Trump steel tariffs: EU warns it will respond 'firmly'

[Gunny]

European Union officials have said they will respond "firmly" if US President Donald Trump presses ahead with his plan for steep global duties on metals.
EU trade chiefs are considering slapping 25% tariffs on around $3.5bn (£2.5bn) of imports from the US, Reuters news agency reports.
World Trade Organization Director General Roberto Azevedo said: "A trade war is in no one's interests."
The rhetoric ramped up as Mr Trump tweeted that "trade wars are good".
International condemnation has greeted the US president's Thursday announcement that he plans to impose a 25% tariff on steel imports and 10% on aluminium next week.
What are EU officials saying?The European Union is reported to be considering retaliatory tariffs, targeting US steel, agriculture and other products.
European Commission head Jean-Claude Juncker promised to react firmly.
https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/2DA4/production/_100248611_chart-ussteel-r4oup-nc.png"We will not sit idly while our industry is hit with unfair measures that put thousands of European jobs at risk," he said.
French economy minister Bruno Le Maire said there would "only be losers" in a US-EU trade war.
Mr Le Maire vowed a "strong, co-ordinated and united response from the EU".
Canada, Mexico, China and Brazil have also said they are considering retaliatory steps.


Steel tariffs: What impact will they really have? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43251335)
What would China do in a US trade war? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42798941)
Where Trump stands on world trade (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42571838)

What does Trump administration say?Mr Trump tweeted on Friday morning that the US was "losing billions of dollars on trade" and would find a trade war "easy to win".

Skip Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43264200#jump-linkhttps://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969525362580484098)


(https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969525362580484098)
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/874276197357596672/kUuht00m_normal.jpgDonald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump)


When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win. Example, when we are down $100 billion with a certain country and they get cute, don’t trade anymore-we win big. It’s easy!
4:50 AM - Mar 2, 2018 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969525362580484098)



52K (https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=969525362580484098)

31.3K people are talking about this (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969525362580484098)



Twitter Ads info and privacy (https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256)








Report (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/contact-us/editorial)

End of Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump




Critics argue that the tariffs would fail to protect American jobs and ultimately raise prices for consumers.
But US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross used a can of Campbell's Soup to defend the tariffs on Friday morning as "no big deal".
"In a can of Campbell's Soup, there are about 2.6 pennies worth of steel," he told CNBC.
"So if that goes up by 25%, that's about six-tenths of one cent on the price on a can of Campbell's Soup.
"I just bought this can today at a 7-Eleven and it priced at a $1.99. Who in the world is going to be too bothered?"
https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/75306000/jpg/_75306515_line976.jpgAre trade wars good?By Theo Leggett, business correspondent
If trade wars really were good and easy to win, the World Trade Organisation probably wouldn't exist.
Most countries believe that negotiations are best carried out and disputes settled through a rules-based system. Introducing trade barriers on a tit-for-tat basis has the potential to harm companies on both sides.
But that's unlikely to bother Mr Trump. His campaign rhetoric drew heavily on the perceived threat to traditional US industries from foreign interlopers acting unfairly. He's simply continuing in that vein.
And it's unlikely to register much with the steelworkers of Pennsylvania and Indiana. Concerned about their jobs and the future, many will welcome Mr Trump's comments.
https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/75306000/jpg/_75306515_line976.jpgWhat are the stakes for US?Mr Trump has lamented the decline of the US steel industry, which since 2000 has seen production drop from 112m tons to 86.5m tons in 2016.
The number of employees working in the sector has fallen over the same period from 135,000 to 83,600.
But experts say far more Americans work in industries that depend on steel products, than are employed in steel plants.
Steel mills in 2015 employed about 140,000 Americans, according to census data.
But 6.5 million Americans work for manufacturers who make things using steel.


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43264200

Tit for tat.

[Black Diamond]

The rust belt/blue wall is listening.

[Gunny]

The rust belt/blue wall is listening.As the only ones that stand to gain, I imagine the laymen who just collect a check don't give a crap. I don't recall that I am big on any European imports so it will have little effect on me.

What I would do in this case if I had a business it DID affect? Move my business out of the US.

[Black Diamond]

So he's doubling down on this.

[Gunny]

So he's doubling down on this.I'm sure. Does he do anything else when threatened?:laugh:

[Gunny]

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43251335

A different take than the OP.

[Black Diamond]

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43251335

A different take than the OP.
He was railing against all this in the 1980s.

[Gunny]

He was railing against all this in the 1980s.Sure. Lots of people have been railing since the 70s when Nixon and Carter turned the EPA into a monster running on a bunch of chicken little theories that ... this for you global warming junkies too ... NEVER HAPPENED. Over-regulation and labor union overheads in our country pretty-much wiped both the oil and steel industries, among others. Add to that the Japanese coming online with cheaper steel and it was a recipe for disaster.

