Why Is the GOP Terrified of Tariffs?

Guest Post by Patrick J. Buchanan

From Lincoln to William McKinley to Theodore Roosevelt, and from Warren Harding through Calvin Coolidge, the Republican Party erected the most awesome manufacturing machine the world had ever seen.

And, as the party of high tariffs through those seven decades, the GOP was rewarded by becoming America’s Party.

Thirteen Republican presidents served from 1860 to 1930, and only two Democrats. And Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson were elected only because the Republicans had split.

Why, then, this terror of tariffs that grips the GOP?

Consider. On hearing that President Trump might impose tariffs on aluminum and steel, Sen. Lindsey Graham was beside himself: “Please reconsider,” he implored the president, “you’re making a huge mistake.”

Twenty-four hours earlier, Graham had confidently assured us that war with a nuclear-armed North Korea is “worth it.”

“All the damage that would come from a war would be worth it in terms of long-term stability and national security,” said Graham.

A steel tariff terrifies Graham. A new Korean war does not?

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

“Trade wars are not won, only lost,” warns Sen. Jeff Flake.

But this is ahistorical nonsense.

The U.S. relied on tariffs to convert from an agricultural economy in 1800 to the mightiest manufacturing power on earth by 1900.

Bismarck’s Germany, born in 1871, followed the U.S. example, and swept past free trade Britain before World War I.

Does Senator Flake think Japan rose to post-war preeminence through free trade, as Tokyo kept U.S. products out, while dumping cars, radios, TVs and motorcycles here to kill the industries of the nation that was defending them. Both Nixon and Reagan had to devalue the dollar to counter the predatory trade policies of Japan.

Since Bush I, we have run $12 trillion in trade deficits, and, in the first decade in this century, we lost 55,000 factories and 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs.

Does Flake see no correlation between America’s decline, China’s rise, and the $4 trillion in trade surpluses Beijing has run up at the expense of his own country?

The hysteria that greeted Trump’s idea of a 25 percent tariff on steel and 10 percent tariff on aluminum suggest that restoring this nation’s economic independence is going to be a rocky road.

In 2017, the U.S. ran a trade deficit in goods of almost $800 billion, $375 billion of that with China, a trade surplus that easily covered Xi Jinping’s entire defense budget.

If we are to turn our $800 billion trade deficit in goods into an $800 billion surplus, and stop the looting of America’s industrial base and the gutting of our cities and towns, sacrifices will have to be made.

But if we are not up to it, we will lose our independence, as the countries of the EU have lost theirs.

Specifically, we need to shift taxes off goods produced in the USA, and impose taxes on goods imported into the USA.

As we import nearly $2.5 trillion in goods, a tariff on imported goods, rising gradually to 20 percent, would initially produce $500 billion in revenue.

All that tariff revenue could be used to eliminate and replace all taxes on production inside the USA.

As the price of foreign goods rose, U.S. products would replace foreign-made products. There’s nothing in the world that we cannot produce here. And if it can be made in America, it should be made in America.

Consider. Assume a Lexus cost $50,000 in the U.S., and a 20 percent tariff were imposed, raising the price to $60,000.

What would the Japanese producers of Lexus do?

They could accept the loss in sales in the world’s greatest market, the USA. They could cut their prices to hold their U.S. market share. Or they could shift production to the United States, building their cars here and keeping their market.

How have EU nations run up endless trade surpluses with America? By imposing a value-added tax, or VAT, on imports from the U.S., while rebating the VAT on exports to the USA. Works just like a tariff.

The principles behind a policy of economic nationalism, to turn our trade deficits, which subtract from GDP, into trade surpluses, which add to GDP, are these:

Production comes before consumption. Who consumes the apples is less important than who owns the orchard. We should depend more upon each other and less upon foreign lands.

We should tax foreign-made goods and use the revenue, dollar for dollar, to cut taxes on domestic production.

The idea is not to keep foreign goods out, but to induce foreign companies to move production here.

We have a strategic asset no one else can match. We control access to the largest richest market on earth, the USA.

And just as states charge higher tuition on out-of state students at their top universities, we should charge a price of admission for foreign producers to get into America’s markets.

