US Considering Broad Curbs On Chinese Imports

[Swordsmyth]

First thing this morning, when the market was surging and inexplicably rejoicing in the certainty that Trump would back down on tariffs, a nagging feeling that this was all wrong prompted us to ask "What If Trump Does Not Back Down (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-06/what-if-trump-does-not-back-down-and-why-1-trillion-being-floated-around-washington)", and to follow it up with a troubling rumor from Strategas, namely that this is all about China, and would involve a massive amount of tariffs, to wit:

Trump himself has also said that the trade wars have one major target: Beijing, with the rest of the world negotiable collateral damage. Just yesterday, the US trade rep made it clear that both Mexico and Canada would get an exemption from the tariffs once they agreed to a "fair" renegotiation of Nafta.
And beyond the already announced aluminum and steel tariffs, there is another far more troubling aspect, or rather number, to Trump's protectionist push noted by Strategas. The number is $1 trillion. Here is Strategas:

President Trump is considering imposing tariffs on Chinese goods in response to China stealing US intellectual property. This is often referred to as Section 301 and President Trump specifically mentioned this action in both his Davos and State of the Union speeches. The rumor around DC is that the US will impose $1 trillion of tariffs, which would shock financial markets. We believe the $1 trillion number is too high. Since the US imports $450bn from China, across the board tariffs would need to be 200 percent. Even for Trump that is too much. But given the magnitude of what is being discussed, China would need to respond.
If Strategas is correct, and if Trump's ultimate intention is to hit China with tariffs in the "hundreds of billions" (or more), it's on, and the resulting trade wars will promptly cripple all China-facing US corporations first, followed by the rest of the S&P.
This afternoon, with the unexpected resignation of Gary Cohn, this was partially confirmed, however the full confirmation that it was indeed, all about China, came moments after the Cohn news, when Bloomberg reported that the Trump administration is considering clamping down on Chinese investments in the U.S. by slapping tariffs on a broad range of its imports in response to alleged intellectual-property theft, according to people familiar with the matter.
The U.S. actions would result from the U.S. Trade Representative’s 301 investigation into China IP practices, and will hardly be a surprise now that Trump's chief trade advisor is Peter Navarro, author of such books as "Death by China" and "Crouching Tiger: What China’s Militarism Means for the World"

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-06/trade-wars-set-go-nuclear-us-considering-broad-curbs-chinese-imports

[kahless]

I hope he follows through despite the considerable opposition by politicians that are owned by the globalists. America first!

We should not have policy that advances Communist interests to the detriment of the US manufacturing base. Globalists that do not give a damn about American manufacturing, job losses and have no allegiance to this country will of course oppose it. They will claim it will raise the price of goods but that will be temporary as the US markets eventually fill the void.

[goldenequity]

For me it's a win-win.
If it works... we get jobs, manufacturing and domestic production back, a chicken in every pot. yea.
It it blows up... the empire collapses.
I'm all good. Next.

[AZJoe]

http://michaelpramirez.com/uploads/3/4/9/8/34985326/mrz012918-color-1-9-mb_orig.jpg

[oyarde]

For me it's a win-win.
If it works... we get jobs, manufacturing and domestic production back, a chicken in every pot. yea.
It it blows up... the empire collapses.
I'm all good. Next.
Ya , I am good .

[Swordsmyth]

http://michaelpramirez.com/uploads/3/4/9/8/34985326/mrz012918-color-1-9-mb_orig.jpg

https://static.infowars.com/politicalsidebarimage/trump-trade_large.jpg

[AZJoe]

https://static.infowars.com/politicalsidebarimage/trump-trade_large.jpg

Who's the author of that cartoon. What an Idiot!
It would be more accurate showing the Trump embracing the Democrats firing arrows at the American workers.

If Trump really wants to make US steel more competitive, he wouldn't be burdening America with more debt by requesting budget deficits breaking Obama's records, and imposing more burdens and taxes on American consumers and business in the form of tariffs. Instead, to really make America competitive, he would be calling for end to the income tax immediately, and thus make every US industry more competitive - increase competitiveness, lower prices and increase profits and income simultaneously, increase demand, increase demand for labor, increase take home pay, lower unemployment, improve standard of living, free up capital for development, research, investment.

