The President announced today that America will levy tariffs on steel and aluminum to the EU, Mexico, and Canada tonight - retaliatory measures are already being drafted against the country and the stock market is tenuous at best.
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said trade talks with the affected nations were progressing, but not enough to continue the March tariff exemption. He did not specify what requirements the EU, Canada and Mexico would have to meet in order to get the tariffs lifted.
Retaliation? They say that payback is a bi*ch
Are we all sure that we and our economy can weather the reprisals from these trading partners?
Yep, there are no winners in ‘Trade Wars’.
But the EU has no option other than to retaliate, and it will hurt the American economy e.g. make exports from the USA to the EU less competitive as the EU slaps Tariffs on American Goods, and thus adversely affect American jobs.
It’s not the EU who has been ‘Dumping’ cheap steel on the USA; up until now the EU have been Trading with the USA in accordance with WTO Rules.
It’s China who has been ‘Dumping’ cheap steel on both the USA and EU. And therefore, rather than picking a fight with the EU, Trump should be working with the EU as an ally to combat ‘Dumping’ from China.
Germany has the third largest trade deficit with America
The US has been in a deficit position since 1975
This is not a trade war really, but a balancing act
And you believe Spanky is an expert juggler? He cannot even handle his affairs and keep them quiet!!
Yeah, just about every country in the world imports more goods from some countries they trade with than it exports to them, that’s World Trade. It’s no reason to start Trade Wars; especially when those countries you’re importing more goods from are dutifully following WTO Rules.
Until the aftermath of the 2nd world war Europe, for thousands of years, had been one of most war-stricken places on Earth, and is well used to wars. So, if Trump wants to pick a fight with Europe, Europe will fight e.g. we don’t take kindly to bullies.
RJ , good point , Trade is" a balancing act " as you say and not a give OR take deal just for the larger purchaser . As but ONE MORE TRUMP OBSTRUCTION for the left here -Who would rather the US suffer and pay more for its trade goods than any other country , I often wonder what immaturity from those on the left requires that they diss this country of ours rather than say China .
Little do these trade experts HERE realize the bottom line costs of how for instance a country like China can subsidize its steel production AND in how many ways ? Tax breaks for instance alone . Say a non-nationalized steel producer country [US] puts out raw goods steel at $ 80 a ton , China pops up and sells theirs at $ 40 a ton, Why ? Because they don't have to worry about a" Profit " do they ?
But the trade "experts " here still believe in dissing Trump for what ? Protecting US steel markets ? That's extremely bright of them . Had Obama moved to the same protectionism - They would have praised him on their knees .
"Take a Knee "for steel ? Hmmmmmm.
Wrong as usual, horse. Do you ever read the other comments on a subject before posting a reply?
Randy so what ? Do you on the left get a monthly print out of resistance , obstruction or liberal group thought talking points ? Because all hypocrisy aside , you all blast forth with same thought controlling, resist fever , as if it were actually a plague , no matter the cause ,the political point or issue. Just simply 'go against the tide no matter what " ? And all done as if hypocrisy were a common cold passed from one to the other .
I listen to Hannity, horse. Unlike you though, I can tell which of his conspiracies are lies and which are simply fabrications. Keep on listening to the ex-dishwasher for your "facts" and you'll be just fine!
If who represented my media was Joy Reid , Rachel Maddow , Joy Baer and Whoopi Goldberg , I too would be just as royally informed as your party is . ...........mostly ! If not for identity politics , your media wouldn't know what politics was .
Power to the hypocrites .
Your China example thoughts aren't that far off-base ahorseback, at least relative to it being some sort of Chinese government support or intervention that allows the price differences you described.
But ...this topic is about Canada, Mexico, and the EU, none of which have been shown to use unfair government support, (subsidies, tax breaks, etc.), like China does.
Although you sarcastically refer to the "experts" here, I haven't seen their comments, and I doubt you could point any out. In my comment I specifically noted I only had a shallow understanding from a brief look-around.
However, considering your lecturing tone, maybe you are the expert and the rest of us should pay attention to what you are saying.
Since I don't know a lot about these "trade war" issues, I would give that a shot, if, you could just get your topics right. This topic is about Canada, Mexico, and the EU. What are your thoughts about our steel production problems with them?