And just like now with global warming, no one was listening THEN to the people calling bullshit.

The only REAL problem I see here is exactly as I said previously, and Abbey mentioned about down-sizing the government ... the idea is just great but Trump is trying to instantly reset the playing field at one time and it is going to be an economic nightmare for someone or all involved. Either way, we, the consumers, will be getting screwed at the store. Maybe somewhere down the line it all ends well. Remember it took from the 1970s until now to get where we are. If this backfires and it takes another 50 years to recover, it's not going to be a happy ending.

And, IF Europe wins a trade war with us, then they own our asses which they currently do not.

If Trump wants make things "fair"? Make all these countries pay us back the debts we keep forgiving. Those alone would give us a trade surplus. If you're going to be a d*ck, might as be John Holmes instead of PeeWee Herman.

[aboutime]

It's called: "PAYBACKS ARE A BITCH!" Other nations have been taking advantage of the U.S.A. since the end of WWII. The Marshall Plan gave all of Europe what they needed to regain their societies, economies, and industrial base...with Billions from the USA.

Anyone happen to notice how NONE of those European nations ever paid us back?

Then, when they got on their feet, and became competitive with US, and the rest of the World. They started charging us more for our products, and even taxed them....WHILE WE JUST LET THEM SLIDE...AND COLLECTED NO "RECIPROCITY" in return.

That's why the President did to them...what they were doing to us....while we just stayed quiet.

[Black Diamond]

It's called: "PAYBACKS ARE A BITCH!" Other nations have been taking advantage of the U.S.A. since the end of WWII. The Marshall Plan gave all of Europe what they needed to regain their societies, economies, and industrial base...with Billions from the USA.

Anyone happen to notice how NONE of those European nations ever paid us back?

Then, when they got on their feet, and became competitive with US, and the rest of the World. They started charging us more for our products, and even taxed them....WHILE WE JUST LET THEM SLIDE...AND COLLECTED NO "RECIPROCITY" in return.

That's why the President did to them...what they were doing to us....while we just stayed quiet.
How much of the Marshall plan was to keep Western Europe from liking communism?

[Black Diamond]

How much of the Marshall plan was to keep Western Europe from liking communism?
Japan too..

[Elessar]

I do recall California contracting to rebuild the Bay Bridge in the 90's using imported, poor quality
steel from China.

Safety inspections failed because of the brittleness and it had to be done all over again.

Nothing beat the quality of good old USA steel from Pittsburgh, Wheeling, and Wierton.
But that EPA crap alluded to above shut down all the mills and put thousands out of work.

[Black Diamond]

I do recall California contracting to rebuild the Bay Bridge in the 90's using imported, poor quality
steel from China.

Safety inspections failed because of the brittleness and it had to be done all over again.

Nothing beat the quality of good old USA steel from Pittsburgh, Wheeling, and Wierton.
But that EPA crap alluded to above shut down all the mills and put thousands out of work.
Ahh the plot thickens. How did it compare to Japan's steel?

[Elessar]

Ahh the plot thickens. How did it compare to Japan's steel?

Ours was of higher quality, only to be equaled by what the Germans could make.

[Gunny]

Ahh the plot thickens. How did it compare to Japan's steel?You could go to the drive in movie and sit on the hood without denting it. Which begs the question, what would it be like TODAY? Those cars were like battleships (we DID call them "gunboats") but they weighed a ton and that figures into gas mileage for both aerodynamics and weight. Those cars also had 454's with 4bbl's under the hood.

[Elessar]

You could go to the drive in movie and sit on the hood without denting it. Which begs the question, what would it be like TODAY? Those cars were like battleships (we DID call them "gunboats") but they weighed a ton and that figures into gas mileage for both aerodynamics and weight. Those cars also had 454's with 4bbl's under the hood.

My old International Scout had steel...solid steel..1/8 inch thick. It weighed 6200 lbs. Damn thing would go anywhere.
345 cubic inch engine, 4 bbl carb, and 4 wheel low I could let it idle and walk along side it and steer from the door.

https://www.google.com/search?q=1979+International+Scout&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif25m21M7ZAhUQ4GMKHdc2DawQsAQIJg&biw=1600&bih=769

[LongTermGuy]

It's called: "PAYBACKS ARE A BITCH!" Other nations have been taking advantage of the U.S.A. since the end of WWII. The Marshall Plan gave all of Europe what they needed to regain their societies, economies, and industrial base...with Billions from the USA.

Anyone happen to notice how NONE of those European nations ever paid us back?

Then, when they got on their feet, and became competitive with US, and the rest of the World. They started charging us more for our products, and even taxed them....WHILE WE JUST LET THEM SLIDE...AND COLLECTED NO "RECIPROCITY" in return.

That's why the President did to them...what they were doing to us....while we just stayed quiet.