[AZJoe]

From WSJ via ZeroHedge (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-02/wsj-editors-biggest-policy-blunder-trumps-presidency):

The immediate impact will be to make the U.S. an island of high-priced steel and aluminum. …

Mr. Trump seems not to understand that steel-using industries in the U.S. employ some 6.5 million Americans, while steel makers employ about 140,000. …

Instead of importing steel to make goods in America, many companies will simply import the finished product made from cheaper steel or aluminum abroad.

Mr. Trump fancies himself the savior of the U.S. auto industry, but he might note that Ford Motor (http://quotes.wsj.com/F) shares fell 3% Thursday and GM’s fell 4%. U.S. Steel (http://quotes.wsj.com/X) gained 5.8%. Mr. Trump has handed a giant gift to foreign car makers, which will now have a cost advantage over Detroit. …

The National Retail Federation called the tariffs a “tax on American families,” who will pay higher prices for canned goods and even beer in aluminum cans. Another name for this is the Trump voter tax.

The economic damage will quickly compound because other countries can and will retaliate against U.S. exports. Not steel, but against farm goods, Harley-Davidson (http://quotes.wsj.com/HOG) motorcycles, Cummins engines, John Deere tractors, and much more. Foreign countries are canny enough to know how to impose maximum political pain …

Then there’s the diplomatic damage … Mr. Trump is declaring a unilateral exception to U.S. trade agreements that other countries won’t forget and will surely emulate. The national security threat from foreign steel is preposterous because China supplies only 2.2% of U.S. imports and Russia 8.7%. … Canada … supplies 16%, South Korea 10%, Brazil 13% and Mexico 9%. …

Canada buys more American steel than any other country, accounting for 50% of U.S. steel exports. Mr. Trump is punishing our most important trading partner …

[thoughtomator]

From ZeroHedge (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-02/wsj-editors-biggest-policy-blunder-trumps-presidency)

Not from Zero Hedge.

It's from the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal.

That would be the same Wall Street that accumulated insane wealth through offshoring our industry in the first place.

I guess I shouldn't be so terribly surprised, given how thoroughly this forum has been compromised, to see people shilling for Wall Street here. Even after all we'd been through in the trenches of campaigns fighting Wall Street's predation.

Most folks here have completely lost the plot and are now actively fighting for their own enslavement and subjugation.

[AZJoe]

Not from Zero Hedge.
It's from the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal.
That would be the same Wall Street that accumulated insane wealth through offshoring our industry in the first place.
I guess I shouldn't be so terribly surprised, given how thoroughly this forum has been compromised, to see people shilling for Wall Street here. Even after all we'd been through in the trenches of campaigns fighting Wall Street's predation.
Most folks here have completely lost the plot and are now actively fighting for their own enslavement and subjugation.

Defending socialist government interventions into the marketplace because because you don't like a newspaper? That's brilliant logic there.
And yet, not a single word about thew content or the correctness of the article itself.

The article is correct - free markets, capitalism, freedom, getting government out of the market is the better path to prosperity and competitiveness. Socialistic government interference into the market only artificially enriches a tiny handful of special interest at the expense of and to the detriment of the nation.

So we should inject more government into the marketplace and drive up the cost it takes to manufacture US automobiles and trucks and tractors and ships and planes and and a million other US manufactured products and drive up the cost burdens on millions of products for Americans products because the WSJ actually said something that is 100 completely accurate. That's nuts.

[timosman]

path to prosperity

:rolleyes:

[thoughtomator]

Defending socialist

I stopped reading at the second word, because it contains all that is necessary to demonstrate that the rest of your post is intentionally dishonest.

The dagger in the back of the liberty movement has your fingerprints all over it.

[thoughtomator]

Ah, I see AZJoe took all of five minutes to descend into a neg-rep tantrum.

Sorry, bud, I'm totally fucking immune to it. Not only do I completely not care, but I'd long since accumulated so much rep that you can spend the rest of your life negging me and it still won't matter.

But I am totally happy to expose your infantile nature. Thanks for the opportunity to demonstrate so openly and widely what a scumbag you really are.

[spudea]

WSJ via ZeroHedge

Every single assumption in that article is wrong and devoid of any logic. The USA is the least protectionist country on earth which has lead to $800 billion a year in trade deficits and the decimation of our manufacturing base. They need us more than we need them. China won't do shit, Canada won't due shit. Justin Trudeau is a weak feeble man child.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oedaSfUU0vc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN7KHWdyrbI

[spudea]

Defending socialist government interventions into the marketplace because because you don't like a newspaper?

