Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mugtang

Trump proposed real free trade at the G7 summit

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, CPslograd said:

And price controls.  You keep leaving that part out.

You need to understand that dairy and some row crops aren't only subsidized and price supported, they are price controlled.  

BTW, there is almost no subsidies for citrus and nuts.  And you do see more price fluctuation from freezes and things like that than you see in staples like milk and corn that are price controlled.  We all know that corn (largely because of the Iowa caucus) and dairy has huge political clout, and I agree with you to a point.  But you are doing the same thing in oversimplifying the matter that Trump is.

And FFS, the Euros and Japan subsidize the living hell out of dairy, cattle, and staples themselves.  Look up Canada and Brazil trade disputes.  Trump isn't the only one that has taken issue with Canadian trade policy, which I think they call managed supply or something like that.

Yeah I guess I’m being imprecise in my use of price controls in that I was also thinking of controls. I agree I’m oversimplifying. My whole point is that it’s a very complex issue that can’t be solved as easily as, say, North Korean nukes. 

Re citrus and nuts, I could argue that their water is subsidized, but that’s a whole new argument. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Akkula said:

My problem is that this USA Vs Mexico, Japan, EU, etc is too much of a macro view of things that it is almost meaningless.  Mexican farmers are getting screwed by our AG subsidies and all of our corporate welfare through the tax code is an unfair subsidy for certain industries too...it doesn't matter how much the overall trade surplus or deficit is to people who are getting screwed. We are truly in the game of picking winners and losers in this supposed "Free Market" system.  Overall, though, the working class has gotten the short end of the stick.  If you want to see who has gotten less of the benefits of free trade it has been the lower skilled and semi workers throughout the world.  Trump seems to understand this but he is too much of an idiot to understand the nuance and it is much easier to make Mexico or Canada the boogie man.  Corporate barons are laughing all the way to the bank with their slave labor.  Trump Republicans have done a masterful job of turning white workers against workers around the world instead of those workers trying to get together to collectively bargain or change the national laws for their benefit.  Racism is a great way to get workers to fight among each other instead of asking for a raise!

Yeah. you are right. We probably need a revolution where the workers can violently overthrow the evil rich bastards , and then we will have a Utopia. It has worked everywhere it's been tried you know. Just look at the Soviet Union as the shining example of a Utopian workers society. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Remove price supports, as one must if you are committed to truly free trade, and our corn may not be so cheap. 

I agree with removing price supports. However the US has been blessed with an abundance of very productive farmland at producing grains and corn. Even without the subsidies we would have a natural advantage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

If trade is to be free, price supports and subsidies also need to be included. This would massively impact our agricultural sector. 

We grow plenty of food to feed our nation and several other nations. 

If we were to remove ag subsidies we wouldn't decrease the amount of food we grow , we would rather let market forces, and consumer preferences determine what farmers grow. Right now the very powerful AG lobby gets sweetheart protections and subsidies from Congress, and that is what determines what farmers grow. The AG lobby in DC is very powerful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it some of you think Trump is trying to do here?  Trump is very simply trying to get these other countries to relax THEIR tariffs.  And he's playing hardball to do it.  
China will negotiate and stall for years on things.  The EU certainly doesn't have any reason to simply change things because we ask either.  

Some of you here don't like the methods Trump is using, being rude, obnoxious, threatening etc.   But lets look at the Obama way - most those Euro leaders loved Obama but what did they actually do for the US regarding trade?  

The long game is for these countries to loosen up their import restrictions and tariffs.  Trump critics are just quick to jump on anything negative they hear.  I think Trump firmly believes that the US is at a distinct disadvantage and wants to amend that.  What is really amusing is how some of you on here seem to think that these other world leaders are somehow looking out for American interests.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

Yeah. you are right. We probably need a revolution where the workers can violently overthrow the evil rich bastards , and then we will have a Utopia. It has worked everywhere it's been tried you know. Just look at the Soviet Union as the shining example of a Utopian workers society. 

