Trump Steel Tariffs Could Kill Up to 40,000 Auto Jobs, Nearly One-Third of Steel Workforce

[Swordsmyth]

Yeah the empire has gear and personnel spread all over the damn globe.

Bad move. Creates enemies and costs a $#@!load. The toilet paper bill for one day would prolly set you up for the rest of your days. God knows how much it costs to move all that iron and steel around.

I wonder if there would be a surplus if all that sh!t was here like it should be.

We need to bring the troops and the equipment home but we also need the industries to provide a continuous supply in case of war, lacking what we need to defend ourselves will guarantee that we will be attacked sooner or later.

[kahless]

It's not $#@!ing conjecture. I witnessed it with my own $#@!ing eyes, in my own $#@!ing lifetime. Jesus $#@!ing Christ. Those industries were DESTROYED. The local Technical Institute that used to teach these trades completely shut it down and turned to teaching people how to wipe other peoples asses in assisted living homes. Read the lies, damned lies and statistics all you care to. Until, you've lived and witnessed it just shut the $#@! up.

Exactly. Which is why I asked him where he has been living for the last 40 years not to have noticed it.

[The Northbreather]

Stockpiles are never enough, do we have the capacity required even if we do convert civilian production to military? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?
Weapons are higher tech now than they used to be, do we have the required industries? Will we if we continue to allow our industries to be destroyed?

What world are you living in?

I’m pretty sure the weapons industry is number one in exports, right next to printed money

[Zippyjuan]

We need to bring the troops and the equipment home but we also need the industries to provide a continuous supply in case of war, lacking what we need to defend ourselves will guarantee that we will be attacked sooner or later.

Yeah- the US doesn't have enough military hardware.

[r3volution 3.0]

The Dangers of Free Trade!

[Swordsmyth]

What world are you living in?

I’m pretty sure the weapons industry is number one in exports, right next to printed money

It is the feeder industries that are most important, also no full fledged major wars are going on that we are supplying.

[Swordsmyth]

The Dangers of Free Trade!

New York City is doing great too, it's the rest of us who aren't in the international trade industry that are being destroyed.

[fcreature]

Exactly. Which is why I asked him where he has been living for the last 40 years not to have noticed it.

Answer these questions.

1) If all academic / government manufacturing output numbers are false, what are the true numbers?
2) What is the flaw in the manner in which the production numbers are calculated?
3) Is it possible for manufacturing output to increase while simultaneously decreasing the amount of labor needed?
4) What is more important? Manufacturing employment or manufacturing output?

[r3volution 3.0]

New York City is doing great too, it's the rest of us who aren't in the international trade industry that are being destroyed.

You think NYC is a free trade paragon like Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore?

No, NYC relies on high finance, largely thanks to certain geopolitical considerations, and is otherwise extremely anti-business.

It will be Detroit in 30 years if you people have your way.

[The Northbreather]

It is the feeder industries that are most important, also no full fledged major wars are going on that we are supplying.

Yeah the neo-conservatives are always ichin for another war as well. Good for industry, the military-industrial type.

[Ender]

It is the feeder industries that are most important, also no full fledged major wars are going on that we are supplying.

You're joking, right?

[Swordsmyth]

You think NYC is a free trade paragon like Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore?

No, NYC relies on high finance, largely thanks to certain geopolitical considerations, and is otherwise extremely anti-business.

It will be Detroit in 30 years if you people have your way.

The point is that the rest of the US is not a trade hub, Singapore is a single city that can support itself as a trade hub, the whole world can't be composed of trade hubs.
People have to do something to earn their keep and pursue happiness, free trade is a nice concept but when other countries engage in trade war and destroy your industries and impoverish your people that isn't free trade.
America is well on it's way to becoming a communist welfare state if we continue to let the rest of the world abuse us, it's almost too late now.

[Swordsmyth]

You're joking, right?

Everything going on right now rolled into one war is nothing compared to a great power war.

