Unions praise Trump on steel tariffs

So I guess screw free market principle, our non profitable mills are just too big to fail.

I agree by the way, that government interference is necessary...by the way so did Obama.

 

The problem with your notion is you fail to demonstrate where protectionist economics has produced better results. There is no country in the entire first world that has prospered through protectionist economics. You're like the socialist who points out the disparities in capitalism while also not being able to mention a single example where socialism produced better results than capitalism.

 

I’m not so sure

Leftists are masters at talking out of both sides of their mouth

These are basic industries to create good jobs for blue collar workers

Not make work schemes for liberal snowflakes

And its a plus for trump politically

 

I guarantee you that we will not see even ten thousand steel and iron jobs gained, but we will see a net loss of tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in other industries, just like we did last time Bush tried this same tactic. Mac-7, what's better, 200,000 or 5,000 jobs? Because the first number is what we're slated to lose, and the latter what we'll gain in terms of steel & iron jobs.

 

Could be

Building a better economy is an incremental exercise rather something thst happens overnight

As for jobs lost we’ll see

The actual details have yet to be worked out

 

Better results you say? How about China and the way they have prospered by blocking imports and benefited by selling us stuff that we used to make here? It's time to fight back.

• Due to the trade deficit with China 3.4 million jobs were lost between 2001 and 2015, including 1.3 million jobs lost since the first year of the Great Recession in 2008. Nearly three-fourths (74.3 percent) of the jobs lost between 2001 and 2015 were in manufacturing (2.6 million manufacturing jobs displaced).
• The growing trade deficit with China has cost jobs in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, and in every congressional district in the United States.
• The trade deficit in the computer and electronic parts industry grew the most, and 1,238,300 jobs were lost or displaced, 36.0 percent of the 2001–2015 total. As a result, many of the hardest-hit congressional districts (in terms of the share of jobs lost) were in California, Texas, Oregon, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Arizona, where jobs in that industry are concentrated. Some districts in Georgia, Illinois, New York, and North Carolina were also especially hard-hit by trade-related job displacement in a variety of manufacturing industries, including computer and electronic parts, textiles and apparel, and furniture. In addition, surging imports of steel, aluminum, and other capital intensive products threaten hundreds of thousands of jobs in these key industries as well.

"There are reasons for China’s large and growing trade surpluses with the United States and the world that go far beyond the free market

China both subsidizes and dumps massive quantities of exports. Specifically it blocks imports, pirates software and technology from foreign producers, manipulates its currency, invests in massive amounts of excess production capacity in a range of basic industries, often through state owned enterprises (SOEs) (investments that lead to dumping), and operates as a refuse lot for carbon and other industrial pollutants. China has also engaged in extensive and sustained currency manipulation over the past two decades, resulting in persistent currency misalignments. Other countries in the region have found it attractive to follow (and difficult to resist following) China’s lead in engaging in currency manipulation, resulting in the region’s large and growing trade surpluses with the United States and the world over the past 15 years."

https://www.epi.org/publication/gro...nce-trade-and-rebuild-american-manufacturing/

 

Bush steel tarrifs were not in place long enough to have any real effect other that threats from other countries and a drop in the stock market when they were announced as Wall Street panicked. Bush quickly caved in as was his usual MO in things like this.

 

So far democrats seem to be steering clear of this subject. They see it as a no win situation for them.

 

1. China is not a first world country, they are second world.

2. While China has made improvements in recent years, they have done so by cutting their tariffs, not raising them.

(China's average tariffs by year)

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Chinas-Average-Tariff-Rate-1978-2010_fig2_320414828

4. China is continuing to cut their tariffs.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-42107311


5. Trade deficits are not necessarily a bad thing for us, when our economy is stronger our trade deficit tends to go up. We saw this before, and after the recession. Our trade deficit decreased during the recession, and increased as our economy recovered. We are purchasing these foreign goods using our currency, meaning that money is being invested back into our country

Just see what nobel prize winning economist, and Reagan economic adviser Milton Friedman had to say about the US's trade deficits

 

I think many liberals like to see jobs leave America

That hurts the white middle class and they hopepromotes socialism

 

Strange I am a liberal and I complain about the loss of high paying jobs due to free trade. Trade has benefited China. Its just the US, or more obviously US workers, who got clobbered by it.

 

They are so busy bashing trump 24/7 they would need longer days to fit a new topic in

 

There's just no way to put a positive spin on our trade defecits as hard as you may try and China has other ways of blocking imports than tarrifs.