And — someone get a hold of Sen. Graham — it’s called a tariff.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
63 Comments
flash
flash
March 6, 2018 9:05 am

Cue…1..2..3 Loopy Red Ass of the Never-Wipe Tribe shows up to tell us why American jobs can never come back.

starfcker
starfcker
  flash
March 6, 2018 10:39 am

And starfck shows up to tell you folks that this is probably the best article ever on the Burning Platform. Basic economics, the Buchanan way. Great job, Mr. Buchanan. You’re probably the best Economist this country has ever produced.

Llpoh
Llpoh
  starfcker
March 6, 2018 7:27 pm

Notice nothing was said about the volume of exports. Nothing whatsoever. Good luck with that. It is moronic to blame the 6 million manufacturing jobs lost on this issue, as manufacturing as a percent of GDP remains unchanged. How is that possible? It is not.

How much sales do 6 million mfg employees generate? Well, say each employee costs around 70k, that equates to $420 billion in wages. And wages account for, generally, under 1/4 of sales price, that means 6 million mfg jobs = 1.6+ trillion in sales.

And the deficit is what again? Doh!

This clown is clueless. He should stick to what he knows. Manufacturing is not it.

And of course, he fails to mention the negative impact tariffs will have on productivity, quality, and price of goods.

Llpoh
Llpoh
  Llpoh
March 6, 2018 7:41 pm

What about $1.5 trillion in exports, largely high tech/high end that might be lost? These morons only look at one side of the equation.

Put reciprocal tariffs in place. Ban trade with nations that do not play fair, barring US imports but wanting to export to the US. They will fall into line. But putting tariffs on Canadian steel? What an absurdity. You may as well admit you cannot compete. The screwing will be endless if the US abandons all pretext of being able to compete.

starfcker
starfcker
  Llpoh
March 6, 2018 7:54 pm

We don’t have to compete with them, if we don’t want to. We don’t have to enrich them, if we don’t want to. By tonnage, we’re the market for half to steel they produce They’re foreigners. Fuck them. But you are correct. Reciprocal is the way to go. And the trade deficit needs to be far more balanced with every country we deal with. I’m not into this distributing of the wealth.

Llpoh
Llpoh
  starfcker
March 6, 2018 8:37 pm

Star – of course you have to compete with them. What, you want to be Somalia, and say but hey, we do not have to compete with anyone? To win, you have to compete.

But trying to protect manufacturing is a fool’s errand. It will be gone, for all practical purposes, in a decade or two in any event. Unless of course you want Trump to ban automation as well. Nothing can stop the demise of manufacturing as a major employer. Nothing. Because humans are simply not needed to manufacture.

Plus, riddle me this – do companies have the capacity to mfg in the US? Are you sure? And how long will it take to create capacity if it does not exist?

There are many questions Trump does not even know to ask, nor does Buchanan. Be careful what you wish for.

nkit
nkit
  Llpoh
March 6, 2018 11:09 pm

Agree, but letting Canada backdoor Chinese steel into the US through NAFTA undermines the basis and trust of the agreement.

Llpoh
Llpoh
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 5:53 am

Nkit – Canada imports very little Chinese steel. Check out the stats. The amount of Chinese steel it imports is far less than the steel Canada exports to the US. In addition, the US exports almost as much steel to Canada as it imports.

If Canada is on selling Chinese steel, that should not happen. If it is happening, it is a miniscule issue, as Canada imports almost no Chinese steel. It is like taking a 20 pound sledge to kill a gnat.

starfcker
starfcker
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 5:55 am

It goes in the cars,Llpoh. And they export a ton of cars to the US. That’s the work around Trump’s going after

Llpoh
Llpoh
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 6:32 am

Star – it does not go in the cars. They import almost zero Chinese steel. Maybe they are importing complete steel parts, but I do not know the stats on that. If that is the case, put tariffs on the cars, tomaddress the dumping of Chinese auto parts with subsidized steel.

The issue that needs addressing is that China is dumping steel throughout the world. But not in Canada and the US, for the most part.

starfcker
starfcker
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 6:45 am

That’s exactly the point, Llpoh. Instead of smelting steel or stamping parts or whatever, Canada is just importing Chinese junk and doing final assembly, and shipping that stuff here, duty-free. Clearly not what NAFTA was supposed to be about. Remember the timing of this. We just went through 7 rounds of renegotiation on NAFTA, and basically failed because Canada did not want to enforce rules of origin. Tariff time

Llpoh
Llpoh
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 7:07 am

Star – seriously, before you say shit, you need to look up the facts. That is NOT happening. Canada imports very little automotive parts from China. Facts are your friend.