[r3volution 3.0]

The point is that the rest of the US is not a trade hub, Singapore is a single city that can support itself as a trade hub, the whole world can't be composed of trade hubs.
People have to do something to earn their keep and pursue happiness, free trade is a nice concept but when other countries engage in trade war and destroy your industries and impoverish your people that isn't free trade.
America is well on it's way to becoming a communist welfare state if we continue to let the rest of the world abuse us, it's almost too late now.

No, the point is that free trade encourages economic development, while protectionism leads to the opposite.

How is it that the very punishment we impose on Iran...as a punishment, mind you...we think helps us when we impose it on ourselves?

Rather dumb, rather dumb...

Anyway, as for America's descent in socialism, protectionism is a critical part of that; being itself socialism and also encouraging more of the same.

I have an alternative suggestion, a truly crazy idea; let's try free markets.

[kahless]

It is conjecture. You are drawing conclusions based on incomplete information.

What you witnessed with your own eyes were specific companies going out of business in specific places. You did not witness the entire US manufacturing sector get wiped out. You personally witnessed a very small, minute piece of the puzzle. And for some reason you are assuming "unfair" trade policies are the causation of what you have witnessed when in reality there are a million different factors in play here. Forgive me if I expect a little effort put into an analysis of a causation relationship before you decide to tax me on the basis of it. Maybe something aside from your obvious sour grapes.

There have always been homeless people. The fact that there is homeless people does not mean they're there because of a lack of tariffs.

He said "those industries" so it does not sound like he is just speaking of one company. Curious, do you live outside the US or maybe just live in a major US city away from any form of manufacturing? Maybe you are allot younger than Phil who I gather reading from another thread has been around awhile like I have to notice these things.

Go back 30 years ago I sat in meeting rooms more than once as a new comer being let go with people that had been with the companies 10-40 years since production was being moved offshore. Many cities in my state look like burned out shell of remnants of US manufacturing of companies I was once familiar with that I know for a fact moved offshore.

To this day though I still have family and friends losing their careers having worked in firms 10-20, 30 years losing jobs specifically due to manufacturing moving to India or China.

[Swordsmyth]

No, the point is that free trade encourages economic development, while protectionism leads to the opposite.

How is it that the very punishment we impose on Iran...as a punishment, mind you...we think helps us when we impose it on ourselves?

Rather dumb, rather dumb...

Anyway, as for America's descent in socialism, protectionism is a critical part of that; being itself socialism and also encouraging more of the same.

I have an alternative suggestion, a truly crazy idea; let's try free markets.

There is a difference between sanctions and defensive tariffs, the ideal is low tariffs but there is a reason other countries tariff us and subsidize their industries, it may cost them in the long run but it will destroy us first if we don't respond.

[Ender]

Everything going on right now rolled into one war is nothing compared to a great power war.

Well the US spent the equivalent of 4 Trillion on WWII and about 5.6 Tr in the ME.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/study-...ddle-east-asia

[r3volution 3.0]

There is a difference between sanctions and defensive tariffs, the ideal is low tariffs but there is a reason other countries tariff us and subsidize their industries, it may cost them in the long run but it will destroy us first if we don't respond.

How so?

Maybe our sanctions will encourage their domestic whatever production.

MIGA?

...and, if this brilliant economic theory is correct, perhaps we ought to ask the rest of the world to sanction us.

Then we could really "create jobs."

Why, stuff that we once imported at very low cost we could produce at higher cost ourselves.

That would be a big win, because the progress of civilization consists of having to spend more labor to produce the same widget, right?

[phill4paul]

It is conjecture. You are drawing conclusions based on incomplete information.

What you witnessed with your own eyes were specific companies going out of business in specific places. You did not witness the entire US manufacturing sector get wiped out. You personally witnessed a very small, minute piece of the puzzle. And for some reason you are assuming "unfair" trade policies are the causation of what you have witnessed when in reality there are a million different factors in play here. Forgive me if I expect a little effort put into an analysis of a causation relationship before you decide to tax me on the basis of it. Maybe something aside from your obvious sour grapes.

