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

[The Northbreather]

//

[The Northbreather]

It is our governments role to ensure other countries do not impoverish us.

Nope that’s your role or the role of your business.

You don’t have a right wealth, you do have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The way to keep they playing field level any open is to keep the government from making your business decisions for you or outright stealing your money from you (taxes).

Although our slogan isn’t “ America, where you have the right to wealth”, I feel like that’s what the masters broadcast so they can keep our cities full of fresh slaves wanting that guaranteed money$$

[kahless]

Americans are getting screwed on trade.

2017 US Trade Deficits in Billions

1 China -375.2
2 Mexico -71.1
3 Japan -68.8
4 Germany -64.3
5 Vietnam-38.3
6 Ireland -38.1
7 Italy -31.6
8 Malaysia -24.6
9 India -22.9
10 Korea, South -22.9
11 Thailand -20.4
12 Canada -17.6
13 Taiwan -16.7
14 France -15.3
15 Switzerland -14.3

Source: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade...tners.html#def

US Trade Deficit at 9 Year High
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...lance-of-trade


A Libertarian system would be ideal within our own borders. Outside of that the free trade ideology is completely retarded unless you are sadist or intent on making the US a $#@! hole country or are one of the global elite that benefits screwing the American people.

[phill4paul]

If you are so economically literate, why do you keep posting factually incorrect statements about our economy? Specifically in regard to our manufacturing and production?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS
http://www.macrotrends.net/2583/indu...storical-chart

United States industrial production, measured in real output, is at (or above) all time highs.

Federal Reserve figures are to be trusted. Everything is fine. Ignore the homeless camps.

[fcreature]

No we can go by the loss of our industries instead of numbers put out by the same people who have been destroying them.

I suppose you will next insist that we accept the government's numbers on inflation and unemployment?

I can quite easily explain to you why government calculations on inflation and unemployment numbers are misleading and back it up with hard numbers and math.

Common sense would lead you to the assumption that production has increased. There is no reason to believe that overall manufacturing output has not been increasing. This lines up with the all the available data I have available. One would assume this due to automation, technical improvements, scientific refinement, etc. Some specific industries may have less production, but there are countless new manufacturing opportunities arising every day. Take energy for example.

Explain to me how the numbers regarding our manufacturing output are incorrect. Back it up with math and some hard data. Your feelings on the subject aren't going to cut it.

[Zippyjuan]

Americans are getting screwed on trade.



US Trade Deficit at 9 Year High
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...lance-of-trade


A Libertarian system would be ideal within our own borders. Outside of that the free trade ideology is completely retarded unless you are sadist or intent on making the US a $#@! hole country or are one of the global elite that benefits screwing the American people.

Why do we have trade deficits with those countries? Are they the same as us economically- same levels of wealth? Are they able to buy as much stuff from us as we buy from them? For the most part, we are wealthier and can afford more things than they can. Does that mean we are worse off because we are better off? (also noting that if we buy stuff from them, they have more money to possibly buy stuff from us)

[fcreature]

Federal Reserve figures are to be trusted. Everything is fine. Ignore the homeless camps.

So because homeless camps exist (as if they haven't in the past...), that means US manufacturing output is decreasing? The homeless camps can't at all be related to huge government growth, high taxes, or massive regulations?

Listen. Disagree with the numbers if you want, but at least tell me why they're wrong and what the real numbers are.

[kahless]

It is our governments role to ensure other countries do not impoverish us.

Nope that’s your role or the role of your business.

You don’t have a right wealth, you do have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The way to keep they playing field level any open is to keep the government from making your business decisions for you or outright stealing your money from you (taxes).

Although our slogan isn’t “ America, where you have the right to wealth”, I feel like that’s what the masters broadcast so they can keep our cities full of fresh slaves wanting that garenteed money$$

I did not say that and I bolded the keyword my quote above. If a governments foreign policy is intent on decimating our means of production through trade policy it is a national security issue.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings...onal-security/
Economic vitality, growth, and prosperity at home is absolutely necessary for American power and influence abroad.

President Donald J. Trump

COUNTERING TRADE PRACTICES THAT UNDERMINE NATIONAL SECURITY: President Donald J. Trump is addressing global overcapacity and unfair trade practices in the steel and aluminum industries by putting in place a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports.