Agree aboutime ...."European" nations dont really make the best choices...besides most all are Socialists and are very "PC" driven and are weak...They got big Problems already with their open borders...I could care less what they think....*Trump is taking them to school....and its about time someone stepped up to these "give me ..give me" Its not fair ...socialists very liberal bitches....

[High_Plains_Drifter]

My old International Scout had steel...solid steel..1/8 inch thick. It weighed 6200 lbs. Damn thing would go anywhere.
345 cubic inch engine, 4 bbl carb, and 4 wheel low I could let it idle and walk along side it and steer from the door.

https://www.google.com/search?q=1979+International+Scout&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif25m21M7ZAhUQ4GMKHdc2DawQsAQIJg&biw=1600&bih=769
We had 1969 International Scout, yellow with a white top, had the 4 banger in it but still, had lots of grunt. Great little truck, would go feakin' anywhere.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Who gives a crap about the EU. America, could probably, be 100% sustainable nation with all it's own resources. I HIGHLY doubt other nations could do the same. We have things they NEED, like WHEAT, and LUMBER.

The EU has no real leverage on America. They want to fuck around, then I hope president Trump schools them some more. America has been getting FUCKED by so many different nations for so long, they've come to conclusion that it's just supposed to BE THAT WAY. Got news for 'em, there's a new sheriff in America, and he don't like that deal.

[Gunny]

Yeah, it's nice to stick it to Europe if we even can. I guess. It's great for the US steel workers. Great for Trump delivering on a campaign promise in PA. Great for left wing, communist labor unions.

Not so great for non-union, mom-n-pop construction companies (those conservatives Republicans supposedly represent) who don't have a margin of error the to equal the price of steel doubling to meet union overhead They go under, as do their employees. Not so great for consumers when the higher cost of steel is passed along.

Maybe we ought to consider the cotton/rice industry in the Deep South next and prop the rural South up as well.

And as a military retiree, I'd like a pay raise that equates to today's dollars and cost of living.

Anyone else?

[aboutime]

Yeah, it's nice to stick it to Europe if we even can. I guess. It's great for the US steel workers. Great for Trump delivering on a campaign promise in PA. Great for left wing, communist labor unions.

Not so great for non-union, mom-n-pop construction companies (those conservatives Republicans supposedly represent) who don't have a margin of error the to equal the price of steel doubling to meet union overhead They go under, as do their employees. Not so great for consumers when the higher cost of steel is passed along.

Maybe we ought to consider the cotton/rice industry in the Deep South next and prop the rural South up as well.

And as a military retiree, I'd like a pay raise that equates to today's dollars and cost of living.

Anyone else?

Gunny. You know, all of us would like that to happen. But...realistically....It's not gonna happen for those of us who DO NOT WORK anymore, or are UNABLE to work to get a pay raise.
We'd be lying if we answered your question....No!

[Gunny]

Gunny. You know, all of us would like that to happen. But...realistically....It's not gonna happen for those of us who DO NOT WORK anymore, or are UNABLE to work to get a pay raise.
We'd be lying if we answered your question....No!Not my point. I'd like US steel to be a viable, vibrant industry and everybody be happy too, but the fact is, it could not compete on the World market for a variety of reasons. There's NO reason to artificially prop that industry up at the expense of others without propping EVERYONE up, which is a government controlled market. That's communism.

Free market competition is just that. Compete or die. US steel died. I'm all for cutting the rules that killed it out to put it on a level playing field to COMPETE. Not to get an unfair advantage. That's when it's no longer free market trade.

And it doesn't matter WHO is doing it. It's that it is being done. It actually kills me that because Trump is doing it conservatives are okay with a communist policy and the Dems who are commies to begin with haven't let out a peep just because it's Trump. Something REAL "Twilight Zone-ish" about that.

Lost in the mix is the impact it's going to have on our economy. THAT is the issue.

[Elessar]

S

If Trump wants make things "fair"? Make all these countries pay us back the debts we keep forgiving. Those alone would give us a trade surplus.

Another nail struck squarely on the head.

Where are France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, Iceland paying us back?
Where are the UK, Ireland and Russia paying us back?

Map the entire European mass...

We bailed them all out.

[Gunny]

Another nail struck squarely on the head.

Where are France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, Iceland paying us back?
Where are the UK, Ireland and Russia paying us back?

Map the entire European mass...

We bailed them all out.True enough. There's no love lost from me toward any of those countries that has been ungrateful, especially France. They turned semi-commie and on us as fast as they could. We bailed them out of 2 world wars and got stuck with the fiasco they made of French Indochina and all they'e done in return is vote against us in the UN. Shitty French leadership in Yugoslavia dragged that out and showed what the UN was worth as a military force.