You've got your terms mixed up, tariffs are part of capitalism. Tariffs funded our government until 1913. Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations" discussed the appropriate use of tariffs.

https://www.newsandtimes.com/politics/2018/03/father-of-capitalism-embraced-the-use-of-tariffs/


Retaliatory tariffs should only be established when there is a chance they will work to have both nations lower their restrictions: “There may be good policy in retaliations of this kind, when there is a probability that they will procure the repeal of the high duties or prohibitions complained of. The recovery of a great foreign market will generally more than compensate the transitory inconveniency of paying dearer during a short time for some sorts of goods.”

[AZJoe]

Every single assumption in that article is wrong and devoid of any logic. The USA is the least protectionist country on earth which has lead to $800 billion a year in trade deficits and the decimation of our manufacturing base. They need us more than we need them. China won't do $#@!, Canada won't due $#@!. Justin Trudeau is a weak feeble man child.

This is level of a six year old. Its like say "Nuh uh". Spudea's response is devoid of any logic.
It does not address anything at all in the article.
Are you trying to argue that increasing the cost of steel and Aluminum will not increase the costs of steel and aluminum? That's nonsensical.

[AZJoe]

You've got your terms mixed up, tariffs are part of capitalism. Tariffs funded our government until 1913. Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations" discussed the appropriate use of tariffs.

https://www.newsandtimes.com/politics/2018/03/father-of-capitalism-embraced-the-use-of-tariffs/

Just because taxes and market distortions have been around for a long time does not mean it is capitalism. It is not.
Sure tariffs, like other taxes, and licensing and government, a protectionism, and distortions, and redistribution of wealth has all been around for a long time. That does not make them capitalist. It is NOT free market. To the contrary it is force and theft.

Taxation is theft!

[timosman]

This is level of a six year old. Its like say "Nuh uh". Spudea's response is devoid of any logic.
It does not address anything at all in the article.
Are you trying to argue that increasing the cost of steel and Aluminum will not increase the costs of steel and aluminum? That's nonsensical.

The price of US steel, I believe, will remain unaffected. What am I missing?

[AZJoe]

The price of US steel, I believe, will remain unaffected. What am I missing?

Logic and history.
Putting tarriffs on the price of steel and aluminum raises the price of steel and aluminum for those industries that were purchasing that that steel and aluminum - like the US auto industry and other manufacturing industries. Forcing them to buy from higher priced domestic special interest raises their costs, making many other industries less competitive. The policy of tariffs as trade protection is pure economic fallacy. A small segment special interests is [propped up at the cost of making other industries less competitive.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjwUUF1_Z9Q

[timosman]

Logic and history.

So the main argument is the US economy hasn't been properly stimulated for a while. :cool:

[nobody's_hero]

I guess we'll just have to see what happens.

My biggest gripe is that a just tariff would be a flat rate on all imports. By singling out specific goods and industries, you're bound to cause problems in other areas of the economy that rely on these things.

Increase tariffs on steel by x % and you just made it harder for American auto manufacturers to compete with foreign auto manufacturers. Unless, you were to charge foreign auto manufacturers an x % tariff as well. Most people don't just buy raw steel to keep around their house. It goes into the production of other things. It really needs to be an everything-or-nothing application or you're going to cause some serious distortions.

[AZJoe]

So the main argument is the US economy hasn't been properly stimulated for a while. :cool:

Nope. Just the opposite. You're still missing the logic and history, and now verbal comprehension.
Stop trying to "stimulate" any sector via government -- Whether its special interest tariffs, or healthcare/insurance regulations, or student loans/tuition, or minimum wage laws, or corn subsidies, or trade wars, or licensing, or taxi quotas, or anti-Uber laws, or anything ...
Reread and rewatch (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?520049-US-Considering-Broad-Curbs-On-Chinese-Imports&p=6598595&viewfull=1#post6598595).

[Ender]

Just because taxes and market distortions have been around for a long time does not mean it is capitalism. It is not.
Sure tariffs, like other taxes, and licensing and government, a protectionism, and distortions, and redistribution of wealth has all been around for a long time. That does not make them capitalist. It is NOT free market. To the contrary it is force and theft.

Taxation is theft!

Yep.

It's called mercantilism & was basically the cause of the Revolution.

[juleswin]

I have to say that this might be just one idea that goes against conventional wisdom and its so crazy that it might just work. For the record, I am against tariffs and taxes. I think the lower the better and if govt needs money, they should charger customers for the services they provide.