So facts are that Canada neither exports much Chinese steel,or Chinese manufactured auto components, into the US.

https://www.asiapacific.ca/statistics/trade/bilateral-trade-asia-product/canadas-merchandise-trade-china

I am banging my head conversing with you. I prove that Canada is not exporting Chinese steel into the US in bulk, because they buy almost no Chinese steel, and you counter with “it is in the cars”. I look up the facts, and facts are it is not in the cars.

For fuck sake, blindly putting forth a position, claiming things are facts when they are not, is an absurd way to debate.

starfcker
starfcker
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 7:20 am

Llpoh, I don’t care about stats. I’ve been following the NAFTA negotiations. The information I’m giving you is straight out of Robert Lighthizer and Wilbur Ross’ mouth. Nothing blind about it. This is their job as Commerce Secretary and US trade representative. So I figure they know this stuff better than me and you. And this is what they are saying. So I tend to believe them

Llpoh
Llpoh
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 7:29 am

Star – the actual facts are out there for anyone to see. If you are going to pass along bullshit, that is up to you. I have posted the actual facts. And the facts are as I’ve stated them – Canada imports very little Chinese steel, and little in the way of Chinese auto parts. Hence, they do not export much of the same to the US – it is not possible.

So the argument that Canada is dumping Chinese steel or autoparts into the US is demonstrably and inarguably FALSE. The facts are clear as day.

Canada imports around $70 billion a year from China, little of it auto parts or steel. Even if they dumped it all in the US, it would be a gnat sized problem in the scheme of the entire China issue. The China issue is not Canadian r American directly – it is that they have cut off Canada and the US from world markets by dumping elsewhere. And that is biting hard.

starfcker
starfcker
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 7:35 am

Wilbur Ross’ background is in steel and auto parts. I tend to think he’s the right guy for the job. He knows something, or they wouldn’t be making a big fuss like this. I think the economy is in great hands. These are business guys that had been doing big things for a long, long time. Trump has been a builder of skyscrapers for 40 years, 50 years something like that. You don’t think he knows the steel industry inside and out? He’s been buying steel, more steel and we can imagine for a long time. So I have no issue with what they are doing. I think they know these industries inside and out, and I think they have the best interest of the country in mind

Llpoh
Llpoh
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 8:18 am

Star – I have my doubts that Trump knows a whole lot about anything. This tariff debacle is case in point. This will be a clusterfuck of epic proportions if it goes through. I hope it is just a smokescreen he is using to get a deal done. If not, the shit will hit the fan if he starts laying tariffs on his allies. They are the wrong targets.

BL
BL
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 8:46 am

Star-Wilbur Ross is a crook and a bankster, you can’t trust anything he says about steel:

Before Pushing Tariffs, Wilbur Ross Had a Messy History With the U.S. Steel Industry

You can thank Ross and his buddies for putting us in a national security mess if we were to go to war, you need steel in wartime and we produce very little.

BL
BL
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 12:51 pm

Seriously Star, before this thread is over, you need to understand who and what Wilbur Ross is and stands for so you don’t come back in here down the road blather puking about his experience in the steel industry.

Did you read the message/link I posted? That is a drop in a 30 gallon bucket of the criminal activity that guy has been up to in past decades. PLEASE spare me and others the praise of a low down varmint like Ross.

Westcoastdeplorable
Westcoastdeplorable
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 11:07 pm
flash
flash
  flash
March 7, 2018 8:52 am

Even though Free Trade has been proven a myth and beneficial only to a global corporatocracy, the affirmative action economist still persists in spewing his anti-American free trade gibberish. Why am I not surprised ?

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/03/main-street-first.html
“Free trade is not good for the US economy or the American public. But it is good for the financial elite that lives as a useless parasite off both as it plays the “heads I win, tails you bail me out” casino. And for those who missed my debate with economist Bob Murphy, the best thing about tariffs is the fact that they are an alternative to income taxes, a benefit that Bob even conceded during the debate. It’s fine to hypothesize about a world with no taxes, no debt, and no government spending, but back here in the real world, we have a choice between a) income taxes, b) government debt, and c) tariffs. And tariffs are by far the economically preferable option that does the least harm to the citizenry.”

CCRider
CCRider
March 6, 2018 9:10 am

I don’t know, Pat. This has been a long time disagreement between him and free marketeers. I think a precious metal dollar backing and actual free market rules played a strong role in our economic growth at the latter half of the 19th century.

