« Subliminal Manipulation of Votes (updated 8aug19) | Main | Sandbox - 2aug19 »

02 August 2019

Comments

Steven Frisch

Yeah the problem is that, as you said, the Chinese are not paying. The US consumer is paying. This is nothing but a tax on American consumers.

According to market analysts at both the Center for Tax Policy and the Brookings Institute, even taking into account the market adjustments distributors and retails are adopting, the average American under the new tariffs imposed by the President pays an additional $831. The average savings from the 2017 tax "cut" was $930. I

In short, the Presidents new tariff policy already in effect has wiped out the "benefit" of the tax cut. It is pretty clear that the President either does not understand how this works, which is scary enough, or that he is intentionally lying to the American people and betting their disdain for China and Mexico will outweigh their own pocket book.

Consumers pay more with tariffs, period. The amount of the newly imposed tariffs is roughly $3 billion per month. That is before the potential next wave of tariffs Trump is threatening, which would have approximately 4 times the existing impact.

I would be the first to agree that China is essentially ripping US companies and consumers off by requiring American companies manufacturing in China to either share their technology and processes, or blatantly stealing their intellectual property.

The answer to that problem might start with looking at the best practices developed by the US-China Business Council on IP protection and negotiating sanctions against patent and IP infringers in China....but I would not hold my breath.

https://www.uschina.org/sites/default/files/USCBC%20Best%20Practices%20for%20Intellectual%20Property%20Protection.pdf

Todd Juvinall

Tariffs raise the cost of something so if you don't want to pay it then buy American. Look at the "bolts" fiasco of the Bay Bridge. Chinese made and rotten. American steel was a bit more but it would not have had to be replaced. So China needs to stop devaluing their currency and compete fairly or these tariffs will wreck their economy. Our economy will take it.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 03 August 2019 at 08:45 AM

So Todd, do you believe you have a right to determine what other Americans should pay for consumer goods? Using your logic I could say we should only purchase goods from countries with what I consider to be fair labor or environmental practices.

I am a somewhat rare animal, a free trade Democrat, but the underlying question here is really one of how much government interference in trade regulation do we want to support as a nation?

Historically, meaning up until TRUMP, Republicans supported free trade.

Republicans supported free trade based on the principle that markets would inherently find the most favorable pricing and that freer markets encourage competition, innovation and entrepreneurship, and thus lower prices for consumers.

The theory was that because the US was a global leader in innovation, patents and efficiency, US GDP would benefit from growth in global trade, and data proves that has been true, with gains in market share and increased economic activity outweighing losses in other areas of the economy.

Republicans also supported free trade on the theory that there is an inherent link between property and freedom--that encouraging people to own property and capital creates governance systems that protect individual rights--a theory I share.

The new Republican position seems to be that we will adopt absolutely any policy that increases the turnout for our base--disaffected white middle class voters who fear losing position in society--regardless of whether or not those positions are intellectually consistent with our previously stated small government, free market, low regulation principles.

Steven Frisch

BTW, it is not just consumers being harmed by tariff policy.

Agricultural producers have seen a 50% drop in the net income over the last decade, most of it in the last 2 years (so there is collective political blame for this trend), and the impact is disproportionately felt by small farmers. The federal government has pledged $16 billion in new farm subsidies (adding to the deficit and debt) but analysis shows the vast majority of the subsidies in the new Market Facilitation program go to large vertically integrated agricultural operations rather than small farmers (even adjusted for commodity production numbers.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/farm-bankruptcies-rise-as-trumps-trade-war-grinds-on/?utm_term=.3eaa1c2d70cd&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-trump-farm-bailout-20190528-story.html

Steven Frisch

Oh, and another BTW, that $16 billion in new federal Ag subsidies, on top of the $20 billion per year in previously existing Ag subsidies, is 6 times higher than the $6 federal renewable energy subsidies that so many here oppose. (According to the EIA total direct energy subsidy is $12 billion split roughly 50/50 between renewables and fossil fuels.)

Now don't get me wrong, I am not against subsidy, but some here might want to think about the consistency of their position supporting the Trump tariff policy leading to subsidy but opposing renewable energy subsidy.