No, what we really need is a violent revolution to persecute the poor brown people as the scapegoat for workers having their jobs outsourced.  Those thieving brown third world Muslim bastards working for a bowl of rice are the reason for our problems!!  Apple is laughing all the way to the bank at this idiocy!  Slavery is great for the stock market!  USA, USA:USFlag:

I love how international labor and environmental standards are always dismissed as communism.  Stupidity has been the key to these racist Tumpers trade problems and they are led by the king idiot.

 

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, pokerider said:

What is it some of you think Trump is trying to do here?  Trump is very simply trying to get these other countries to relax THEIR tariffs.  And he's playing hardball to do it.  
China will negotiate and stall for years on things.  The EU certainly doesn't have any reason to simply change things because we ask either.  

Some of you here don't like the methods Trump is using, being rude, obnoxious, threatening etc.   But lets look at the Obama way - most those Euro leaders loved Obama but what did they actually do for the US regarding trade?  

The long game is for these countries to loosen up their import restrictions and tariffs.  Trump critics are just quick to jump on anything negative they hear.  I think Trump firmly believes that the US is at a distinct disadvantage and wants to amend that.  What is really amusing is how some of you on here seem to think that these other world leaders are somehow looking out for American interests.  

I actually don't disagree that China and other countries are problems and they are taking advantage.  I just think that Trump's solutions are antiquated and backwards.  If it was me I would have renegotiated NAFTA and put in some additional wage and environmental protections in Mexico and removed subsidies within the trading block.   Canada and Mexico are good partners and they have some of the same issues with NAFTA as we have with the investor state disputes and other issues.  Pulling wages up quickly in Mexico with a high minimum wage there would have been the best way to make the USA more competitive with USA unions able to represent Mexican workers.  Allowing multinational to play Mexican and USA workers against each other is the same game plan that they did with blacks and whites in the south.

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

We grow plenty of food to feed our nation and several other nations. 

If we were to remove ag subsidies we wouldn't decrease the amount of food we grow , we would rather let market forces, and consumer preferences determine what farmers grow. Right now the very powerful AG lobby gets sweetheart protections and subsidies from Congress, and that is what determines what farmers grow. The AG lobby in DC is very powerful. 

Yes. And the leaders of other countries have their own interest groups to deal with. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, pokerider said:

What is it some of you think Trump is trying to do here?  Trump is very simply trying to get these other countries to relax THEIR tariffs.  And he's playing hardball to do it.  
China will negotiate and stall for years on things.  The EU certainly doesn't have any reason to simply change things because we ask either.  

Some of you here don't like the methods Trump is using, being rude, obnoxious, threatening etc.   But lets look at the Obama way - most those Euro leaders loved Obama but what did they actually do for the US regarding trade?  

The long game is for these countries to loosen up their import restrictions and tariffs.  Trump critics are just quick to jump on anything negative they hear.  I think Trump firmly believes that the US is at a distinct disadvantage and wants to amend that.  What is really amusing is how some of you on here seem to think that these other world leaders are somehow looking out for American interests.  

Foreign leaders are looking out for their own interests of course. But what Obama understood, and Trump does not, is that many of our interests overlap.

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

I would be fine for the elimination of agg subs.  But we do not have those subsidies in place to create a trade advantage, we have them in place because we have a huge nation to feed and we still remember the Great Depression when could not feed them.  

That may be why the subsidies were initially created, but it is not the reason that the vast majority of them remain.

I'm a desperate man
Send lawyers, guns, and money
The shit has hit the fan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2018 at 3:12 PM, #1Stunner said:

Just because Japan and German car makers have some factories in America is besides the point...

We are talking tariffs (not if we have manufacturers in America).

 

How is it fair to Tesla, Ford (Mustang), GM (Cadillac), Chrysler (Jeeps and Minivan) to have to deal with a 10 percent tariff on their cars that are imported to Europe, and Mercedes and BMW and VW get a 2.5 percent tariff on their cars?

No one seems willing to defend the tariff and imbalance, and just wants to talk about Mercedes or someone manufacturing some fraction of their cars in the USA.

