I'd also point out that the tariff on milk is 7.5% until volume goes over quota. The problem they face is that we can essentially eliminate their dairy.
Also, we export TWICE as much milk to Canada as they export to us. And, our milk is protected, too. This whole thing is more butt hurt Trump. The idea of jeopardizing US/Canada trade relations over this milk thing is just plain IGNORANT.
Their system works great for them and you don't describe it as a "Canadian Launch of Economic War" on us, but when we move to protect an industry of ours, you promptly crap yourself. Our farm supports have American Dairy Farmers producing milk and pouring it out in the fields, you think Canadian farmers are doing that? You claim to be a big environmental weenie, do you have any idea how much power it takes for US farmers to produce milk only to then pour it out into the fields? Just in 2016, American farmers have purposefully poured out more than 43 million gallons’ worth of milk due to an excessively abundant supply of the dairy product in the county. Enough to fill 651 Olympic sized swimming pools.
They limit how much milk we can sell to them, now we are going to return the favor and put some limits on some things they sell to us. Their trade barrier system with Dairy, frankly looks a lot smarter and less wasteful than our Dairy supports. So when we imitate them are we "launching a trade war" to use your hysterical hyperbole or are we engaging in the sincerest from of flattery, imitation?
You are trying to make it way to simple. In most cases the stuff we get from China is really US stuff with China labor added. So while you are correct it will hurt them it will also hurt us. You can use ZTE as an example. They buy US chips from Qualcomm add some labor and software and sell the phone back to us. So every phone we don't buy from them probably costs us more than them. But hey. If it makes you feel better. China was already cutting back on steel production. Our steel companies are going to be forever in trouble trying to compete using 100 year old plants. Why do you think they were in trouble to start with. Better spend your tax cut quick, because the tariffs are going to take them away from you.
Switching to aluminum: "The Aluminum Association, which represents the bulk of the American industry, says that 97 percent of American jobs in aluminum are at what are called “downstream” businesses that shape the metal into things like auto parts or other goods. Those companies are hurt by Mr. Trump’s tariffs, because they must now pay higher prices for their raw materials." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/04/climate/trump-industry-policy-consequences.html
Let's think about that: Company A can either B) Buy parts here C) Buy parts from China. They find that parts, including shipping costs from China are cheaper than purchasing locally and meet their quality standards. Now Trump adds a protective tariff on these goods to tip this calculation from C) B). Nations do this constantly and extensively, us less than others, which is why we are running the world's largest trade deficit, a deduction on our GDP. So, we are going to do a bit more to bring our practices more in line with the world's and suddenly there is a vocal minority in our nation that craps themselves. But, then they crap themselves every time Trump exercises Presidential Authority, so, it's mainly fun to watch them relive 9pm on election night. I wasn't the one whining about the Steel Tariffs. I never whined about Obama's tire tariffs, and I don't recall you guys saying squat. In fact, Bush's steel tariffs were larger than Trump's and none of these were even a fraction of the size of Reagan's Heavy Motorcycle Tariffs that saved Harley Davidson. So, it's anti-Trumpers shrieking: "Trump's Doing Something! I don't like anything Trump does!" But, the American People are, in fact, they like his policies quite a bit more than they like him. U.S. Steel to reopen dormant Illinois plant, credits proposed Trump tariffs https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...illinois-steel-plant-trump-tariffs/403064002/ That's to be expected when Chinese dumping is killing the industry and the folks that have the power to protect it wanted steel and coal workers to lose their jobs and pursue tech and green energy careers. The Left doesn't like these folks and until Trump became President, they got some lip service at election time, John Kerry would get a photo op of him hunting ducks which was supposed to convey "I'm really just a good old boy!" And that's about it, these areas were dying. Trump really means it, and when it works you folks will be proven wrong, so you are against the efforts, but, you can't do a damn thing about it, so wth? You guys all swear that you are willing to pay more for goods and services in order to raise the minimum wage to $15/hr, but when you find out your chinese goods might cost a little more, you soil your shorts? Does that make any sense, even to you?
Weird how the folks who swore they were willing to pay more for goods and services in order to ensure a $15/hr minimum wage, aren't willing to pay a little more for a car in exchange for more of it being made by American workers. You should figure out which countries workers you like the best and move there. Because, more of the stuff available here is going to be made by American workers.
Your thinking small again. When was the last time the US built a phone in the US. Why do you think that is? Really? Unlike Trumps tariffs the tire tariffs hit the correct target. But having said that; they didn't really work either. Bush's steel tariffs were pretty well thought out compared to Trumps. I think the requests for exemptions now number in the tens of thousands. Oh, and Bush's didn't work either. We love Spanky. He supplies hours of entertainment. Unfortunately they are either comedies or horror stories. How much do you want to pay for those 500 jobs? Five billion? More? I'm not an advocate of $15, but at least it circulates in the economy while tariffs are just a tax.