Democrats forgave all their debts. Stupid. At the tie though, we were the World's leader in everything, and supplier of everything. The success of the Marshall Plan, as AT alluded to, was also its own undoing. We built all these countries back up and asked nothing in return yet they stuck it right to us. Germany's another sell-out.

However, none of that changes the situation on the ground NOW. They can fight back and no doubt will, at our expense. Winning some trade war means NOTHING to me if I'm priced right off the dinner table. Not just so one sector of our economy can be propped up by the government.

[Kathianne]

Can't wait for the price of canned goods to go up, Campbell's said the idea that it's 1 cent per can is wrong.

So we all see a few more dollars thanks to 'tax relief' but more than that is going to go to inflation. Buy a car? The list will be endless, but what it will mean are those 'protected industries' will get more $$, but the average family will be paying more than 'tax relief' gave them and that's called inflation.

Again, the government trying to regulate will be an economic slowdown.

However, my guess like that related to the gun talk of Wednesday's 'take the guns, then worry about due process...' will still result in those that support the current administration will continue to-after all, he's 'in their face...' this time they claim Europe. Those who are 'resist' and 'impeach' well that goes without saying. Those that wanted someone that was for smaller government, they will remain unhappy.

[LongTermGuy]

:dance:
`In case you missed it`

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/951221184565268480/qz4YUl3f_bigger.jpgMary  ‏ @AmericanHotLips (https://twitter.com/AmericanHotLips) 9h9 hours ago (https://twitter.com/AmericanHotLips/status/969671567184728064)



https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/72x72/1f602.pnghttps://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/72x72/1f602.pngAwwww China is upset that @realDonaldTrump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump) isnt letting USA bend over anymore on trade deals. Oh welllhttps://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/72x72/203c.pnghttps://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/72x72/1f60e.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXT3IcEXUAAkPrb.jpg



Sebastian Gorka DrG and 6 others follow


https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/948035343202127874/6Hy73xTK_bigger.jpgCali-Conservative‏ @CaliConsrvative (https://twitter.com/CaliConsrvative) 29m29 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/CaliConsrvative/status/969795544733241345)More



I support Trump trying to fix the problem of our terrifying trade deficits that cost us billions/yrWe have the single largest GDP in the world and the Liberal media acts like we need to bend over for China?! NO! AMERICA FIRST! AMERICAN STEEL ONLY! #TradeWar (https://twitter.com/hashtag/TradeWar?src=hash) #TradeWarsAreGood (https://twitter.com/hashtag/TradeWarsAreGood?src=hash)






https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/926303888365510656/IHt-GEhl_bigger.jpgLaura Ingraham‏Verified account @IngrahamAngle (https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle) 7h7 hours ago (https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/969692959439499264)More



Laura Ingraham Retweeted The Daily Beast
"Free mkt conservatives." That's really funny. Since when is producing billions in excess tonnage of steel & aluminum in order to distort the global marketplace an example of "free mkt" practices? That's what China did.

Laura Ingraham added,
The Daily BeastVerified account @thedailybeast
Free market conservatives turn on Trump after his call for steel and aluminum tariffs, reports @mattklewis http://thebea.st/2F7StbS

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I must be missing something here... why is president Trump leveling the playing field as far as "trade" BAD for America?

Are what you people saying that America getting fucked with a huge trade imbalance losing billions is a "good thing," and we should keep it that way?

[Kathianne]

I must be missing something here... why is president Trump leveling the playing field as far as "trade" BAD for America?

Are what you people saying that America getting fucked with a huge trade imbalance losing billions is a "good thing," and we should keep it that way?


From some pro-Trump economists:

http://thehill.com/opinion/international/376539-trump-must-think-twice-about-tariffs

[High_Plains_Drifter]

From some pro-Trump economists:

http://thehill.com/opinion/international/376539-trump-must-think-twice-about-tariffs
Ya, "the Hill" isn't exactly going to write anything pro Trump.

And these "pro-Trump enconomists," they wouldn't be the very same ones that have single digit approval numbers compared to president Trumps 51% would they?

He campaigned on this, it was one of his major talking points, to end massive trade imbalances with countries that have been screwing us out of billions for decades.

I can't for the life of me understand how that's a bad thing. They screw the hell out of us with tariffs and ship all their crap here, but we don't have a tariff on them and they don't let us send equivalent to them... and this is a GOOD THING?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/tariffs-on-steel-aluminum-are-long-overdue-2018-03-02

https://www.epi.org/press/trade-remedies-for-steel-and-aluminum-were-long-overdue/

[Kathianne]

Ya, "the Hill" isn't exactly going to write anything pro Trump, and I'd rather have facts than opinion.

And these "pro-Trump enconomists," they wouldn't be the very same ones that have single digit approval numbers compared to president Trumps 51% would they?

He campaigned on this, it was one of his major talking points, to end massive trade imbalances with countries that have been screwing out of billions for decades.