President Trump is taking action to protect America’s critical steel and aluminum industries, which have been harmed by unfair trade practices and global excess capacity.
The President is exercising his authority to impose a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and a 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports in order to protect our national security.
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended, provides the President with authority to adjust imports being brought into the United States in quantities or under circumstances that threaten to impair national security.
The tariffs on steel and aluminum are anticipated to reduce imports to levels needed for these industries to achieve long-term viability.
As a result, these industries will be able to re-open closed mills, sustain a skilled workforce, and maintain or increase production.
The strengthening of our domestic steel and aluminum industries will reduce our reliance on foreign producers.
The President recognizes that Canada and Mexico present a special case, and will continue ongoing discussions with those countries to address our concerns.
The President welcomes any country with which we have a security relationship to discuss alternative ways to address our concerns, including our concerns about global excess capacity. He has left open an avenue for potentially modifying or removing a tariff under certain conditions for individual countries.
Modification or removal of the tariffs would be possible if alternative means are agreed upon to ensure imports from a country no longer threaten to impair our national security.
Under the direction of the President, the United States Trade Representative is responsible for negotiations with countries that seek an alternative means to the steel and aluminum tariffs.
In addition, there will be a mechanism for U.S. parties to apply for exclusion of specific products based on demand that is unmet by domestic production or on specific national security considerations.
This process will be managed by the Department of Commerce in consultation with other Federal agencies.

PROTECTING INDUSTRIES VITAL TO NATIONAL SECURITY: The tariffs imposed by President Trump will address steel and aluminum import quantities and circumstances that threaten to impair our national security.

President Trump’s action will address the conclusions reached in the Commerce Department’s Section 232 reports on the effects of steel and aluminum imports on our national security.
The Department of Commerce concluded that steel import levels and global excess capacity are weakening our internal economy and therefore threaten to impair national security.
The Department of Commerce’s report concluded that levels of foreign steel imports threaten to impair national security by displacing domestic production.
The Department of Commerce concluded that global excess steel capacity will cause U.S. producers to face more and more competition from foreign imports as other countries increase their exports to further their own economic objectives.
The Department of Commerce also concluded that the quantities and circumstances of aluminum imports are weakening our internal economy and threaten to impair national security.
Rising levels of foreign imports put domestic producers at risk of losing the capacity to produce aluminum needed to support critical infrastructure and national defense.
The report found that excess production and capacity, particularly in China, has been a major factor in the decline of domestic aluminum production.
The Department of Commerce concluded that if no action were taken, the U.S. could be in danger of losing the capability to smelt primary aluminum altogether.

CONSISTENT ACTION: President Trump’s action to protect American steel and aluminum industries is consistent with his Administration’s policies and practices.

President Trump’s action is in line with his long-standing commitment to confronting harmful, unfair trade.
On March 31, 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order on Establishing Enhanced Collection and Enforcement of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties and Violations of Trade and Customs Laws.
The Trump Administration has previously affirmed the importance of addressing unfair trade and the threat it poses to our national security.
One of the pillars of the President’s National Security Strategy is to “Promote American Prosperity.
The National Security Strategy stated that the United States will counter all unfair trade practices that distort markets.
A key principle of the President’s 2018 Trade Policy Agenda is to enact trade policy that will support our national security policy.
The 2018 Agenda stated that U.S. trade policy, like our national security policy, will seek to protect U.S. national interests.

[Swordsmyth]

Why do we have trade deficits with those countries? Are they the same as us economically- same levels of wealth? Are they able to buy as much stuff from us as we buy from them? For the most part, we are wealthier and can afford more things than they can. Does that mean we are worse off because we are better off?

It has NOTHING to do with their tariffs, subsidies and other trade barriers.

[Zippyjuan]

I did not say that and I bolded the keyword my quote above. If a governments foreign policy is intent on decimating our means of production through trade policy it is a national security issue.

Is it a national security issue? Are we in danger of losing access to supplies in the event of a war or major international event? Will Canada or Mexico or Brazil cut off our supplies?

Imports account for about 30% of our steel consumption. China accounts for about four percent of those imports or about 1.2% of our total steel needs (less than $2 billion worth)

.

[Swordsmyth]

Is it a national security issue? Are we in danger of losing access to supplies in the event of a war or major international event? Will Canada or Mexico cut off our supplies?

Imports account for about 30% of our steel consumption. China accounts for about four percent of those imports or about 1.2% of our total steel needs (less than $2 billion worth)

.

China continues to try to destroy every other country's steel industry, do you expect us to wait until they succeed?

[kahless]

Another prospective.