But guys, think of tariffs as sanctions against your country, it makes the country difficult to import foreign good and it forces the country to find ways to produces the items which is made difficult to import because of the sanction. Just think how Iranian, Russian and even North Korea to an extent developed home grown industries to survive the sanctioned levied against them.

My main problem with the way Trump enacted the tariffs is that it only applied to raw material and not finished products made with steel and aluminum. Essentially, the consumers will get around it by just buying the finished products from foreign countries.

[TheCount]

The price of US steel, I believe, will remain unaffected. What am I missing?
Econ 101 and basic supply and demand.

[thoughtomator]

Econ 101 and basic supply and demand.

That presumes it's somehow cheaper to make steel halfway across the planet and ship it here, than it is to make it here.

I think it should be self-evident that, if this is the case, it cannot be the outcome of a free market - the cost of shipping alone should make it infeasable.

Playing the free trade absolutist in the context of what is actually the situation in the real world is like betting big money at a poker table where you know for a fact every other player is cheating their asses off.

The way to get back to an honest game is to say that cheaters don't get to play. And that's why the tariffs are a good idea right now, because we will never have genuinely free trade as long as we deliberately provide strong financial incentives to cheat and no penalties for getting caught.

Bottom line: if you value free markets and free trade, and have a time horizon beyond 24 hours from now, then the institution of tariffs to block unfree trade is a major step in the right direction. Now for the first time in 25 years plus we finally have actual leverage in trade negotiations, rather than having every party on the other side of every table know in advance that we were prepared to give away the farm for nothing at all.

[timosman]

Yep.

It's called mercantilism & was basically the cause of the Revolution.

I think it is called dumping - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)

[Zippyjuan]

The price of US steel, I believe, will remain unaffected. What am I missing?

If the price of steel remains unaffected there will be no incentive to move any steel production back to the US. It will not save any jobs.

[timosman]

If the price of steel remains unaffected there will be no incentive to move any steel production back to the US. It will not save any jobs.

Avoiding tariffs would not be enough of an incentive?:confused:

[Zippyjuan]

Avoiding tariffs would not be enough of an incentive?:confused:

If the tariff is not high enough to make steel more expensive, no.

[timosman]

If the tariff is not high enough to make steel more expensive, no.

I am having trouble following your logic. :cool:

[Zippyjuan]

I am having trouble following your logic. :cool:

A business will move when it makes financial sense to do so. If the price of steel does not change, the financial incentive to move production doesn't change because their costs/ benefits are the same. It costs money to make the move so it has to be profitable for them to do so.

[kahless]

Americans last (a contingent of RPF) will have a problem with this.

U.S. Steel to Call Back 500 Employees to Illinois Plant After Trump Announces Tariffs on Foreign Steel
http://www.breitbart.com/economics/2018/03/07/winning-u-s-steel-call-back-500-employees-illinois-plant-trump-announces-tariffs-foreign-steel/

United States Steel announced Wednesday morning that it would call back 500 employees to work at its Granite City, Illinois, plant after President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would impose tariffs on foreign steel.

[kahless]

971349864125788160


From Bush 1 to present, our Country has lost more than 55,000 factories, 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs and accumulated Trade Deficits of more than 12 Trillion Dollars. Last year we had a Trade Deficit of almost 800 Billion Dollars. Bad Policies & Leadership. Must WIN again! #MAGA

[Zippyjuan]

Americans last (a contingent of RPF) will have a problem with this.

U.S. Steel to Call Back 500 Employees to Illinois Plant After Trump Announces Tariffs on Foreign Steel
http://www.breitbart.com/economics/2018/03/07/winning-u-s-steel-call-back-500-employees-illinois-plant-trump-announces-tariffs-foreign-steel/

The tariffs do help a single industry but hurt many others- the ones using steel and aluminum. Bush steel tariffs in 2002 cost an estimated 200,000 jobs.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4063058/bush-steel-tariffs-trump-trade-war/


In 2002, George W. Bush imposed tariffs — which are essentially a tax imposed on imported items — on steel in an attempt to revive the industry in the United States.

“This relief will help steelworkers, communities that depend on steel, and the steel industry adjust without harming our economy,” Bush said in a statement at the time.

The opposite largely occurred as a result: job losses, material shortages, production delays and increased costs.