Not just Harley's, but how about any vehicle that uses steel and aluminum? Like the aluminum-made bodies the F150's are made out of nowadays? That cost is going to hit more than motorbikes.
You do understand that BMW's, Volvo's, Toyota's, Nissan's, Kia's and Volkswagen's are built in America, right?
Why would folks pay the tariff if the American product is competitively priced? Most folks will buy the American product and the money will circulate in the economy. If they insist on buying the Chinese goods with the Tariff, then they pay the Tariff, and Dems have been bitching about the tax cut, so, you're welcome!
I don't think the car companies will take it in the shorts for the steel mills. My guess is they will move the stamping process from the US to Canada since finished parts face no tariffs. Unfortunately it's a double whammy for the US. they won't use US steel and the stamping jobs will leave the country.
This is a totally childish analysis of the effects of having a trade war with allies. And, your proposal concerning what it means for trade with China is equally ridiculous.
Those two issues simply aren't. Raising income for those who spend all their income is an economic stimulus. Having a trade war is NOT an economic stimulus.
If our "allies" running a trade surplus isn't a trade war, Why is our working for trade balance, a trade war?
Aside from the economic implications of an adversarial trade war, there are a host of complex factors to consider: long-range strategic military agreements, historical relationships, and other non financial factors. There are no winners in a trade war.
That should be obvious. Trump SAYS he's running a trade war. He states that he is enacting tariffs to force general change. Other countries have certainly worked to protect certain industries, but calling that a trade war doesn't make sense.
That's ridiculous, if he called it "trade peace" you would be happy? That's a pile of crap. Exactly. They have a tariff system that maintains a trading advantage, Trump is making adjustments to achieve parity. You are claiming that parity is a hostile act but maintaining an advantage isn't? Your position is self-refuting, that is why it isn't doing well. Exactly, and they have done a better job at this than we have, to the tune of $568.4B last year. Every dime of which is a deduction from our GDP. In 2017, Real GDP grew $435.1B, that's 2.6% growth, despite the subtraction of our trade deficit of $568.4B Without that trade deficit, we would have had 6% GDP growth. That's a hell of a difference. Just because you don't give a damn about it doesn't mean the US electorate doesn't.
False. He says he's raising tariffs designed not to protect some particular industry but to force general changes that don't even have to do with tariffs. He says it's going to be used to cause changes in unrelated parts of trade (such as intellectual property rights). He says it will drive a better NAFTA deal. That IS a trade war - it doesn't matter what term he uses. Also, your ideas on growth are nonsense. The world economy does not make dollar for dollar changes like that.
GDP = C + I + G + NX C = Consumer Spending I = Investment G = Government Spending NX = Net Exports When Net Exports is a negative number, its a subtraction from GDP, that's why our trading partners want to keep their number positive, Silly! Your claims: i) Our partners running a trade surplus = not a trade war ii) The US trying to just achieve trade balance, not even a surplus = Trade War. Here's a question for you. If we insisted on a surplus like our partners have, would we being launching a trade war?
Our partners can run a surplus simply by providing stuff that we want to buy. That has nothing to do with trade war or "insisting on a surplus" or any other such nonsense. It has to do with them providing something lots of Americans are willing to buy. We can create a trade surplus for ourselves by producing stuff others want to buy. We lost that edge in steel, because we stuck with outdated methods and equipment while enterprising corporations in other countries moved to new and more automated technology. So, Pittsburgh crashed. That wasn't the fault of some other country. That was the short sighted decision making of American steel. The same thing happened with cars. As the Detroit executive testified before congress, Detroit simply didn't build the cars that Americans wanted. So, their dominance in world wide auto manufacturing went down the toilet. Again, that was not something some foreign country "did to us" in some "trade war". Our manufacturing simply didn't keep up. Other countries are investing in high tech, in information management, in clean energy, in automation, etc., etc. They are developing well educated work forces in order to CLEAN OUR CLOCKS in what are the economic sectors of the future. We're not going to succeed by trade wars. We have to succeed by being competitive, just like everyone else. Yes, there will be tariff negotiations. Yes, we need to form alliances to push for fairness. But, our trade deficit is not going to be fixed without the USA moving into new markets successfully. BUT, all Trump has is cuts for education, promotion of dead coal, and trade wars against allies. Suicide!
Well, let's see what they want to do after we put some balancing tariffs into place. You are already on record stating that protective measures to obtain a surplus isn't trade war at all. Trump confused you by opening the bidding too low. Since you insist that we must insist on a surplus rather than only balance, you win! We want a trade surplus just like our trade "allies" have. Canada maintains a trade surplus with their dairy products via a steep wall of tariffs, which you are fine with, so, we will do the same for the industries we wish to protect from foreign competition. Tariffs and barriers imposed by other countries against us to achieve trade surpluses are not "trade warcraft" you have already assured us, so obviously when we do the same, its not really trade warcraft either, Trump's just pulling your leg. We are going to succeed by using trade policy to maintain a surplus, just like everyone else. Negotiations are nice. So are surpluses.