I am certain you will also find it in your research efforts, but even as the per-ton steel price fluctuates, the price difference between these four countries runs about 40%, (example; $988 U.S. steel vs. $587 Canadian steel). And that difference seems to be completely production costs related.
Can you explain how those three countries fit the same tariff rationalization that you use for China?
Steel , aluminum , coal or oil for that matter , Steel production is but one small part of a large picture . Example , Why do we worry about one product like steel between say the U.S. , Mexico and Canada when there are larger and more pressing problems and negotiating factors involved ?
The US and Canada are great partners and don't need a trade war but ........ So , The don't raise tariffs against Canadian steel but we pull back our costs of international defense and make Canada build their own Navy. Neither Canada nor Mexico have to invest anything at all in national defense , does that mean it's America's duty to patrol their borders securing strategic defenses for them ?
I don't know alot about these trade issues either but looking at WSJ
doesn't tell an entire picture of either trade assets or deficits , strategic military protections or any other "costs" of international diplomacy . Immigration for instance is another factor , perhaps Mexico can be wedged to actually do something about illegal immigration to protect their heavily subsidized trade partnership with us .
This is bullsh*t, Ahorseback, why are you dragging in a dead cat when a simple response to how the EU, Canada, and Mexico are taking advantage of America through unfair advatage will do?. The saber rattling explanation referring to America's bellicose nature in the Age of Trump relative to the nations that are the subject of this discussion is quite lame.
Oh really ? So America having to accept the masses of Mexican unemployed into our labor markets isn't just as important a trade factor than say the price of raw steel ? The US cost to our military for regional protections of nations with little or no military of their own isn't fair trade ?
None of this can be considered ? Really ?
If twenty five million illegals from Mexico , Central America ,South America are taking US jobs and affecting our labor , insurance , health care , labor investigations , OSHA , unemployment , corporate profits and law enforcement .........this can't become part of the overall trade deals ?
I think Trade negotiations encompasses a huge picture . If it doesn't ; I sure bet it will with the Trump administration .
Well ahorseback, at least it looks like we got that "expert" point aired out. But I don't see how the rest of your comment applies to the topic, so I will just move on.
GA , If it were all as simple as setting the prices of steel , aluminum , potatoes and oil between trading nations , wouldn't it seem we could set the price and send the government employees home for the year ?
But that doesn't quite cover it does it ?
Trade Expert ? Nope ........................there aren't any I know of here .
Nah, I'm not for anybody but the producers setting the price ahorseback. As long as everyone is playing on the same field, (Canada, Mexico, and the EU do seem to be playing by the rules - on the same field), the customers of those producers will let them know what they think of the prices they have set. I don't see a place for the government having anything to do with the price-setting in that scenario.
We will always need those government employees on the job, but it will be to keep the field level, (re. China's actions), not call plays.
But even then, you are right, it is never that simple or that covered.
You said it yourself "as long as everybody's playing on the same field " Or in other words , If they were , Why would we need trade agreements between differing economies ? Size , governing factions , tax system differences , tax subsidization , quality standards , food safety , steel quality , composite make up's ?
Guess what ; No one does play on the same field . Not continents ,not countries , no national trade unions and certainly not economies . So , I'd much rather negotiate from a place of strength than weakness . Our guys look out for US against THEM don't they ?
Has anyone asked the question "why?"
I took a brief look around and it seems that Canadian steel is a ton, (pun intended), cheaper than U.S. steel - to the tune of about 40%. But, it also appears this is just a production cost difference, not a subsidized cost difference. Canadian steel doesn't appear to be unfairly government subsidized, such as examples of China's steel costs would show.
I didn't look at the EU or Mexico's steel industry, but their steel price differences, (per ton), seem to be on par with Canada's.
One question is if this is just a difference in production costs, unlike China's steel where the difference is government support.
With my shallow knowledge of the subject, it looks like this issue is not related to unfair advantage, a la China.. One article even noted that the U.S. steel industry benefited, (in previous years), by the cost differential in that it forced them to become more efficient.
So what's up with letting the waivers expire? Could it be a bargaining ploy? I wouldn't jump on the condemnation wagon yet, there could be other factors that will come to light, but I haven't found the logic to support it, (the demise of the waivers), yet.
Yep GA, when I researched this a month ago (when Trump was first threatening such action) I came to the same conclusion e.g. that American steel production costs are far higher, and that countries like Canada, Mexico and the EU are not unduly subsidising their steel industries. So, in that respect I fully agree with what you say.