There’s also this from Bastiat:
“When goods don’t cross borders, Soldiers will”

And this from Jim Rickards:
“Currency wars then trade wars then hot wars”
And the currency wars have been going on for many years.

flash
flash
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 9:35 am

Impoverishing hundreds of thousands so they can afford to buy cheap foreign shit is hardly sensible, regardless who spins the lie.

Trump’s Truthful Heresy On Globalization And Free Trade
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevekeen/2016/11/11/trumps-truthful-heresy-on-globalization-and-free-trade/

Anonymous
Anonymous
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 9:45 am

Bastiat lived in a different time, what he said was more valid then than now.

CCRider
CCRider
  Anonymous
March 6, 2018 11:58 am

How about his ‘broken glass’ analogy? That out dated also?

Anonymous
Anonymous
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 1:12 pm

You might ask that of, say, an auto body shop about hail and snow storms.

CCRider
CCRider
  Anonymous
March 6, 2018 1:54 pm

Read the fucking theory and get back to me.

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 5:34 pm

Which one are you talking about – the “Broken Window Fallacy?” If so, he dispels the myth that a broken window increases the growth and prosperity of the economy by providing new business for the glass maker, glass installer, etc. by pointing out that the money spent on repairing the glass MAY go to these two guys, but will NOT be going to something else, and that destruction of capital goods is ALWAYS a need loss for the economy, regardless of who might benefit from the sale of the replacement items. His comments are as valid today as they were when he wrote them. And if you think that his comments on trade, borders, and armies is out of date, it is only because YOU want to see American businesses “protected” by government force rather than the rest of the economy benefit from lower costs of foreign goods. We stopped stuff from getting to Japan and they attacked Pearl Harbor. We stopped medicine, food, and other items from getting to Iraq and 1.5 million people died and these sanctions were cited by Osama bin Laden as a reason behind 9-11. Actions have consequences.

CCRider
CCRider
  MrLiberty
March 6, 2018 5:46 pm

If it was Anon’s window that was broken I’d say he’d finally get it.

starfcker
starfcker
  MrLiberty
March 6, 2018 6:22 pm

” it is only because YOU want to see American businesses “protected” by government force rather than the rest of the economy benefit from lower costs of foreign goods.” No shit, Sherlock. I could care less about foreigners, and even less about trans-national corporations. Tariffs are the way forward. Deal with it. You lost the argument the day Hillary lost.

starfcker
starfcker
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 10:44 am

Come on, CC. Buchanan lays it out so simply that a fifth grader could understand it, and the best you’ve got are quotes from a guy who’s been dead for over a hundred years and a greasy lawyer?

CCRider
CCRider
  starfcker
March 6, 2018 11:59 am

I’m conflicted on it. From a pure free market perspective it’s a bad policy. If some government wants to lower the cost of steel below market levels I see no reason to decline the offer. Also, my firmly held belief is that less government is better and it sucks (like among so many other issues) at picking winners and losers (like jared, or omarosa, scaramooch, etc). But I can see Pat’s rationale.

As for your typically 2 dimensional thinking about the 5th grade and greasy lawyer, that’s why I think you’re common as dirt-like your hero chief israel.

starfcker
starfcker
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 12:58 pm

I may be common as dirt, let’s compare our predictions on the stock market last month. And I don’t believe I’ve ever mentioned Israel on these pages. I do like the fact that you’re conflicted. And I’ll let you know I’m just a big Buchanan fan. His book “Death of the West” kind of woke me up to macro-economics and politics

CCRider
CCRider
  starfcker
March 6, 2018 1:07 pm

Actually you did mention israel in a very positive light but I can understand the amnesia. Pat’s book “The Unnecessary War” was his best.

starfcker
starfcker
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 2:27 pm

I defend the Jewish people against the Neo types here. I don’t give a fuck about Israel

TPC
TPC
  CCRider
March 6, 2018 4:00 pm

@CCRider – Like you, and probably most of the others on this website, I would prefer free market principles first and foremost.

Unfortunately the world does not work on the same foundations. The globe is big, much bigger than just the US, and as long as we remain “Free Trade” we will always be looting ourselves here at home to pay for the improved quality of life over seas. This is good for humanity for a variety of reasons, but there is a LOT of humanity to improve, and by holding back western/American productivity, you are stymieing the creativity and production that ushered in a new wave of humanity. If you keep spending that coin to enrich others overseas it will eventually be gone – snuffing out the spark of America would stop all forward progress our invention and ideals have done for Earth over the last 150 years.