41354cc18aeae2c9d41e0129e6662a23.gif

The benefits of a low tariff to the American people as a whole greatly outweigh the benifits to the protected manufacturers were we to match the tariff. A tariff is a tax on American consumers, meaning we harm ourselves in the hopes that we can do enough hurt to harm the other country. All of the money spent by Americans paying the tax is money that could be more efficiently spent by them in the economy elswhere, instead of being allocated by our swollen Federal bureaucracy. So by raising the tariff to match do we hurt the individual consumers wallet, we hurt all the businesses that they would deign to exchange with had they had that extra money.

A higher tariff also raises prices on the protected goods. The market doesn’t sit idle while taxes are implemented to match other country’s tariffs. The manufacturers raise their prices to just below those the level of their foriegn competition. Which is great for the minuscule amount of Americans working for that company, instead of competing they are protected and guaranteed higher profits...for a time. Everybody else gets screwed protecting them.

And when you keep draining capital from the private sector through these taxes on trade, your returns diminish greatly. A protected industry is not going to benefit the economy enough to make up for the lost opportunity cost of everyone else when the government picks winners and losers instead of the individual consumers.

Yes, it’s not fair that the G7 protects some manufacturers at a ridiculous rate. However, raising taxes on ourselves is a completely boneheaded way to deal with the problem. Even looking at the tariff imbalance as a real problem lacks critical thinking. We are the most fabulously wealthy country by such a large amount, that the other richest countries have to protect their own industries because they export capital to us at such a rate that completely equal trade threatens their economies dearly. And we don’t want our richest, friendliest, trading partners to suck. So we accept a trade imbalance. Lower tariffs on their part would be better for us, but higher tariffs on our part would be very stupid. 

Don’t cut your nose to spite your face. Trade isn’t “free” in the most reductive sense, but it’s damn good right now for America. “Fair” trade is a baloney term that can’t be defined. When you accept a deal, it’s fair. Otherwise you wouldn’t have accepted it. Now “smart” trade? That’s gonna line up with free-er trade for America every time.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

41354cc18aeae2c9d41e0129e6662a23.gif

The benefits of a low tariff to the American people as a whole greatly outweigh the benifits to the protected manufacturers were we to match the tariff. A tariff is a tax on American consumers, meaning we harm ourselves in the hopes that we can do enough hurt to harm the other country. All of the money spent by Americans paying the tax is money that could be more efficiently spent by them in the economy elswhere, instead of being allocated by our swollen Federal bureaucracy. So by raising the tariff to match do we hurt the individual consumers wallet, we hurt all the businesses that they would deign to exchange with had they had that extra money.

A higher tariff also raises prices on the protected goods. The market doesn’t sit idle while taxes are implemented to match other country’s tariffs. The manufacturers raise their prices to just below those the level of their foriegn competition. Which is great for the minuscule amount of Americans working for that company, instead of competing they are protected and guaranteed higher profits...for a time. Everybody else gets screwed protecting them.

And when you keep draining capital from the private sector through these taxes on trade, your returns diminish greatly. A protected industry is not going to benefit the economy enough to make up for the lost opportunity cost of everyone else when the government picks winners and losers instead of the individual consumers.

Yes, it’s not fair that the G7 protects some manufacturers at a ridiculous rate. However, raising taxes on ourselves is a completely boneheaded way to deal with the problem. Even looking at the tariff imbalance as a real problem lacks critical thinking. We are the most fabulously wealthy country by such a large amount, that the other richest countries have to protect their own industries because they export capital to us at such a rate that completely equal trade threatens their economies dearly. And we don’t want our richest, friendliest, trading partners to suck. So we accept a trade imbalance. Lower tariffs on their part would be better for us, but higher tariffs on our part would be very stupid. 

Don’t cut your nose to spite your face. Trade isn’t “free” in the most reductive sense, but it’s damn good right now for America. “Fair” trade is a baloney term that can’t be defined. When you accept a deal, it’s fair. Otherwise you wouldn’t have accepted it. Now “smart” trade? That’s gonna line up with free-er trade for America every time.

Not to mention, we’re talking about raw materials as well, not just finished/packaged products. Tariffs on raw materials increase the cost of goods manufactured and sold in the United States, which negatively impacts employment and purchasing power parity.

Excellent post Ned!

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...