Posted on 08/05/2019 1:02:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
China announced on Tuesday that it has suspended purchases of US agricultural products in retaliation for a “serious violation” of agreements between its President Xi Jinping and his counterpart Donald Trump.
Trump’s announcement last week that the US would put a new 10 per cent tariff on US$300 billion worth of imports from China was “a serious violation of the consensus of the heads of state of the two countries”, state news agency Xinhua said in a report issued soon after midnight.
China “has not ruled out import tariffs on US agricultural products purchased after August 3, and related Chinese companies have suspended purchasing US agricultural products,” Xinhua said.
“It is hoped that the US will conscientiously implement the consensus reached at the meeting between the heads of state of China and the United States, and have the confidence to implement the commitments to create the necessary conditions for cooperation in the agricultural fields between the two countries,” the report added.
After the two presidents held a summit during the G20 in Osaka, Japan in June, Xinhua reported that the two leaders had agreed to resume economic and trade negotiations, and that the US said it would not impose any new tariffs on Chinese products.
Trump told reporters after the meeting that: “We’re holding back on tariffs and they’re going to buy farm products”, adding that his meeting with Xi was “far better than expected.
Negotiations since the June meeting – including high-level talks in Shanghai last week between Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He, US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin – failed to produce any breakthrough concessions, prompting Trump to announce the new tariffs shortly after the US officials returned to Washington.
(Excerpt) Read more at scmp.com ...
American workers are not a factor. We spend money to get value for the $$$ spent. Overpaying just to pay americans who are not competative is not capitalism. You are a good socialist and must be happy with Bernie et al who spout your marxist/socialist garbage all the time
The reason there is competition from all over the world is that the workers are competative. We are near full employment and factories are producing lots of goods they can competitively sell. America is manufacturing all sorts of high priced excellent quality technologically superior products.
Sometimes the government will subsidize to avoid overproduction of one crop to encourage the production of another, again with an eye towards making food economical for the masses to keep the population from starving.
-PJ
This utter contempt you display for the US worker is why we need a tariff to protect us from insane lunatic radicals like you. BTW K. Marx, like you, was a free trader.
I have an idea maybe the GOP should use this as their campaign slogan in '20
"Overpaying just to pay Americans who are not competitive is not capitalism."
What do you think?
With that gem of a slogan I am sure we could lose over 100 seats in congress. Maybe more.
Riddle me this — When an American purchases an Apple Computer, it does not represent the U.S. Congress’ trading with the Chinese government. It represents an American citizen’s engaging in peaceable, voluntary exchange, through intermediaries, with a Chinese computer assembler. When voluntary exchange occurs, it means that both parties are better off in their own estimation — not Trump’s estimation or Dell’s estimation. I’d like to hear the moral case for third-party interference with such an exchange.
And think about it, by trying to save jobs for one industry, have you ever considered the increased prices that flow on to consumers ( yes, AMERICAN CONSUMERS ) causing them to have less money in their pockets?
Let’s delve a bit into the politics of trade tariffs. Whom do we see spending the most resources lobbying for tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum? Is it American users of steel and aluminum, such as Harley-Davidson and John Deere? Or is it United States Steel Corp. and Alcoa?
Of course it’s U.S. Steel and Alcoa. They benefit from tariffs by being able to sell their products at higher prices. Harley-Davidson and John Deere lose by having to pay higher prices for their inputs, steel and aluminum, and their customers lose by having to pay higher product prices.
The ruse used to promote producer interests through tariff policy is concern about our large trade deficit. It’s true that we have a large current account trade deficit. However, that’s matched EXACTLY BY A LARGE CAPITAL ACCOUNT SURPLUS.
Translated, that means Americans buy more goods from other countries than they buy from us; that’s our current account deficit. But other countries find our investment climate attractive and invest more in the U.S. than we invest in other countries; that’s our CAPITAL ACCOUNT SURPLUS.
Have you ever wondered why foreigners (yes, Chinese included) are willing to invest far more money in NY, Texas and California than they are willing to invest in Argentina and Venezuela?
Do you think it’s because they like North Americans better than they like South Americans? No. We’ve always had an attractive investment climate, and we’ve had current account deficits and capital account surpluses throughout most of our nation’s history. In fact, the only time we had a sustained current account trade surplus was during the Great Depression, when we had a surplus in nine out of 10 years, with 1936 being the lone exception.
Typical hypocrite GOPer. All subsidies are wrong and not capitalistic. Right Bert?
RE : YES
What’s the end result of this?
Then you are prepared to pay nearly double the price for household products and other items.
Then American car companies for one, that assemble cars in countries to SELL WITHIN those countries will have to assemble them here and ship them over there.
Yep, that’s gonna make our products competitively priced.
Don't even go there. You have absolutely no Constitutional right to free trade with any foreign entity what so ever. Actually the opposite is true. So get over it.