We have to be protectionist, because its not just our goods that benefit but our culture as well. America’s cultural history is one of freedom, creativity, and productivity.

Firearms protect us from physical threats, and things like tariffs protect us from other, more oblique methods of warfare. We need both.

CCRider
CCRider
  TPC
March 6, 2018 5:30 pm

Fair enough. Here’s 2 last thoughts:

Expecting 19th century high paying jobs to return in steel may be fanciful. Here locally there’s a rebar mill making trainloads of rod. It a huge building, maybe an acre or more and 6-8 stories high. It also has a parking lot the size of a 7-11. All automated production.

Also how many gov’t programs have you seen that actually deliver on a promise without worse consequences?

But it feels good to fuck THEM back for a change and I won’t be a purist on it. I hope it works. That it helps everyday people is terrific. I just have these observations on government proclamations and they all spell ‘bullshit’.

starfcker
starfcker
  CCRider
March 7, 2018 3:31 am

My bad, CC. I just realize you were talking about Scott Israel, not the country. Yes, I like Scott. He’s taking a pounding right now. He’ll be okay

Llpoh
Llpoh
  starfcker
March 6, 2018 7:29 pm

Star – he does not lay out shit. His numbers are wrong, he ignores exports, and he ignores what happens when competition is reduced. He knows exactly zero about mfg.

starfcker
starfcker
  Llpoh
March 6, 2018 7:44 pm

Are you talking about Buchanan? I didn’t mean in this particular piece. I’m talking about his body of work over the last 20 years. I’m just having some fun today, pushing buttons, and lobbing grenades. It’s fun to see my side winning. As far as impact of this stuff, we’ll see how it works out. Trump is doing exactly what I expected him to do. There will be counter forces. But if he gets us out of NAFTA, he will have done something great for the country. Mexico needs us. Canada needs us. And we just need a better deal than that one. One of the unfinished stories that I have, that I’ve never finished because I don’t have the time to research it, is titled, ‘NAFTA could have worked.’ I’ll finish it one of these days. You might be surprised at what I know and some of my opinions on that stuff.

TampaRed
TampaRed
  starfcker
March 6, 2018 10:09 pm

why do we need nafta or any other governmental agreement-why can’t we just have free trade?

Dutchman
Dutchman
March 6, 2018 9:29 am

Europe and Japan were decimated in WWII. They imposed tariffs, as they rebuilt their economies. Their economies are now rebuilt. It’s completely without logic why they should have tariffs on our goods while we have none on theirs. Free trade should be free both ways.

Captain Willard
Captain Willard
  Dutchman
March 6, 2018 11:47 am

This ^!

We could simply replace the WTO with reciprocal tariff arrangements and rates between allies and free countries.

Slave labor nations with no elections could pay a flat tariff.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
March 6, 2018 9:31 am

Tariffs are revenue to the federal government. Voters seem to like a federal government that spends money, so that money has to come (mostly) from taxes or borrowing. Unless you want to argue that a dynamic analysis of tariffs proves that tariffs will slow the economy and reduce overall tax revenue (which would be unpersuasive to many), revenue from tariffs reduces the deficit. Either the tariff revenue is substantial – good for reducing the deficit – or insubstantial – meaning the hue and cry over tariffs’ horrible effects is overwrought. If we don’t get tax revenue from tariffs, then it should logically be supplanted with tax revenue from, say, a higher income tax, which disincents earnings and production and has its own downstream effects.

TPC
TPC
March 6, 2018 10:03 am

I love the ideas of reciprocal tariffs. Out of everything Trump has done so far, this is the one I am most excited about.

Its infuriating our international sales team, but effectively kills two competitors over night.

Wip
Wip
March 6, 2018 10:13 am

One caveat…if we import, we save our own natural resources.

A countries wealth is it’s people and it’s resources.

starfcker
starfcker
  Wip
March 6, 2018 10:46 am

Good point WIP. Now try to square your position with the globalists and liberals preoccupation with conservation. Save them for what?

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Wip
March 6, 2018 10:54 am

Importing isn’t getting free goods.

They have to be paid for and, in the end, it is only our own products and resources that can be used to pay for them, either at the time in the form of direct trade of goods or at some future date as payment of debt we used at the time in place of direct trade of goods.