There Is No "Free Trade" - There Is Only The 'Darwinian Game Of Trade'
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ian-game-trade

Those bleating about "free trade" are simply pushing a Darwinian strategy that benefits them above everyone else.
...
Then there's currency manipulation, for example, China's peg to the US dollar. What's the "free market" price of Chinese goods in the US? Nobody knows because the peg protects China from its own currency being too strong or too weak to benefit its export-dependent economy.
....
Protecting fragile domestic industries with tariffs has a long history, including in the US, but the real action isn't in tariffs: it's in the bureaucratic tools to limit trade and the soft and hard power plays that secure cheap resources while denying access to those resources to geopolitical rivals.
...
If we ask cui bono, to whose benefit?, we find the consumer has received shoddy goods and paltry discounts from "free trade," while corporations, banks and financiers have benefited enormously.

Rising income and wealth inequality is causally linked to globalization and the expansion of Darwinian trade and capital flows: the winners are few and the losers are many. Tariffs will not solve the larger problems of reduced employment, stagnant wages and rising income inequality. To make a dent in those issues, we'll need to tackle central bank and central-state policies that have pushed financial speculation to supremacy over the productive economy.

[Zippyjuan]

Another prospective.

There Is No "Free Trade" - There Is Only The 'Darwinian Game Of Trade'
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ian-game-trade

Rising income and wealth inequality is causally linked to globalization and the expansion of Darwinian trade and capital flows:

Perhaps government should manage trade and prices so that things will be distributed more fairly. Instead of "survival of the fittest" where the inefficient are allowed to fail. Maybe they can force the wealthy to give money to the poor so that the "wealth gap" isn't quite so bad.

[kahless]

Perhaps government should manage trade and prices so that things will be distributed more fairly. Instead of "survival of the fittest" where the inefficient are allowed to fail. Maybe they can force the wealthy to give money to the poor so that the "wealth gap" isn't quite so bad.

If it was not for your red bar I would LOL thinking that was sarcasm. I and most here would disagree with you on that.

However I have no problem with anyone pointing out wealth inequality. It is the solutions that I worry about. I think it is worth noting since the risk is revolution for a system that is far worse than we have now.

My concern is losing the free market system due to massively growing monopolies and globalism.

[Swordsmyth]

Perhaps government should manage trade and prices so that things will be distributed more [un]fairly. Instead of "survival of the fittest" where the inefficient are allowed to fail.

^^^That^^^ (with a small edit) is what other governments are doing, we must do our best to defend against it.

[Zippyjuan]

If it was not for your red bar I would LOL thinking that was sarcasm. I and most here would disagree with you on that.

However I have no problem with anyone pointing out wealth inequality. It is the solutions that I worry about. I think it is worth noting since the risk is revolution for a system that is far worse than we have now.

My concern is losing the free market system due to massively growing monopolies and globalism.

Tariffs are good for monopolies. Protects them from competition.

[Anti Federalist]

Is it a national security issue?

If the US had to fight a major two front war against real adversaries, you might as well surrender now.

We no longer have the means to produce the tanks, and ships, and planes, and guns, and trucks, and munitions that we did during WWII for instance.

[Anti Federalist]

Tariffs are good for monopolies. Protects them from competition.

Then why are there a multitude of automobiles that you can choose from?

The only monopolies I see are globalist and borderless...Google and Fedbook and MicroSquash come to mind.

[Swordsmyth]

Tariffs are good for monopolies. Protects them from competition.

Which is exactly how other governments are using them.

[Zippyjuan]

If the US had to fight a major two front war against real adversaries, you might as well surrender now.

We no longer have the means to produce the tanks, and ships, and planes, and guns, and trucks, and munitions that we did during WWII for instance.

We didn't then either. We were still trying to dig out of the Great Depression and demand (and thus production) of goods was still low. They converted making consumer goods into using the same resources to make war goods. (we also have larger stockpiles of weapons already on hand today).

http://www.pbs.org/thewar/at_home_war_production.htm

War production profoundly changed American industry. Companies already engaged in defense work expanded. Others, like the automobile industry, were transformed completely. In 1941, more than three million cars were manufactured in the United States. Only 139 more were made during the entire war. Instead, Chrysler made fuselages. General Motors made airplane engines, guns, trucks and tanks. Packard made Rolls-Royce engines for the British air force. And at its vast Willow Run plant in Ypsilanti, Michigan, the Ford Motor Company performed something like a miracle 24-hours a day. The average Ford car had some 15,000 parts. The B-24 Liberator long-range bomber had 1,550,000. One came off the line every 63 minutes.

http://ww2awartobewon.com/wwii-archi...ge-lend-lease/

BRITIAN COMES TO U.S. AID IN STEEL SHORTAGE

10,000 Tons Monthly to Be Shipped to States as Output There Lags

From the July 11, 1944 Edition of Stars and Stripes

WASHINGTON, July 10–England has agreed to ship 10,000 tons of steel a month to the U.S. to head off an impending critical shortage, William L. Batt, chairman of the Combined Production and resources Board, announced.

