can escape downward pricing pressure from such a huge player.

The World Trade Organisation defines dumping as state interference in the market: protection leading to subsidised exports at prices below real market costs. Specifically, dumping occurs when a country’s average export price over time is less than a reasonable price for the same product when sold at home. This characterisation of dumping is based on market prices rather than production costs – UK Steel contends this is unrepresentative.

Why would China be dumping steel? Well, the European trade body, Eurofer, estimates that China’s excess production – what it makes beyond the level of domestic demand – is as much as double total EU demand. In short, it has a lot to sell. Eurofer also believes that China exports steel at below production costs. According to UK Steel, Chinese producers lose US$34 on every tonne produced. International steel trade associations also believe that China sells below its normal domestic price and cost.

One consultant, Think!Desk, has argued that due largely to coke and labour costs, the production costs of a typical Chinese steel factory are marginally (€30 per tonne) less than those of European producers. As China, however, imports around half its iron ore, this advantage is outweighed by shipping costs.

The analysis concludes that compared to the EU, the cost base of Chinese steel benefits from preferential treatment on tax arrangements, bank loans, land use rights, environmental standards, import substitution subsidies and grants and unpaid dividends.

Verdict
In short, Chinese steel may not possess a “natural” cost advantage, but does operate at artificially depressed costs levels. In other words, China is dumping steel.

But the issue of dumping is not simply technical and legal; it is political and ideological. International trade associations argue that state intervention in China’s steel industry leads to massive oversupply and damages global market discipline. The demand is made that China relinquishes state ownership and control of its steel industry: a dramatic call, unlikely to be heeded.

And for all the protests in the UK, the irony is that British steel workers would likely support a form of Chinese-style intervention as part of an industrial strategy to reinvigorate the prospects for British steel.

Review
Ray Hudson, Professor of Geography at Durham University

The author is absolutely right that the issue of dumping is political and ideological, not simply technical and legal. At issue is the conceptualisation of dumping – does it relate to selling below production costs or below market prices?

In this article, the definition of dumping as “keeping costs artificially low so that other producers cannot compete” raises the thorny question of what a “natural” production cost would be and how it would be defined. The other option, to define dumping as “when a country’s average export price over time is less than a reasonable price for the same product when sold at home”, rests on the nebulous definition of “reasonable”.

Markets are always political constructions, so there is no natural market price to use as a reference point. Countries and companies always have strategies in mind for product pricing. So when this piece arrives at the conclusion that China is indeed dumping steel, we should consider whether Beijing (or Tehran, or Moscow…) is simply setting steel prices at a level which harries the competition and drives trade its way, much like major capitalist enterprises do the world over when they seek to compete and enhance market share.

https://theconversation.com/fact-check-is-china-dumping-steel-76916

Let me translate. "I made a guess. I admitted I had no idea if it was correct or not. Now I've decided to call it deductive reasoning with zero evidence if there's a drop of truth to it or not. I'm trying anything I can to make a total guess sound smart."

Let me Translate -"I tried to call you on something, when the very first reason you gave me was the stated above, but instead of realizing that my hatred was blinding the obvious, I am going to try to demean others because that's what we do"

Go back if you must, the first reason I gave you was china was using the EU as middle men to sell their steel. Now that 40 has shown that is the case, you are trying to back peddle. Just like any other fence sitter, you refuse to take a side so you can say you are always right.

You do realize that the comment you made about "deductive reasoning" came before 40's post, right? That's what i thought......

And I'm not sure what article you were reading, but nowhere in 40's article does in indicate that countries Like Germany, Spain or Italy were middle men in dumping Chinese steel on America.

why do you have to act like such a whiner when all I was asking for are some actual evidence as to why Trump made such a blanket policy on nations that didn't seem to follow the description he spoke of.

Your answer was to make a guess and claim that 40's article actually addressed that. All 40's article has shown is that European nations look like they're going to put tariffs on China for steel dumping. Which is actually something I do support.

Dude, either you have some evidence of your claim or you don't. You can either show why you support it or you can't. all the other BS you're posting is meaningless.

[quoteYou do realize that the comment you made about "deductive reasoning" came before 40's post, right? That's what i thought...... ][/quote]your point? the first thought I had was that EU was being used by China to sell us steel. That seems to be the case based on 40's post. You do realize I even stated that I posted that firt, "that's what I thought"

BS, you were trying to be a condescending know it all, and got called out for it. You see, just like the vast majority of you post, when you don't agree with someone, instead of stating why you don't agree or any type of discussion - you push out snide condescending remarks towards other posters. Go back through all your post on these Forums - doest matter if PF, EE, or Politics, you always ASSume you are right, and everyone else is wrong. Then when someone disagrees with you, you adhere to the snide, insulting comments. Im gonna let you in a litte secret that the rest of us have already figured out, that you have not. You are not the always the smartest person in the room. It would behoove you to realize that once in awhile.

So more BS and no evidence to support your claims. Why am I not surprised? lmao

I'm generally the smartest person in the room and I'm willing to put that to the test anytime you want.

jk, couldn't resist. I get called elitist on here enough because "I know stuff" that I just had to put that out there.