Zarathustra
Zarathustra
March 6, 2018 10:17 am

The reason the Gop hates tariffs is because they reduce foreign influence or rather the ability to bully foreign governments to do what you…er I mean Israel want them to do. Duh…

rhs jr
rhs jr
March 6, 2018 10:55 am

The goal must be to produce better and cheaper products than the competition. Tariffs work against that principle by protecting inferior products or costs. If our products are to expensive because of socialism’s costs (which is part of our problem), then the socialism needs to be reduced, not supported with high taxes. If our products are not as good by design, or low quality workmanship, or outdated manufacturing equipment: fix it, don’t subsidize it. Any tariffs against our products should be met with tariffs against their products (with a goal of eliminating all tariffs and not creating higher prices). Our country (which unfortunately usually elects liberals) and industries (which unfortunately are usually controlled by greedy unpatriotic Elite ZOG Oligarchs in NYC or Chicago) must start making the changes needed to make our products better and cheaper without imposing tariffs that in the long run hurt our consumers, or we go even farther backwards. If a nation fails to fix it’s excessive socialism, or problems with an indifferent management structure, or product quality and costs, it will fail as obviously the USA has been failing over the last 25 years.

Llpoh
Llpoh
  rhs jr
March 6, 2018 7:31 pm

Rhs is right.

I have no problem with reciprocal tariffs. But tariifs to avoid competing?

Hollow Man
Hollow Man
March 6, 2018 11:10 am

Both parties know the gig is almost up. They just want to keep it going as long as they can. Their fear is the tariff will be the beginning of the chaos. They want to die after living the good life first.

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
March 6, 2018 5:39 pm

The steel industry has been begging the federal government for protections from foreigners for 160 years. During that period they have done nothing to improve their quality, their efficiency, or anything else critical to competing on a global level. Their time to fail passes a LONG TIME AGO. Now this is just pandering to a bunch of ignorant flag wavers who lack the economic sense to appreciate the destruction a real trade war would reek upon this nation. Buchanan is a mercantilist and a crony capitalist. His mentality is part of the problem in this country. These tariffs are simply picking winners in big steel, while screwing everyone who manufactures with steel (like the car companies, all the weapons makers, plane makers (steel and aluminum), etc. and everyone who must purchase these items.

starfcker
starfcker
  MrLiberty
March 7, 2018 4:36 am

“Mr Liberty”, you’re a straight up dirtbag, and probably a paid troll. “A bunch of ignorant flag wavers”, is that what people who don’t want to see America turned into a third-world shithole are to you? How about this, “Mr Liberty.” Suck my dick

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
  starfcker
March 7, 2018 9:44 am

Wow. Solid comeback. Pretty much what I would expect from you. Sad that you can only see ONE side of the economic equation and fail to appreciate the 160 years of steel industry whining for government protectionism. In the end, my desire to see American manufacturers having access to affordable steel and aluminum will do far more to keep this country from becoming a “third world shithole” than protectionist tariffs that protect an American industry that refuses to attempt to stand on its own. My calls for REAL freedom for American businesses (from government oppression) are well-documented. Ignorant flag wavers who lack the economic sense to appreciate the consequences of their agenda is exactly what I meant and what I stand by. You on the other hand wish to simply have the government pick the steel and aluminum industries as winners and don’t give a SHIT about any other company in this country who will be hurt by this move. I support principled freedom in which the government doesn’t decide who wins and who loses (but does stop screwing everyone over so that everyone can compete and survive). I’m funny that way. But quite proud of my stand.

starfcker
starfcker
  MrLiberty
March 7, 2018 12:42 pm

Yeah, it’s worked so far, right? Then why did your girl Hillary lose? Because people feel like things are good? Fuck you

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
  starfcker
March 7, 2018 5:05 pm

Wow, now the “Hillary” comment again as if I would support freedom consistently and EVER vote for either Hillary or Trump. Sad that you don’t have sound economic arguments to make but must resort to pigeonholing, name calling, and various sexual requests. From what I can see, plenty of American businesses are doing quite well with global access to foreign goods that are cheaper and more efficiently produced in other nations. The same can be said for industries in one state that have access to raw materials and finished goods produced more efficiently in other states. So yes, it does appear to be working so far. How a failing steel industry that has been lobbying congress and the president for 160 years rather than innovating and improving their production methods is more deserving of government force and violence than the rest of American businesses that HAVE been succeeding on their own, is a mystery that only you can answer. Good luck with that. And since your head is already up your ass, you can far more easily suck your own dick I’m sure.

starfcker
starfcker
  MrLiberty
March 7, 2018 5:14 pm

The Hillary comment simply revolves around trade and immigration. Trump said he would renegotiate trade deals and tariff violators, and toughen up immigration. Hillary would have kept the status quo. If you like the status quo, that was your candidate. And you lost. No surprise there. So you’re theoretical arguments are a day late and a dollar short. We’re heading in a new direction. Deal with it. All those businesses you cry for just got a nice tax break. They’re still way ahead.