"China is blocking imports, illegally subsidizing its domestic industries and pursuing policies to cripple foreign competitors. That's the verdict(link is external) of the US Trade Representative following ten years of China's membership in the World Trade Organization.

China(link is external)’s trade restrictions and “interventionist policies” in areas such as intellectual property rights remain a concern for American companies doing business in the Asian nation, the U.S. said.

China discriminates against foreign business in “numerous sectors” of the economy, the U.S. Trade Representative’s office said yesterday in its annual report(link is external) on Chinese compliance with World Trade Organization rules. Continued government intervention in its economy has been a “troubling trend,” the U.S. said.

“China seems to be embracing state capitalism more strongly, rather than continuing to move toward the economic reform goals that originally drove its pursuit of WTO membership,” the report said.

The report details the predatory practices China is using to kneecap global competitors.

China continued to pursue industrial policies in 2011 that seek to limit market access for imported goods, foreign manufacturers and foreign service suppliers, while offering substantial government resources to support Chinese industries. The principal beneficiaries of these policies are state-owned enterprises, as well as other favored companies attempting to move up the economic value chain.

China continued to deploy export quotas, export license restrictions, minimum export prices, export duties and other export restraints on a number of raw material inputs where it holds the advantage of being one of the world’s leading producers. Through these export restraints, it appears that China is able to provide substantial economic advantages to a wide range of downstream producers in China, at the expense of foreign downstream producers, while simultaneously creating incentives for these foreign downstream producers to move their operations and technologies to China.

China has continued to provide a range of injurious subsidies to its domestic industries, and some of these subsides appear to be prohibited under WTO rules.

The Chinese government attempted to manage the export of many primary, intermediate and downstream products by raising or lowering the value-added tax rebate available upon export. In addition, China sometimes reinforced its objectives by imposing or retracting export duties. These practices have caused tremendous disruption, uncertainty and unfairness in the global markets for some products, particularly downstream products where China is a leading world producer or exporter, such as steel, aluminum and soda ash."

http://www.americanjobsalliance.com/content/china-blocks-us-imports-cheats-global-trade-rules

 

I should have said “many” liberals because the are democratics who see the big picture

 

Gives them the trojan horse excuse to continue their campaign of tariffing.
EU is a protectionist trade block.

 

Your interpretation skills are seriously lacking.

 

Sure, I guess if 200,000 jobs isn't real enough for you..

 

Yes, there is a positive to our trade deficits, again our trade deficit decreased when the recession hit, and increased when the economy recovered. That's because when our economy is stronger, we have a tendency to buy more things. On top of this, the money we spend on foreign goods is payed in American dollars. So what do you suppose these foreign businesses do with those US dollars? They invest those dollars back into the US

again, I recommend you actually listen to what nobel prize winning economist, and Reagan economic adviser Milton Friedman had to say about our trade deficits




In regards to China, you are absolutely wrong. First off, China is a developing economy, they are not yet a first world country. Second, China is moving in the direction of becoming a first world country by adapting to first world policies, they are lowering their tariffs, and increasing their imports. They are gradually becoming a more capitalist country (though the past 15 years have been a bit more than gradual)

This graph repents the amount of goods China has imported by year


https://tradingeconomics.com/china/imports

 

Strange, the author never once mentions using tariffs to combat unfair trade.

 

Your source for this is?

This one is not valid by the way.

. A 2003 report commissioned by industries that consumed steel estimated that the Bush steel tariffs cost in excess of 200,000 jobs—

 

Maybe because it wasn't the subject of the article?

 

Did I say GE? I meant GM.
Too late to edit. Please excuse.

 

Maybe you should find an article that an economist wrote?

By the way, I find it pretty funny that you chose China as your model country. Me personally? I would have chosen New Zealand, or Switzerland, or one of the many other capitalist first world countries as a model economy... but instead chose a country that is still developing into a capitalist country as your model economic example. That's actually pretty damn funny, as if to say the US should model itself on a second world country that's still becoming a capitalist country, but hasn't quite developed yet.

I guess we should set our economic development back to the second world too, only we'll be a capitalist country developing into a socialist country, instead of the other way around. Brilliant!

 

Personally, I wish we could focus on the textile industry -
Jobs lost there had nothing to do with technology and everything to do with trade.
As a result, we all have to tolerate garments that look like they were made from Kleenex.

Just so you are clear, crappy fabrics are not stylish, they're just crappy.

 

It's automatically not valid based on who commissioned the study? lol, wat. There was also a 2005 study not commissioned by a trade commission that said basically the same thing.