I can't for the life of me understand how that's a bad thing. They screw the hell out of us with tariffs and ship all their crap here, but we don't have a tariff on them and they don't let us send equivalent to them... and this is a GOOD THING?

I very much doubt many have criticized the media more than myself over the years. I can tell you the biases of nearly any mainstream or alternative media. In spite of all the well deserved criticism though, one must learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. That usually begins with the writers. Of course, if one just wants to hear or read their own opinion regurgitated back and then claim they cannot understand how anyone could disagree? I for one, can not respond to that.

The above, linked article was written by BY LARRY KUDLOW, ARTHUR LAFFER AND STEPHEN MOORE, whether published in the Hill or on Breitbart, their words are their words. None of these guys are 'anti-Trump.' Kudlow is the Hannity of economy writers.

[pete311]

You guys know we need allies in the world right? Right?

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I very much doubt many have criticized the media more than myself over the years. I can tell you the biases of nearly any mainstream or alternative media. In spite of all the well deserved criticism though, one must learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. That usually begins with the writers. Of course, if one just wants to hear or read their own opinion regurgitated back and then claim they cannot understand how anyone could disagree? I for one, can not respond to that.

The above, linked article was written by BY LARRY KUDLOW, ARTHUR LAFFER AND STEPHEN MOORE, whether published in the Hill or on Breitbart, their words are their words. None of these guys are 'anti-Trump.' Kudlow is the Hannity of economy writers.
Well I'm open to how facts as to how a trade imbalance not in our favor is good for America though, and that's what I'm asking. There's "opinions" on both sides, and you quoted me before I was able to insert a couple links contrary to your's...

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/tariffs-on-steel-aluminum-are-long-overdue-2018-03-02

Remember Pelosi said the tax cuts were "armagedon" too.

But just using simple logic, why isn't leveling trade with countries and stop the bleeding our economy and exports they have tariffs on, why is that a bad thing?

I just don't understand how that's bad.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

You guys know we need allies in the world right? Right?
Not a fraction as bad as they need us.

You know that right?

[pete311]

Not a fraction as bad as they need us.

You know that right?

China and Russia will gladly take our spot. That is what you get when you isolate yourself.

[Gunny]

I must be missing something here... why is president Trump leveling the playing field as far as "trade" BAD for America?

Are what you people saying that America getting fucked with a huge trade imbalance losing billions is a "good thing," and we should keep it that way?This is not leveling the playing field. This forcing a failed industry onto the world market and artificially propping it up by tariff. The World market isn't going to take it, and the people are going to suffer are US consumers of that market; which, since it is steel, means everyone.

US steel failed because it could not compete fairly on the world market. The World doesn't want to pay Union dues nor overpay union employees. Most of the World doesn't have that overhead. The Unions more that anything else priced our steel out the market. The World is not going to buckle to paying for it. They're going to jack their tariffs up on us.

If Trump wants to address the trade imbalance, fine. I'm all for it. Realistically and one that isn't going to have the consumer paying double within a year. Government mandated steel doesn't sit real well with me to begin with. This kind of like Obamacare only "different"? He's basically forcing domestic companies to by US steel or pay a penalty for it. A cost that will be passed on to the consumer.

Guess I can kiss that new Jeep I was thinking about goodbye. I ain't paying $50k for a Jeep next year I can get for $25k today. Somebody's got to pay for that union steel. Guess I'll just get a $500. Walmart bicycle instead. Or a horse.

[aboutime]

You guys know we need allies in the world right? Right?


We have our TRUE, HONEST allies in the World. They are not the same people, or countries who have been taking our BILLIONS for years, and treating us like crap with unfair economy tricks.

Trump knows who HE can trust, and who HE can't. This tactic is designed to WEED OUT the so-called friends who happily stab us in the back....while we shake their hands.

Sounds like I'm talking about YOU, Obama, and the Clinton's....Huh?

[Gunny]

Can't wait for the price of canned goods to go up, Campbell's said the idea that it's 1 cent per can is wrong.

So we all see a few more dollars thanks to 'tax relief' but more than that is going to go to inflation. Buy a car? The list will be endless, but what it will mean are those 'protected industries' will get more $$, but the average family will be paying more than 'tax relief' gave them and that's called inflation.

Again, the government trying to regulate will be an economic slowdown.

However, my guess like that related to the gun talk of Wednesday's 'take the guns, then worry about due process...' will still result in those that support the current administration will continue to-after all, he's 'in their face...' this time they claim Europe. Those who are 'resist' and 'impeach' well that goes without saying. Those that wanted someone that was for smaller government, they will remain unhappy.It's not about political philosophy and belief anymore. It's about choosing a side and being against whatever the other side is for.

[Kathianne]

It's not about political philosophy and belief anymore. It's about choosing a side and being against whatever the other side is for.