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
  starfcker
March 7, 2018 10:43 pm

Whatever makes you feel better about your immoral position in favor of the use of force against your fellow Americans. But remember, the massive tariffs that exist on sugar (to protect our sugar industry from competition) have driven nearly every American candy maker to Canada (except Hershey’s). How many steel consumers will leave and take jobs with them, or aluminum consumers. And what will Trump do then? Impose tariffs on the imported products. And what will be next? Who will be the next crony capitalist cartel to come begging for “relief?” And which manufacturing sectors will then be forced to leave to escape higher prices, etc. Again, YOU have decided to favor an industry that has been paying off the federal government for 160 years in order to maintain oppressive steel tariffs on foreign imports. And you have sided with these “rent-seekers” over EVERY OTHER AMERICAN COMPANY AND CONSUMER that benefits from cheaper foreign imports -with no regards for the fact that maybe steel isn’t our thing anymore…or will never be with the current cartel of American producers. And I support a government that creates a positive economic environment for business to thrive. NOTHING like that was EVER on Hillary’s agenda…but you tell yourself whatever makes you feel better regarding my educated comments.

starfcker
starfcker
  starfcker
March 7, 2018 10:53 pm

Yeah sure, troll

Anonymous
Anonymous
March 6, 2018 6:13 pm

I love pat thinking that Americas forces occupying Japan after the war are only there to protect it lol. Ok yeah right pat .

TampaRed
TampaRed
March 6, 2018 11:04 pm

this is about internal trade,not foreign but here is an article where the new truck industry and certain politicians who represent it are trying to kill off trump/pruitt’s repeal of the glider rule–

Oops… Volvo lobbyist (literally) wrote the letter for congressman to press EPA against repeal of glider rule

Llpoh
Llpoh
March 7, 2018 6:26 am

I love the fact that folks are claiming tariffs will increase tax revenue.

Riddle me this – who is going to foot the bill for that increased revenue? Why, that will be consumers, via increased product cost. So if it does raise tax revenue, and I doubt it will, it will come from Joe Average.

Additionally, Buchanan’s numbers are bullshit, as they do not consider the offsets that will kick in as a result of tariffs hitting US exports, which are considerable.

Flash made an asinine comment #1, but he is right about what I have and do say. Manufacturing is doomed. It once employed 50% of the US workforce, and now it is down to 8%. Tariffs will not fix that. That 8 will become 6%, then 4%, where it will stabilize, more or less. Someone will need to tend the robots, after all.

Here is the reality – China is dumping steel all over the world, but NOT in Canada or the US, in any meaningful amounts. China is butchering all other steel producing nations by dumping throughout the world, so Canada, US, UK, Japan, etc., are struggling to export their steel. That is the issue, and US tariffs do nothing to address that issue.

Want to reaaly have an impact? Take away all monies to nations letting in Chinese steel. Place tariffs on the goods coming in from any nations buying that steel. It is subsidized with Chinese dumped steel, after all.

And place tariffs on ALL Chinese goods until they stop dumping, not just in the US, but EVERYWHERE.

China is by and large not dumping goods in the US, but rather they are dumping goods everywhere else, which is killing the export markets of all nations. The US cannot export its goods to other nations because China is dumping their goods there.

These tariffs will hit everyone except the one they should – China. China is laughing its ass off. Europe will be hit, Canada wil be hit, etc., but not China. China exports almost no steel to Canada or the US. They could not give a shit about these tariffs.

China is laughing all the way to the bank. Want to hit someone – hit China. But hitting Canada, Europe, Brazil, etc., is simply helping the Chinese and will hurt Americans.

TampaRed
TampaRed
  Llpoh
March 7, 2018 9:14 am

domestic politics–penn.,mich.,wisc–

this does show china that he will act & i’d bet that privately there are some blunt discussions going on–