The good news is you do have the right to free trade between the many states and with citizens of the USA, inside the USA, which should be enough for any Patriot to make a buck.
Double LOL!!!! Why stop there, why not triple or quadruple!!!
RE: Why stop there, why not triple or quadruple!!!
Yes, you are willing to pay those prices? If so, be my guest. Most Americans who don’t have your wealth won’t.
For those with a brain everyone agrees prices will be higher post tariff, which is the whole point. ‘Our’ tariffs are inflationary, decrease the trade deficit, increase tax revenue and increase domestic employment, and ‘their’ tariffs do the opposite and are deflationary, increase the trade deficit, decrease tax revenue and decrease domestic employment. It’s not hard to understand for most. So again prices are higher at first then become lower later on as domestic supplies kick in. The higher cost will be the difference in US labor/regs minus cheaper shipping costs. I’d estimate 5-7% higher. But look to quality to go up too. Yes, the one time inflation is worth it to me and a lot of other patriots.
RE: You have absolutely no Constitutional right to free trade with any foreign entity what so ever.
I never mentioned anything about the constitution, only the WISDOM of government interference in the free exchange of goods.
You might think you are benefiting Americans, but I don’t think you have thought through the unintended consequence of the policy you advocate.
This is not an argument about who loves this country more and who cares about our economy more. This is an argument about the WISDOM of a policy.
We both love this country, and we both want this country to prosper. but we do not see eye to eye on HOW TO GO ABOUT ACHIEVING THIS PROSPERITY.
You are not wise, no you are a myopic globalist corporate tool.
Sure, in theory, In theory, the increased cost of bringing foreign goods into the country will translate into higher sales of domestic products. However, tariffs in the real world can harm the buying public and may sometimes even harm the very companies they are supposed to protect.
Protectionism in the form of tariffs, quotas and other trade barriers often benefits one sector AT THE EXPENSE of others.
According to the “Concise Encyclopedia of Economics,” even after factoring in the gains to workers and companies that benefit from protectionism of the American textile industry, the net loss to the United States economy caused by these policies was approximately $12 billion in 2002 alone. THAT”S IN THE TEXTILE INDUSTRY ALONE, and here you are advocating it to be applied in ALL INDUSTRIES !!
Although tariffs are enacted to benefit domestic manufacturers and workers in certain industries, they may have the opposite effect. Because tariffs effectively remove foreign competition in a sector, prices for its goods may soar ( you already admitted this ).
If tariffs exist in ALL sectors, prices will rise across the board IN ALL SECTORS, leaving workers with less purchasing power.
Additionally, domestic companies and employees that ostensibly benefit from tariffs may find other countries’ retaliatory protections a serious barrier to international market expansion.
But you don’t seem to care about this as you think that we should only be trading with ourselves as a virtual 50 nation economy. In other words, ignore the rest of the world.
RE: You are not wise, no you are a myopic globalist corporate tool.
You have to show the wisdom of your arguments. The above statement is just WHINING on your part. It means nothing as far as arguments are concerned.
I have shown you but you throw made lies in my face. Prices would DOUBLE if made in the USA? LOL That’s a winner.
-PJ
Well no.
America competes on a global scale. (all over the world for those of you in roi Linda)
Agricultural subsidies aid that competition in markets that are cylical in supply, demand and price by smoothing out the risks for farmers. Regardless of what label you want to stamp on it, Our Farm Subsidies are genuinely American.
RE: The reality is nobody knows how much more a product would cost if made in the USA. But from what I can glean from the interwebs it would be marginally more expensive, maybe 5 cents on the dallier.
Really?
Let’s see — Minimum Wage, Osha rules, local and property taxes, environmental regulations, to name just a few. And you think it is just 5 cents on the dollar?
As an example, Nikkei Asian Review reported 3 years ago, that Apple assembler Foxconn has actually been studying the possibility of moving iPhone production to the US. But a source told Nikkei that the cost of an iPhone would “more than double” if that were to happen.
An evaluation by Marketplace looked into the hypothetical cost of an American-made iPhone, and came up with a similar estimate. If all the components were made in the US, they suggest, that could push the cost up to $600, which would mean the phone could retail for as much as $2000.
SEE HERE:
According to a different analysis published in the MIT Technology Review, if iPhone assembly were done in the US but the components were still sourced globally, the cost of making phones (currently estimated at about $230) would rise about 5%. However, if the components were made in the US (with raw materials bought on the global market), that would add an additional $30 or $40 to the cost of making the device, an increase that would then be reflected in retail markups.
SEE HERE:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601491/the-all-american-iphone/
Can you cite me your source for the 5 cents on the dollar figure?
Oh BS nice dodge. That was a pay go system and has NOTHING to do with farm subsidies. All subsidies are bad and not capitalistic, right Bert? BErt straighten this anti capitalist out for me, will you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.