There have always been homeless people. The fact that there is homeless people does not mean they're there because of a lack of tariffs.

Not specific companies...whole INDUSTRIES. Furniture making, apparel, textiles. And yes, what I witnessed was a specific result, a causation, of imbalanced trade practices. Period. Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. I've lived and witnessed it. And, yes, there has always been homelessness. But, there has never been homeless camps in this area. I'm talking upwards of 100 people living in a tent enclaves and many more scattered about. The area went from below 2% unemployment in the late 90's to over 15% in 2010. And that was even after a huge exodus which fudges the unemployment numbers. At one time the areas furniture industry supplied 70% of the nations furniture needs. Now foreign imports provide 75% of the nations needs. The apparel industry tanked after NAFTA and GATT because the apparel business moved to Mexico where it was cheaper to make so that they could compete with China. The textile industry did the same. So don't tell me I don't know what the $#@! I'm talking about. I do. But, ya know, globalism is the way to go. Cheap $#@! for everyone. Yay!

[Swordsmyth]

Well the US spent the equivalent of 4 Trillion on WWII and about 5.6 Tr in the ME.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/study-...ddle-east-asia

And how may years were we at war in each case?

[Pauls' Revere]

LOL, more than likely, that Japanese or German vehicle is made right here.

Sure, but its made by Toyota or Honda. Not GM, Chrysler, or Ford.

[Ender]

And how may years were we at war in each case?

Well, officially we're not at war in the ME, as there has never been a constitutional declaration.

[Swordsmyth]

How so?

Maybe our sanctions will encourage their domestic whatever production.

MIGA?

The sanctions do tend to backfire, low tariffs are the ideal but it is safer to err on the side of self sufficiency and production than on the side of dependency and consumption.

...and, if this brilliant economic theory is correct, perhaps we ought to ask the rest of the world to sanction us.

The we could really "create jobs."

While not ideal we would be better off that way, there is a reason our enemies attack us with tariffs and subsidies rather than sanctions, we are capable of supplying our own needs and building wealth on our own unlike some nations with insufficient resources.

[Swordsmyth]

Well, officially we're not at war in the ME, as there has never been a constitutional declaration.

Fine, over how many years did those military expenditures take place?

Everything going on right now rolled into one would just be a sideshow in a great power war.

[Zippyjuan]

Automation has replaced a lot of workers. Output up- jobs down. Competition encouraged businesses to get more efficient.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...put-has-grown/

Most Americans unaware that as U.S. manufacturing jobs have disappeared, output has grown




Manufacturing jobs in the United States have declined considerably over the past several decades, even as manufacturing output – the value of goods and products manufactured in the U.S. – has grown strongly. But while most Americans are aware of the decline in employment, relatively few know about the increase in output, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

Four of every five Americans (81%) know that the total number of manufacturing jobs in the U.S. has decreased over the past three decades, according to the survey of 4,135 adults from Pew Research Center’s nationally representative American Trends Panel. But just 35% know that the nation’s manufacturing output has risen over the same time span, versus 47% who say output has decreased and 17% who say it’s stayed about the same. Only 26% of those surveyed got both questions right.

One reason Americans may be more familiar with the long-term decline in manufacturing employment than the increase in output is that the job losses have been highly visible, especially in traditionally manufacturing-intensive areas of the Midwest and South.

Manufacturing jobs peaked in 1979 at 19.4 million, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and by 1987 had fallen to 17.6 million. What had been a slow decline in employment accelerated after the turn of the century, and especially during the Great Recession. Manufacturing payrolls bottomed out at fewer than 11.5 million in early 2010, and even though more than 900,000 manufacturing jobs have been added since, overall employment in manufacturing is still at its lowest level since before the U.S. entered World War II.