I don't think there's anyone here who's changed positions regarding the last election. Indeed, when it comes down to the next one, I expect nearly all will repeat. Yes, they'll say, "There were some things that have improved the economy, but. . ." Others, "Well there are things that have been done, but I don't think the alternative is as good. . ." and those that will say, "Flat out fascism, resist! and impeach!"

I am not expecting different.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

This is not leveling the playing field.
Why isn't it about leveling the playing field?


This forcing a failed industry onto the world market and artificially propping it up by tariff. The World market isn't going to take it, and the people are going to suffer are US consumers of that market; which, since it is steel, means everyone.
Isn't the SC going to hear the case against unions? I heard something about that, and if they decide no one should be forced to pay union dues, then why couldn't our steel industry compete then?

I don't think Trump is so ignorant to know that we have to be able to produce our steel at a competitive price, and if busting the unions is what it takes, then that's what they'll have to do, and that could be right around the corner.

I agree, unions suck. They bled Detroit dry, and California. Their day of reckoning could be now.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

China and Russia will gladly take our spot. That is what you get when you isolate yourself.
I'd rather be isolated than have my nation screwed like a red headed step child. And no one can say for sure what will happen if we level things out. It's all conjecture and speculation. If we don't buy China's crap, then they know their own economy is going to head down the toilet, same with Russia. It's not like if we level the playing field that AUTOMATICALLY America will be in the shitter. This is the opinion of you DOOM AND GLOOM Trump haters. You people don't want him to have a win no matter what he does, it's ARMAGEDDON... OH MY GOD... THE SKY IS FALLING... THE SKY IS FALLING... pfft... whatever.

Our trade deals need a complete top to bottom reform, whether the rest of the world likes it or not. America's motto isn't, "GO AHEAD AND FUCK US, WE LIKE IT." Maybe it is to you America hating leftists, but not the rest of us.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Steel worker speaks out in support of Trump's tariff plan
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5744357014001/?playlist_id=930909787001#sp=show-clips

[Kathianne]

Steel worker speaks out in support of Trump's tariff plan


http://video.foxnews.com/v/5744357014001/?playlist_id=930909787001#sp=show-clips

Yup and the farmers are in favor of ethanol and other subsidies. Go figure. Protectionism is great for the 'protected,' at least until the piper demands to be paid.

[aboutime]

Protectionism is only in the eye of the beholder. The president is keeping his promise, and many are mad at him for daring to THINK OF AMERICANS first.

What the tariffs on steel, and aluminum are doing is...FINALLY, telling our neighbors, and competitors around the World....We are bringing home our Industrial Giants at last. Over more than fourty years...our Industrial base has been depleted BECAUSE...other nations could UNDERCUT AMERICAN Steel, and Aluminum manufacturing because OUR POLITICIANS gave away our ability to be independent by demanding HIGH CORPORATE TAXES on American companies that sent them OUT OF OUR COUNTRY.

The president is bringing them back. If you are an American who cares. What is wrong with that?

Advantages and Disadvantages of Trade Protectionism - Video ...
https://study.com/academy/.../avantages-and-disadvantages-of-trade-protectionism.ht...
Countries want to win the game of international trade by exporting more than they import. Some countries pursue trade protectionism to do this. In this lesson, you'll learn about the advantages and disadvantages of this strategy and related concepts.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Yup and the farmers are in favor of ethanol and other subsidies. Go figure. Protectionism is great for the 'protected,' at least until the piper demands to be paid.
What does "protectionism" have to do with trade imbalance?

[Gunny]

Why isn't it about leveling the playing field?


Isn't the SC going to hear the case against unions? I heard something about that, and if they decide no one should be forced to pay union dues, then why couldn't our steel industry compete then?

I don't think Trump is so ignorant to know that we have to be able to produce our steel at a competitive price, and if busting the unions is what it takes, then that's what they'll have to do, and that could be right around the corner.

I agree, unions suck. They bled Detroit dry, and California. Their day of reckoning could be now.Here's the point I am trying to make. I'm all for addressing lopsided trade deals. I'm all for whoever is doing it, doing it. It's not about Trump to me. It's about HOW he is doing it that is the issue.

I have ZERO problem with Trump removing restrictions placed on the steel industry that put it at a disadvantage provided they don't just destroy the environment. We always act on abuse, not use. I don't like abuse. I have no problem with use.

I have NO problem with gutting the trade unions at all. Their overhead priced them out of business. The electrical union here in SA got broken down because of it. There were enough smaller contractors willing to work without the overhead that paid for a bureaucracy that also collected dues to pay for itself. At the same time, the workers DO need protection from unscrupulous employers. Anyway, cutting out the cost of the unions would go a long way.

Also, hearing a case on whether or not a person has to join a union doesn't make the unions go away.