Walt

Thanks to Trump's policies, there is RECORD EMPLOYMENT.
Jobs have come back. You know, the ones "O" said were NEVER coming back.
So we pay a few bucks more for buying "made in the U.S.A.",
And not supporting child labor, and any other shithole nation labor practices LIBS would go blind with rage with if done here.
Yet no problem with Chinese made cell phones at human rights violating labor practices.
Yup,, bitch about those well deserved tariffs.
Non of our goods go in free of charge... Anywhere.

Steven Frisch

Yep, we are creating jobs....https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2019/07/05/trump-is-falling-almost-1-million-jobs-short-vs-obama/#45a9eb8caa7c

Barry Pruett

Steve. Don’t you think that Trump’s point is more of using our strong economy in a way to affect foreign policy? I think the subsidies are viewed as to be temporary just to ease the suffering while Trump gets some better trade deals.

Barry Pruett

Once the trade deal is done the subsidies should end one would hope, but then again even thinking that a subsidy will ever go away may be a little naive. That said, renewables will nearly always have to be subsidized. There is not even a hope that such subsidy would ever be temporary.

Walt

Hay... Steve.🖕.... Your boy "O" has record UNEMPLOYMENT.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/157005000-employed-june-19th-record-trump-era
"A record 157,005,000 people were employed in June, the most since February and the 19th record of Trump's presidency, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday.

And the economy added a strong 224,000 jobs in June, well above the estimate of 160,000.

The unemployment rate, the lowest in 50 years, ticked up a tenth of a point to 3.7 percent."

But keep looking at anti Trump stories. They feed you the unicorn shit you love to slop down.

Todd Juvinall

I am all in for free trade. But it also must be fair. China and many other countries have outsmarted our past trade reps and milked our people for trillions of dollars. China alone has seen us transfer five trillion to them. That is how they built their cities. And they also stole our intellectual stuff without recompense. So without tariffs over the years before Trump all the angst of this massive transfer of our wealth to other countries was applauded by the likes of Frisch and his ilk. As far as I can tell without FAIR trade, America is a patsy and the small amounts being added to the costs are nothing compared to what has already taken place. America has the hottest economy because now we see the return of companies and jobs because of Trumps' policies.

Steve Frisch

Hey Walt, I don’t expect you to be particularly statistically literate, but the graph in the article based on the real numbers kind of says it all...we had a gut wrenching dip with the Great Recession and jobs have been growing since then, under both Obama and Trump.

Don’t get me wrong, I welcome all job growth, and really like a 3.7% unemployment rate, but it is inevitable that the total number employed goes up over time. Even though the total number employed in June was a record the % of the US work force employed stayed the same. Looking at month to month unemployment can also be pretty deceptive, those figures, like month to month GDP, are often retroactively adjusted.

The relative rate of unemployment change has been roughly the same under both Obama and Trump.

Steve Frisch

Barry, if the case is that we are positioning to renegotiate our trade agreements with China then we should be talking about that issue. The idea that the US is in a stronger renegotiating position is questionable.

First and foremost as George points out, the manufacturer does not pay the tariffs, distribution, retailers and consumers do. Trumps strategy kind of reminds me of that classic scene in Blazing Saddles where Sheriff Bart holds the gun to his own head and threatens to kill the Sheriff.

China has a command and control government and economy. They can change policy re: trade agreements in a matter of days, whereas it takes us years due to Congressional approval of trade agreements. The only lever we really have that is under executive control is tariffs. That may temporarily reduce US purchases from Chinese manufacturers but only at the point where US pricing competes, and we are no where near that point yet.

China could retaliate by simply continuing to raise tariffs on US goods imported into China to match US tariffs, further restricting markets for US manufacturers. They could further restrict US business operations in China, or even suspend the licenses for US businesses to operate in China.

China also holds a little over $1 trillion in us debt in treasury bills, and potentially controls even more through wealth funds around the world. If they want to raise funds to offset losses in manufacturing they can simply sell debt and reposition it into other instruments like German or French bonds. That would deflate and destabilize the US treasury market.

Are you confident that the US is ready to take that pain, especially since we are long overdue for a recession?

This is a very dangerous game and China, due to their ability to act quickly and decisively, holds more cards than we do. This is why trade wars benefit no one.