The tariffs added costs for both businesses and consumers, states a 2003 report from the U.S. International Trade Commission.

According to the report, the tariffs resulted in a host of headaches, including:

49 per cent of steel-consuming firms reported some difficulty obtaining steel,
32 per cent of manufacturers, including automakers and canneries, reported delays in production,
19 per cent of firms passed along price increases to customers,

Overall employment in the sector generally fell or remained flat.

At a hearing, the commission heard that “most steel-consuming firms who testified reported substantial increases in the price of steel after the imposition” of the tariffs.



“They lost 200,000 U.S. jobs, it didn’t serve their purpose, it was ruled illegal by the WTO, and it was just a mess,” said Walid Hejazi, an associate professor of international business at the University of Toronto.

Like Bush, Trump too is trying to claim there will be no cost to the US for the tariffs he wants to impose. There will be.

[TheCount]

That presumes it's somehow cheaper to make steel halfway across the planet and ship it here, than it is to make it here.

If it wasn't, no one would be arguing that we need to impose tariffs on it.




I think it should be self-evident that, if this is the case, it cannot be the outcome of a free market - the cost of shipping alone should make it infeasable.

Circular logic.



Bottom line: if you value free markets and free trade, and have a time horizon beyond 24 hours from now, then the institution of tariffs to block unfree trade is a major step in the right direction.

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Tariffs make free trade

[Krugminator2]

Americans last (a contingent of RPF) will have a problem with this.

U.S. Steel to Call Back 500 Employees to Illinois Plant After Trump Announces Tariffs on Foreign Steel
http://www.breitbart.com/economics/2018/03/07/winning-u-s-steel-call-back-500-employees-illinois-plant-trump-announces-tariffs-foreign-steel/

It would be better to just cut each of those people a check for a million dollars than have tariffs.

Cronyism always has someone who wins. In this case, welfare for steelworkers is coming at the expense of everyone else.

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[timosman]

I think what's been added above is a clause you omitted but rings as true as what you did include

Buy silver!

[kahless]

I think what's been added above is a clause you omitted but rings as true as what you did include

I have not changed my beliefs since I started posting here. I believe we should move to a more Libertarian form of limited government envisioned by the Pauls and Libertarians alike within the borders of the US and to the benefit of the people within those borders. The same as the founding fathers clearly stated, for us and our posterity going forward.

When dealing with those outside of our borders that have opposing philosophy to the benefit of their people at the expensive of ours, trying to do the same is moronic if your intentions are to stay true to the beliefs I stated above.

I therefore disagree completely with the Pauls on this specific issue since their policies clearly benefit the globalist elite and other countries at the expense of our own. It saddens me to see the beating they are taking across the net and on social media, but unfortunately in this case they have it coming. When you are taking the side of Communist Chinese Steel slave labor companies over Americans, they have completely lost the moral high ground.

[Zippyjuan]

Would a steel tariff help the US/ China trade deficit? China accounts for less than $2 billion out of the $30 billion worth of steel the US imports each year (roughly seven percent of all our imports). Our trade deficit with China hit $375 billion a year. $2 billion (assuming we stopped importing any steel from China) would be one half of one percent reduction.

Is the issue National Security? Could a war or global crisis cause importers to cut us off from importing steel? 20% of it comes from Canada. They aren't going to halt exports (unless maybe we invade them). Mexico? Europe? Japan? Russia may end their $1 billion we buy from them.

Another security factor is that defense uses lots of metals to produce equipment and armaments. The tariffs will make them more expensive.

Steel exporters may start exporting more finished steel products to avoid the tariffs- making things double worse for US metal product makers who will be facing higher input costs plus more cheap imports to compete against.

[Krugminator2]

I therefore disagree completely with the Pauls on this specific issue since their policies clearly benefit the globalist elite and other countries at the expense of our own. It saddens me to see the beating they are taking across the net and on social media, but unfortunately in this case they have it coming. When you are taking the side of Communist Chinese Steel slave labor companies over Americans, they have completely lost the moral high ground.

And by globalist elite, you mean every single person in the country who buys a car. I don't understand why you feel steel workers are the chosen people. This benefits them, at the expense of everyone else.

Trade isn't some radically libertarian idea. It is actually the single most agreed on topic among economists, ties with rent control. If Trump doesn't make a dramatic change of course, he deserves to lose in 2020.