The transaction was arranged at the request of military and war-production officials faced with the threatened curtailment of tank, sip, heavy-truck and artillery manufacturing this fall because of insufficient U.S. steel output, Batt said.

[Swordsmyth]

We didn't then either. We were still trying to dig out of the Great Depression and demand (and thus production) of goods was still low. They converted making consumer goods into using the same resources to make war goods. (we also have larger stockpiles of weapons already on hand today).

http://www.pbs.org/thewar/at_home_war_production.htm

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?

[r3volution 3.0]

Production is a means to an end; the purpose of all economic activity is consumption.

...something to keep in mind.

RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

So sad.

I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.

Tragic indeed

I think the culture war has affected people across the spectrum

...and the source of the tragedy.

[phill4paul]

So because homeless camps exist (as if they haven't in the past...), that means US manufacturing output is decreasing? The homeless camps can't at all be related to huge government growth, high taxes, or massive regulations?

Listen. Disagree with the numbers if you want, but at least tell me why they're wrong and what the real numbers are.

The homeless camps in my area behind the Wal-Mart didn't in the past. U.S. manufacturing of furniture, textiles and apparel employed most everyone at middle-class wages. Now it doesn't. I blame NAFTA and GATT for that. And a trade imbalance that wiped them out. But, hey, I'm glad you can by your cheap assed pressed wood desks and Chinese and Taiwanese jeans at that Wal-Mart that at leasts masks the blighted conditions they live in.

[timosman]

Federal Reserve figures are to be trusted. Everything is fine. Ignore the homeless camps.

The homeless are there to remind you to keep working so you don't become one.

[fcreature]

The homeless camps in my area behind the Wal-Mart didn't in the past. U.S. manufacturing of furniture, textiles and apparel employed most everyone at middle-class wages. Now it doesn't. I blame NAFTA and GATT for that. And a trade imbalance that wiped them out. But, hey, I'm glad you can by your cheap assed pressed wood desks and Chinese and Taiwanese jeans at that Wal-Mart that at leasts masks the blighted conditions they live in.

So in other words, you've got nothing but conjecture.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the real manufacturing output is in our economy.

I know this if a really hard concept to grasp for a lot of people but manufacturing output / production can increase while employment numbers within that same industry decrease.

Maybe we should just go back to the good old days when all we had were sticks and rocks.

[Zippyjuan]

The homeless camps in my area behind the Wal-Mart didn't in the past. U.S. manufacturing of furniture, textiles and apparel employed most everyone at middle-class wages. Now it doesn't. I blame NAFTA and GATT for that. And a trade imbalance that wiped them out. But, hey, I'm glad you can by your cheap assed pressed wood desks and Chinese and Taiwanese jeans at that Wal-Mart that at leasts masks the blighted conditions they live in.

There has always been homelessness in this country.

[phill4paul]

So in other words, you've got nothing but conjecture.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the real manufacturing output is in our economy.

I know this if a really hard concept to grasp for a lot of people but manufacturing output / production can increase while employment numbers within that same industry decrease.

Maybe we should just go back to the good old days when all we had were sticks and rocks.

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 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?

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.

[fcreature]

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.

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.

[r3volution 3.0]

So in other words, you've got nothing but conjecture.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the real manufacturing output is in our economy.

I know this if a really hard concept to grasp for a lot of people but manufacturing output / production can increase while employment numbers within that same industry decrease.

Maybe we should just go back to the good old days when all we had were sticks and rocks.

Production has been more or less flat for decades.

As you imply, the main loss of jerbs in that particular industry was a function of increasing productivity.

The overwhelming problem for US industry in general, however, is regulation (and, to a lesser extent [yes, lesser] taxes).

Protective tariffs do nothing whatsoever to address either of these problems, of course; in fact, they make them worse, by stifling innovation.

When it comes to stagnant, socialistic economies and their reformation, one might do well to listen to this fellow:



Not this one