Trade deals like all negotiations vary widely , no longer can we afford as a nation to suck up the higher cost margins to protect even smaller markets that are more often than not subsidized by individual and much different governments and tax systems than our own , Mexico - Canada - the EU , all of our deals are now and are even becoming much more fluid situations . If we can't revisit every trade agreement we have regularly , we lose .
Trump offers $12B in aid to farmers hit by tariffs
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) on Tuesday announced it would offer $12 billion in aid to farmers hindered by retaliatory tariffs imposed on U.S. grain, produce and meat exports as the Trump administration digs in for a protracted trade battle.
The department will use the emergency aid to assist and buy crops from farmers who’ve lost billions of dollars in sales from foreign buyers in the European Union, Canada, Mexico and China.
American farmers have been targeted by top U.S. trading partners in response to Trump’s imposition of levies on imported aluminum, steel and Chinese goods. The EU, Canada, Mexico and China have responded with tariffs on key U.S agricultural exports like corn, soybeans, beef, poultry and apples, sinking global demand for American farm goods.
Billions of pounds of American crops and meat have reportedly sat idle in storage facilities while their producers lose money from canceled sales.
“They put in place a policy that requires our farmers to go on welfare and, you know, it’s a ridiculous policy that just needs to be reversed,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who has sought to repeal Trump’s tariffs.
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) argued that direct aide was not sustainable, and only helped a portion of the farmers affected by tariffs.
"There’ll never be enough money to solve the problem,” Moran said. “What happens when other countries gain our markets? Can you do $12 billion regularly? How long does this take?”
Federal Reserve officials have noted a decrease in planned business investment and expansion, and a slew of U.S. manufacturers have warned that their business could soon fail because of rising costs of raw materials and supplies.
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/39863 … by-tariffs
"Billions of pounds of American crops and meat have reportedly sat idle in storage facilities while their producers lose money from canceled sales."
It is not the normal harvest season for most American crops or meat. It has been just a month or two since foreign punitive tariffs were introduced. I'd take that claim of "Billions of pounds of crops and meat" with a grain of salt. Or maybe a billion grains.
We all know , or should , that the US has incredible resources available to supplement these farmers , All we have to do is take it out of foreign aid , internal entitlement programs and support our own growers , Who will starve first ? The one who has the smallest cupboards . Believe me , Trump will make sure our cupboards outweigh the neighbors , America First !
Senator Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican, said in a statement, "This administration’s tariffs and bailouts aren’t going to make America great again, they’re just going to make it 1929 again."
"You have a terrible policy that sends farmers to the poorhouse, and then you put them on welfare, and we borrow the money from other countries," said GOP Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee. "It’s hard to believe there isn’t an outright revolt right now in Congress over what is happening."
Speaking to reporters outside of a GOP lunch on Tuesday, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., compared the trade assistance to something out of the former Soviet Union.
"This is becoming more and more like a Soviet-type of economy here" with "commissars" passing out benefits, Johnson said.
by JAKE Earthshine 3 years ago
Unprecedented instability, we’ve never experienced anything as chaotic and destructive as this: Greatest stock market crash in history, Unilateral trade wars with our allies instigated recklessly by Mr. Trump which is killing jobs for his own voters and everyone else, Americans dropping out of the...
by Scott Belford 4 years ago
President Trump starts a trade war with the rest of the world say such wars are good for America. Everybody of intelligence tells him he is wrong. Now that reality is hitting Americans and American producers with huge loses, as expected and predicted, Trump wants to spend $12 billion to...
by Scott Belford 3 years ago
Trump announced that Canada, Mexico, and America has agreed to a new trade agreement (still needs to be ratified) called United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement that is intended to be a major overhaul of the "worst trade agreement in American history" - NAFTA.Trump's diplomacy to reach this...
by Jack Lee 3 years ago
I came across this story today. It is about a US citizen deciding to immigrate to Mexico permanently...her story is here -
by ga anderson 3 years ago
Pres. Trump tweeted:"For 10 months, China has been paying Tariffs to the USA of 25% on 50 Billion Dollars of High Tech, and 10% on 200 Billion Dollars of other goods. These payments are partially responsible for our great economic results. The 10% will go up to 25% on Friday. 325 Billions...
by Bentley Life 12 years ago
in case of war what side would china take?
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|