Todd Juvinall

No the rates are well below Obama. You libs think people are stupid. If Obama had any smarts on the economy he never showed it. And the idiots he surrounded himself with were academics who never ran a company or had to pay employees. Trump brought a new vigor to the scene and Americans are responding. That was not the case with O. Also I suggest you look at the unemployment rates in Europe as well as the fuel prices. Seems to me if they took Trump's advice they might prosper.

Steve Frisch

Todd, there were some tariffs in place before Trump raised them. I never applauded the transfer of wealth to other countries.

Todd Juvinall

Whatever you say. Sure I believe you. NOT!

Steve Frisch

I can’t help it if your are innumerate Todd. The rate of unemployment decline has been roughly the same since 2011. Readers can look at the graphs in the article, source the numbers, and make up their own minds.

Todd Juvinall

One last point. I say we hold the cards in any dispute with China. They are again for the most part and in the third century in the rural areas. They need our money more than we need to import their crap.

Walt

WOW!! A graph! BFD.
Stevey "Wonder" is trying to rewrite history.
Forget we had to live through the "O"loser years? Not that long ago ,fool...
Had to keep moving the goal post, and messing with the numbers to make Husain look good.
That great plan to socialize healthcare was the biggest job killer. Guess you forgot that.
Burger flipping jobs for everyone!

Steve Frisch

Actually a pretty good case could be made that they don’t need our money more than we need their markets. At a minimum we don’t know that to be true and it’s a pretty massive gamble to simply assume that if they cut exports to the US they could not make that up from other trading partners. China has invested heavily in global infrastructure just to free themselves from needing American markets for their goods.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative

Todd Juvinall

So if they are freeing themselves from us a "trade war" on their part is unnecessary. American goods and monetary means are the top of the world. All others are small potatoes. We are in the driver's seat in all this. Now that manufacturers are returning and plants opening we just might be the cat's meow again.

Steve Frisch

I always love how Todd and Walt can always just blabber without bothering to actually read anything to improve their base of knowledge. They are so indoctrinated they are no longer capable of critical thinking or even carrying on a conversation. That’s what makes this site so much fun; it’s like a zoo for reactionaries.

Steve Frisch

Todd you do realize that if the belt and road strategy works not only do we lose markets in China we also lose markets in every country China has trade agreements with where they are building and owning the infrastructure right?

Todd Juvinall

Thanks Steve Frisch for never disappointing us on how a liberal reacts when defeated in debate. You cannot refute our points so you personally attack. We see your ploy all the way to your clown car candidates for President. So thank you for proving me right. you are stumped and cannot admit I defeated your arguments here. Your lack of critical thinking and knowledge on tariffs is not lost on all of us.

Walt

That's it Steve, when you lose the battle insult the intelligence of others.
Facts are not on your side.
That's what people do who don't really work for a living.
GOD help you when OPM runs out.

Walt

OH.. When is the next trip to China? Have you registered as an agent for a foreign nation?

Steve Frisch

Seems to me that Walt gave me the finger and falsely stated that I applaud the transfer of wealth to China long before I pointed out your innumeracy.

Steve Frisch

Yeah, Walt, no keeping up with your sharp mind. You’re the one who said fuck you first. It’s right up there for all to see.

But I see my work is done here. What could have been an interesting conversation has devolved to troglodytes spewing.

Walt

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/429643-the-verdict-is-in-trumps-tariffs-are-working-bigly
"
U.S. manufacturing is once again in the news. New data shows America’s factories adding 261,000 jobs from January 2018 to January 2019. In the State of the Union, President Trump emphasized the urgency of confronting predatory trade from countries like China.

There’s no doubt that America’s manufacturers are currently rebounding. The tariffs that President Trump imposed a year ago on steel, aluminum, solar panels and washing machines have already created more than 11,000 new jobs.


These new gigs include those in steel mills being announced by Nucor, Steel Dynamics and others. There’s also roughly a dozen companies planning new solar panel manufacturing facilities in Florida, Maryland and Oregon.

Even U.S. car companies are doing well at home. Ford’s North American operations posted a $2 billion profit in the fourth quarter, while GM’s North American net income topped $3 billion. Major steel consumers like Caterpillar and United Technologies have also reported strong results for 2018."

As for LIB news, they will NEVER give Trump the credit he's due.

Walt

Yup the good ol' finger. Just says your full of shit.