Tariffs and import quotas usually reduce general economic welfare. (93%)https://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/02/news-flash-economists-agree.html

[Zippyjuan]

Steel prices rising already. http://www.nwitimes.com/business/lake-newsletter/steel-prices-soaring-in-anticipation-of-tariffs/article_a80d9390-c02c-55c9-acb9-25e857a5fb52.html


Steel prices soaring in anticipation of tariffs


Steel prices are soaring in anticipation of the Section 232 tariffs of 25 percent across the board that the Trump administration said it would impose.

Hot-rolled steel is selling for more than $800 a ton, up from around $650 a ton in December, said Charles Allen Bradford, a steel analyst with Bradford Research, Inc.

Amid of a flood of imports, the steel industry has long suffered from low prices that have crippled profitability, which resulted in widespread layoffs and mill idlings in 2015. Hot-rolled steel prices have dipped to as low as $374 a ton in 2015, according to Steel Benchmarker, a steel industry data site.

Tariffs will raise the price of imports and restrict supply in a boost to domestic steelmakers, Bradford said.


More at link.

[Swordsmyth]

And by globalist elite, you mean every single person in the country who buys a car. I don't understand why you feel steel workers are the chosen people. This benefits them, at the expense of everyone else.

Trade isn't some radically libertarian idea. It is actually the single most agreed on topic among economists, ties with rent control. If Trump doesn't make a dramatic change of course, he deserves to lose in 2020.


https://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/02/news-flash-economists-agree.html

Cheaper prices are chump change compared to the loss of middle class income, the elite and their camp followers are doing quite well under the false "Free Trade" regime they have forced down our throats, so well that their profits skew the economic data while everybody else falls into poverty and debt, and then there is the whole angle of making America dependent on other countries for our needs so we can be subjugated by world government.

[Ender]

And by globalist elite, you mean every single person in the country who buys a car. I don't understand why you feel steel workers are the chosen people. This benefits them, at the expense of everyone else.

Trade isn't some radically libertarian idea. It is actually the single most agreed on topic among economists, ties with rent control. If Trump doesn't make a dramatic change of course, he deserves to lose in 2020.


https://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/02/news-flash-economists-agree.html

Exactly.

REAL freedom is REAL free trade.

[kahless]

Cheaper prices are chump change compared to the loss of middle class income, the elite and their camp followers are doing quite well under the false "Free Trade" regime they have forced down our throats, so well that their profits skew the economic data while everybody else falls into poverty and debt, and then there is the whole angle of making America dependent on other countries for our needs so we can be subjugated by world government.

+1, I would give you rep for that if I could.

[timosman]

The thread title should be - US Considering Broad Curbs On High Quality Chinese Imports - :cool:

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength



The Count is a Supporting Member.

[timosman]

Exactly.

REAL freedom is REAL free trade.

GTFO, Zippy's buddy. :cool:

[phill4paul]

Steel prices rising already. http://www.nwitimes.com/business/lake-newsletter/steel-prices-soaring-in-anticipation-of-tariffs/article_a80d9390-c02c-55c9-acb9-25e857a5fb52.html



More at link.

Awesome. I bet aluminum is too. I have a friend that has a shipping container worth of a decade worth of crushed aluminum beer cans stuffed into contractor trash bags. It's packed full. He asked me today if i would help him take them down for recycling to make room for some mowers, power washer, etc. I told him to hold off for a bit.

[Swordsmyth]

Update: Reutersis reporting that Trump is planning to impose tariffs on $60 billion of Chinese imports. The tariffs will primarily target technology and telecommunications imports - but would not be expressly limited to these sectors, according to one source.
Politico reported earlier that Trump rejected a plan for imposing $30 billion in tariffs on Chinese imports, saying they weren't big enough.
* * *

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-13/trade-war-back-trump-pushing-broad-tariffs-against-chinese-furniture-toys

[enhanced_deficit]

China Gears Up to Retaliate Against US Tariffs
March 09, 2018 10:43 AM


Bill Ide


Saibal Dasgupta






https://gdb.voanews.com/F2E1BE01-1EB2-4F29-8C28-566E60400A62_cx0_cy3_cw0_w1023_r1_s.jpg









BEIJING — China is gearing up to retaliate in response to stiff U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum as Chinese industry associations urge authorities to take "resolute measures." Retaliation from Beijing could contribute to a possible trade war between the world's two biggest economies, analysts said.

https://www.voanews.com/a/china-gears-up-retaliate-us-tariffs/4287712.html