As a share of the overall workforce, manufacturing has been dropping steadily ever since the Korean War ended, as other sectors of the U.S. economy have expanded much faster. From nearly a third (32.1%) of the country’s total employment in 1953, manufacturing has fallen to 8.5% today.

But that doesn’t mean Americans don’t make things anymore. Last year, U.S. manufacturers made about $5.4 trillion worth of goods and products (in constant 2009 dollars), according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The biggest categories were food, beverages and tobacco products ($817 billion), chemical products ($752 billion) and motor vehicles and parts ($670 billion).

After adjusting for inflation, manufacturing output in the first quarter of this year was more than 80% above its level 30 years ago, according to BLS data. But while U.S. manufacturing output has increased in absolute terms, it still represents a smaller share of the economy than it used to: Manufacturing accounted for about 23% of gross output in 1997 (the first year for which such data are available) but just 18.5% last year.

More at link.

[kahless]

No, the point is that free trade encourages economic development, while protectionism leads to the opposite.

We lost 95% of manufacturing in the region I live in the last 50 years. There used to be a time where a person could start a family and own a home here at an early age by working in one of these factories. Not any more. The end result of your trade policies has been a high taxes as a result of having to pay for the welfare state since people cannot make a living on service jobs. (not all this is due to offshoring but I would give it a good 80%)

Government is only going to grow larger and taxers higher with your globalism as we lose volunteer services. Since your globalism left us with low paying service industry jobs the young people are working multiple jobs and we lose them for volunteer fire and ambulance. So taxpayers will be footing the bill for that to.

The only people winning at this are the globalists while the rest of us get screwed.

[Superfluous Man]

It's not $#@!ing conjecture. I witnessed it with my own $#@!ing eyes, in my own $#@!ing lifetime. Jesus $#@!ing Christ. Those industries were DESTROYED. The local Technical Institute that used to teach these trades completely shut it down and turned to teaching people how to wipe other peoples asses in assisted living homes. Read the lies, damned lies and statistics all you care to. Until, you've lived and witnessed it just shut the $#@! up.

The comment you're replying to didn't ask about manufacturing jobs. It asked about manufacturing output.

What's happening is that the US is now manufacturing more measured in inflation-adjusted dollars than it ever has before, and it's using less labor to do it.

Both parts of that are good things.

As you point out, now we're so rich that we can reallocate some of that labor that we used to have to spend on manufacturing on people serving us in ways when we get old and can't take care of ourselves that we would otherwise not be able to hire people to do.

I fail to see the downside.

[Swordsmyth]

Automation has replaced a lot of workers. Output up- jobs down. Competition encouraged businesses to get more efficient.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...put-has-grown/



More at link.

The comment you're replying to didn't ask about manufacturing jobs. It asked about manufacturing output.

What's happening is that the US is now measuring in inflation-adjusted dollars than it ever had before, and it's using less labor to do it.

Both parts of that are good things.

Because you think they tell the truth about the inflation numbers?

[r3volution 3.0]

The sanctions do tend to backfire, low tariffs are the ideal but it is safer to err on the side of self sufficiency and production than on the side of dependency and consumption.

D.C.'s sanctions against Iran are most certainly forcing the Iranians to be more self-sufficient.

Of course, this means that they're massively poorer than they otherwise would be, because the division of labor makes for greater productivity.

But, we're doing them a favor, evidently...

While not ideal we would be better off that way, there is a reason our enemies attack us with tariffs and subsidies rather than sanctions, we are capable of supplying our own needs and building wealth on our own unlike some nations with insufficient resources.

We'd be better off if the world sanctioned us like we're sanctioning Iran...



Incidentally, here's what people living wholey without the horror of the division of labor and trade look like:



I'll bet he's glad foreigners aren't taking his jerbs.

He's got all kinds of jerbs: primarily relating to trying to not starve or be eaten by bears.

But he's self-sufficient, yes sir...

[Zippyjuan]

Because you think they tell the truth about the inflation numbers?

Not adjusting for inflation the increase in output is even higher.