If everything possible by law is done to enable the US steel industry to compete on the world market on a level playing field, I have no problem with it. My personal opinion is payroll alone will preclude it being able to, but that is just opinion.

What I have a problem with is being a conservative, voting for a Republican who is implementing a democrat policy by forcing every one to play to an artificial price for steel (tariff) that is there solely to prop up that industry. There is nothing fair nor level about that. It's definitely government overreach.

[Black Diamond]

I've read Reagan had a protectionist streak. All for now. On vacation.

[Kathianne]

What does "protectionism" have to do with trade imbalance?

You have to buy into the whole 'trade imbalance' argument. Ignore both the industries failure to keep up with modernization to control production costs and quality; along with the differences in wages between American workers-union especially-and overseas.

Then there's the whole subargument he makes about allies vs others, when the largest imported steel to America is from Canada and Mexico-well I guess the argument can be made that these are truly our enemies-right? Invasion and all? Meanwhile, China, we get less than 2%, same with most European allies/enemies.

So your imbalance is with Canada #1 and Mexico #2.

[aboutime]

You have to buy into the whole 'trade imbalance' argument. Ignore both the industries failure to keep up with modernization to control production costs and quality; along with the differences in wages between American workers-union especially-and overseas.

Then there's the whole subargument he makes about allies vs others, when the largest imported steel to America is from Canada and Mexico-well I guess the argument can be made that these are truly our enemies-right? Invasion and all? Meanwhile, China, we get less than 2%, same with most European allies/enemies.

So your imbalance is with Canada #1 and Mexico #2.

Kathianne. Remember NAFTA? The only nations, the U.S. being one of them, that had any kind of advantage was Canada, and Mexico. Nobody, not even the president is calling THEM our enemy.
NAFTA's Impact on U.S. Workers. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market. ... The vast majority of workers who lost jobs from NAFTA suffered a permanent loss of income.Dec 9, 2013
NAFTA's Impact on U.S. Workers | Economic Policy Institute
www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market.

By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers, which had driven the expansion of the middle class since the end of World War II. The result has been 20 years of stagnant wages and the upward redistribution of income, wealth and political power.

[Kathianne]

Kathianne. Remember NAFTA? The only nations, the U.S. being one of them, that had any kind of advantage was Canada, and Mexico. Nobody, not even the president is calling THEM our enemy.
NAFTA's Impact on U.S. Workers. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market. ... The vast majority of workers who lost jobs from NAFTA suffered a permanent loss of income.Dec 9, 2013
NAFTA's Impact on U.S. Workers | Economic Policy Institute
www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/ (http://www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/)

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market.

By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers, which had driven the expansion of the middle class since the end of World War II. The result has been 20 years of stagnant wages and the upward redistribution of income, wealth and political power.


Nah, can't expect someone like me to remember NAFTA and what has been said regarding Mexico and 'maybe' Canada too, who knows? Yep, go back to the primaries when trade protectionism was brought up and see what I said then.

As I've been saying, there's no one changing their minds on this. Though perhaps bringing up the Marshall Plan as reason to back Trump as was happening last night, might be a bit misdirected? But it feels good to 'stick it to them,' especially when it's your President doing so, right?

[aboutime]

Nah, can't expect someone like me to remember NAFTA and what has been said regarding Mexico and 'maybe' Canada too, who knows? Yep, go back to the primaries when trade protectionism was brought up and see what I said then.

As I've been saying, there's no one changing their minds on this. Though perhaps bringing up the Marshall Plan as reason to back Trump as was happening last night, might be a bit misdirected? But it feels good to 'stick it to them,' especially when it's your President doing so, right?

You assume too much Kathianne. By the way. Trump is also YOUR president. I am saddened to see how you feel so good about patronizing me as you did. Finally. I go with factual History. Not fabrication, rumor, or conspiracy theories. Not trying to change your mind. You've obviously made that up, no matter what anyone says to the contrary.

[Gunny]

Nah, can't expect someone like me to remember NAFTA and what has been said regarding Mexico and 'maybe' Canada too, who knows? Yep, go back to the primaries when trade protectionism was brought up and see what I said then.

As I've been saying, there's no one changing their minds on this. Though perhaps bringing up the Marshall Plan as reason to back Trump as was happening last night, might be a bit misdirected? But it feels good to 'stick it to them,' especially when it's your President doing so, right?Hmmm... Honestly? there IS a part of me that is more than happy to stick to any-and-everyone who got to stick it to us for 16 of the last 24 years. So I DO understand the sentiment.

I also understand it means nothing in real time. Things are what they are today, and need to be dealt with as such. The Marshall Plan? I usually am the one who brings it up. As a model for how to nation-build right. It worked. Having said that, the exploitation was NOT one-sided. All trade deals post WWII favored us while everyone remained dependent on us. Now imagine that was us, and I'm quite sure that built some resentment. Once these nations broke away, they wanted a fair deal on the market and weren't forced to buy our goods at our prices.