Steve Frisch

Let’s ignore the dick measurers for a minute and ask another important question (perhaps Barry or George will answer.

So far Trump has engaged in this retaliatory tariff action under his executive authority, but at what point does US trade policy become a Congressional issue since Trumps actions are clearly beginning to intrude into broader policy implementation issues like how we enforced global trade agreements, which are treaties, and security policy?

I think the idea that a policy that has such potential long terms impacts needs to be handled by Congress as well as the executive, and that it is long past time for Congress to start stepping in.

Isn’t this precisely the type of unilateral executive authority that many here opposed when Obama engaged in or, for example in the case of the Paris Accord, which was not a treaty?

Walt

That's the spirit, ignore the facts. Now bitch that Trump is using the same tools your boy "O" did. But this time, properly.
Using them to promote the U.S., instead intentional harm.

Think about that Steve, Remember "O"'s plan to "fundamentally transform"?
That means destroy what already exists. And he did a fine job of the destruction.
So go ahead and deny Trump has done a great job of rebuilding this nation despite the LIB attempts to help "O" finish the job.

Barry Pruett

Establishment has been more interested in partisanship than actually doing anything. Obama had the same problem. Congress will never do anything. Now that impeachment is always used for an improper purpose, the executive has free rein as crying impeachment for dumb reasons cheapens it. Thank you congress and the congressional democrats and congressional republicans under Gingrich. Congress did this to itself. We now live in an age of a relatively unchecked executive. 🤷🏻‍♂️

George Rebane

In the field of job creation, it might be prudent to discount the creation of jobs after the dip, because those were in essence the recovery of pre-existing jobs that happens in all post-recession phases, even Obama's slowest on record. New jobs credits should go to those created that re-established and then maintained or exceeded the pre-recession trendline that bespeaks of growth and low unemployment. This is akin to the recovery graph I described here -
https://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2014/06/the-recovery-rigmarole.html

Todd Juvinall

Wa;t, you nailed the dude. He is justly defeated here and swore to move on but there he is again! He posted a bunch of personal attacks on my blog but he was over the top nasty so I booteed those comments. I think Frisch has Tourettes but is in denial. He knows as much about trade and tariffs as he does about running a restaurant.

Don Bessee

Lets not forget the role devaluation of the chi com currency has in getting more bang for your American buck. It hit its 2019 low this week so that drops the cost from the Chinese manufacturer at the source as an offset to some of the tariffs.

;-)

Bill Tozer

On tariffs

Generally, tariffs are anathema to conservatives and many on the right have been rightly accused of selling our souls out to Trump on this issue. “Nobody wins a trade war” is one of those old sayings we all take for granted. Tariffs in and of themselves are not a trade war, evidenced by a Thomas Jefferson’s State of the Union address where he declared the elimination of certain taxes because tariffs were enough to fund the Treasury.

One could make an argument that the reason we have a President DJT instead of a President HRC is because of NAFTA. Using my best Ross Perot voice, that “great sucking sound we here” was due (in no small measure) to NAFTA.

After 3 years of hearing ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’, what we are actually seeing is ‘China, China, China’.....and seeing China everywhere. I personally feel there is no incentive for China to sign any meaning trade deals with the USA now as they know Trump will not be in office forever and they can simply wait it out until a more amenable President comes along and things get back to business as usual.

It’s it worth paying higher prices in steele products to have a steele mill reopen in the Rust belt? Is it worth having a product stamped Made in America that comes with higher prices? The answer is depending on who you ask.

Back to the Great Sucking Sound, Congresswoman Dingle (D-Mich) was rather disappointed the morning after the Detroit debates precisely because NAFTA was not front and center. Yes, the consumer pays, but how do we compete without using the tools in the toolbox? What about those shuttered factories dotting the landscape like tombstones?

I always wondered why every Trump rally ends with the Rolling Stones “You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you get what you need.” Maybe this is why.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/debbie-dingle-trump-china-democrats-2020-debates

Walt

Looks like Trump is hitting Steve's buddies in China right where it counts.
https://www.npr.org/2019/07/15/741735791/chinas-economy-falters-slowest-growth-in-nearly-3-decades
"China's economy grew at the slowest pace in 27 years, as the trade war with the United States takes a toll."

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)