Meanwhile, we were right on top of European exploitation everywhere in the world. When the ME got divided, we got Iran, and propped an unpopular leader up for cut-rate oil. Carter fixed that deal for us. We got stuck in Vietnam by the UN after the French bailed and along with US troops came the Goodyear tire company, John Deere, and any other US company looking to exploit the Vietnamese. Our hands aren't exactly squeaky clean.

What I DON'T hear is WHY and HOW there is a trade deficit. I mean, I understand why and how, but I don't hear it coming from the decision makers bitching about it. You cannot address a situation with understanding why and how that situation exists, and what it takes to counter it. For example ... killing terrorists address those terrorists being killed, but not the how and why they are terrorists; which, has to be addressed to combat the terrorism itself.

You mentioned a few reasons. Wages is biggest to me. Lots of cheap labor everywhere in the world but HERE. They're happy to have a job at all. Our labor has to have medical, a comfortable wage, retirement. That drives up cost. Our steel industry hasn't been full force since the early 70s. Add modernization to the overhead.

I don't say it can't work. I say it won't work because of the reasons you and I mentioned. I think if we, as a Nation, want to address this trade imbalance, then let's start by using a commodity that is viable NOW. Something we already have and can actually deal on the free market with.

Otherwise, we're going to end up with an artificial steel industry the same as we have an artificial oil industry.

[Elessar]

I am dead-set against 'unions' where to be able to work in or with an industry, it is
demanded you join the union.

I college, I had a weekend job with an independent riverside operation that loaded
coal, gravel, and salt onto barges in the Monongahela River. Was running an end loader
and learning to use welders and torches on metal.

A Union coal strike shut us down; union truckers with rifles blocking the gates.
The same strike shut down the night job I had in a well-known steakhouse. Nobody
had income because of the strike. Coal not being mined, truckers idle, railroads idle.

Unions suck!

When I took the GS-11 position after retiring from Active Duty, an option was to
join a federal employee's union. I refused it.

[Black Diamond]

I am dead-set against 'unions' where to be able to work in or with an industry, it is
demanded you join the union.

I college, I had a weekend job with an independent riverside operation that loaded
coal, gravel, and salt onto barges in the Monongahela River. Was running an end loader
and learning to use welders and torches on metal.

A Union coal strike shut us down; union truckers with rifles blocking the gates.
The same strike shut down the night job I had in a well-known steakhouse. Nobody
had income because of the strike. Coal not being mined, truckers idle, railroads idle.

Unions suck!

When I took the GS-11 position after retiring from Active Duty, an option was to
join a federal employee's union. I refused it.
I don't see trump being against right to work states.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Here's the point I am trying to make. I'm all for addressing lopsided trade deals. I'm all for whoever is doing it, doing it. It's not about Trump to me. It's about HOW he is doing it that is the issue.

I have ZERO problem with Trump removing restrictions placed on the steel industry that put it at a disadvantage provided they don't just destroy the environment. We always act on abuse, not use. I don't like abuse. I have no problem with use.

I have NO problem with gutting the trade unions at all. Their overhead priced them out of business. The electrical union here in SA got broken down because of it. There were enough smaller contractors willing to work without the overhead that paid for a bureaucracy that also collected dues to pay for itself. At the same time, the workers DO need protection from unscrupulous employers. Anyway, cutting out the cost of the unions would go a long way.

Also, hearing a case on whether or not a person has to join a union doesn't make the unions go away.

If everything possible by law is done to enable the US steel industry to compete on the world market on a level playing field, I have no problem with it. My personal opinion is payroll alone will preclude it being able to, but that is just opinion.

What I have a problem with is being a conservative, voting for a Republican who is implementing a democrat policy by forcing every one to play to an artificial price for steel (tariff) that is there solely to prop up that industry. There is nothing fair nor level about that. It's definitely government overreach.
I get your point.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

There's one thing that probably should be mentioned, and that's that the kenyan imposed such draconian restrictions and regulations on American industry that jobs and businesses just up and vanished, and the muslim told us that was the NEW NORM, and that those jobs "wouldn't be coming back." I swear to God that sack of infected puss HATED America. Well president Trump has been on a regulations SLASHING campaign, and this has resulted in bonuses and new business growth, because of less operating costs. He has freed up American industry to do what we do best, and that's take advantage of our capitalist economy.

And I'm not referring to just the steel industry, I'm talking about all American manufacturing. It is Trump's desire to make American products competitive on the global market again, and "Made In America" used to mean it was of a higher quality.

Aside from that, I don't see any reason what so ever that's logical as to why America should allow massive trade imbalances from other nations to continue.

I guess I just like that "America first" idea, and if you want to call me a protectionist or isolationist, go for it, I couldn't care less.