Posted on 03/23/2002 5:25:38 AM PST by Jethro Tull
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:05:16 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
March 23, 2002 -- It's steel versus oranges in a battle that's supposed to be about economics, but that economists say is nothing but politics. The European Union said it will introduce new import tariffs totaling $2.1 billion on things like orange juice, textiles and motorcycles.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
JT, March 23, 2002
Nope, he's a simple Texas Bush....
Did you know the Candian government is letting their timber industry cut down trees on state lands for free? That is a very short sighted move. It cannot be sustained at this rate forever and amounts to 'dumping'.
In other words, the problem in this specific case is not a lack of competitiveness on the part of the U.S. timber industry, instead the problem is they are fighting what amounts to a state subsidy from the Canadians.
That situation is one of the few times special tariffs are justified. W made a good call on this one.
Other than that, he's OK....
He should have removed the environmental and "endangered species" regulations that have been placed against logging in this country if he wanted to make our lumber competitive.
Tarrifs won't help anything as far as lumber is concerned until the US companies are allowed to produce it.
We agree.
Dubya done good...
This has been one of the many arguments which has been totally ignored by the Free Traders.
How can American companies 'compete' with nations who are free of the multiple layers of federal laws, taxes and guidelines?
Their, "The America worker can compete with anyone" mantra was always a flawed argument given the EPA, Endangered Species Act, FICA, Minimum Wage, local, state and federal taxes, American w/ Disabilities Act, etc, ad nauseum...
What? "The buck stops somewhere else." -- George Bush?
Why? They are fighting by our side in Afghanistan. That's a lot more than anyone else except the English and Aussies are doing.
Thanks, Canada!
-ccm
Nobody who actually reads their party platform could take them seriously.
The forested land often belongs to the 'crown' but the forestry company pays steep license fees to the 'crown' ie. government. It amounts to the same cost of doing business as if a person owned the land and a company leases it. In Canada the provincial government collects the 'lease' money as income to its treasury. In other words, the people, collectively own the land. However, when the timber is sold to American home builders for a lower price than an American company would sell it, there are many factors for the price discrepancy. It is not that it is cut from FREE land.
Where's your sense of humor?
Have another Molsons, eh?
Question...are Florida citrus farmers subsidized by fed. Dollars?
Oh, are you wrong on this one, Canadian producers are paying what is called a stumpage fee on every log cut down, this fee was raised the last time we had a tiff with the US.
It does look like dumping, but as for being sustainable, Canada is almost nothing but vacant land, much of it forested. So they could cut for what may as well be forever and not run out of trees to cut. If they plant a few as they go, they really could go on forever.
The Canadians mearly have lower stumpage taxes than we do, they are not cutting it down for free, not to mention as many goofy environmental laws that have shut down logging in the pacific northwest.
This is just like the steel industry union dorks, they aren't competitive and thus as being slaughtered by the competition
George H. seriously needs to pay a visit to Washington and kick George W. ass
Personally I am pissed over this. I am just about to start a new home and this will boost my lumber costs. I betcha the lumber yards are resetting their computers right now. They don't wait for the wholesale costs to go up. Any excuse. ANY excuse. Damnit this is gonna cost me $10,000. Thanks a lot W. Yer really turning out to be my guy in DC. Why don't you let a few more terrs in while your at it. Gotta be good for the security business.
Voltaire called Canada "a few acres of snow". What he didn't know was a lot of those acres were covered with trees that now to provincial governments represent stumpage. Standard practice, I believe it is law in some provinces, is to plant 3 seedlings for each tree cut down. Canada cuts down less than 1% of her forest each year and has 20% more trees now than 100 years ago. But the cost of planting those 100 million plus trees each year is paid for by the Lumber companies.Add that cost on top of stumpage. Canadian lumber companies have computerized and modernized their mills far beyond the productivity of many found in the states. It's called Capitalism, staying efficient enough to make a legitimate, unsubsidized profit. Canadian lumber companies, Tembec for example, export wood products to 50 countries.
The American consumer will pay a minimum of $1500 per new house constructed and 3 to 400,000 first time buyers will be disqualified from getting a mortgage.
The American softwood lobby, working for Americans? Right, Who's screwing who?
You are right on every point, except this one, the lumber industry is supposed to replant, Blondell & McMillan has admitted they do not replant, because the rule is not enforced......... I think the rule was to have one purpose, to shut up the greens. :-}
I don't know about B&M but each spring about May 1st. I see busloads of tree planters heading north and west. My sons did it and it's a dirty, hard job planting 40-50,000 trees in a 6 week period surrounded by bugs and bigger bugs. The money can be good, the experience memorable or a nightmare, depending on who you are. "Survivor" has nothing on tree planters, mostly university students although there are those that make it a part time profession. The chaff gets separated out , real quick.
In theory, you are correct. However, when you're talking about protectionism from a trading partner with which you have a free trade agreement, you have to learn how to live up to your commitments. Canada opened its markets to more US products and services than ever before with free trade. A little reciprocation would be nice, especially when the softwood issue has been decided in court (in Canada's favour) multiple times already.
The day is coming when the US must depend more and more on Canada's resources, so getting out of NAFTA and the new FTAA is not an option that can be seriously considered. Once the hemispheric treaty is in place, the possibility that all of the smaller countries that the USA has used strong-arm tactics on before will be able to provide a united front against blatantly illegal US protectionism. Trying to play it both ways won't work for long.
Why is it some people just want to keep their so called principals even when they don't have a clue on issues.
Our so called foreign friends have put in place Gov't programs to burry the US in certain markets. They pay their producers of certain products to keep the prices 30% - 40% lower then the US produces the products for.
What is this called? It sure as hell isn't free trade or friendship. It is an undeclared war our certain US industries so they can dominate and force us to import certain products.
The Canadian lumber industry has already obtained domination in over 50% of certain markets because they have undercut the US companies so much we just don't produce the products anymore. One example is logs over 8" thick used for beams in the US. There are no more companies selling these because the Canadians have undercut them too much.
There are three choices for the US.. The first one is for the Gov't to subsidize the same as foreign Gov't do. We do this to some extent on farm products but for many other products this sounds easy but it's very costly and triggers trade wars. The second choice is to have Tariffs on certian products that endanger certain industries. The third one is the one many of us free traders want which is to let the free markets rule. The problem with the third choice is it is not a free market so it can't rule.
It's a free US market against subsized markets and in some industries the US companies just can't compete. The result is to let them go under and go out of business. This would work fine if there were other US companies to step in but it's not the case with lumber and steel.
The US is finally telling the world we let you take advantage of us for a long time but were tired of it and it's now time to level the playing field.
So here are your two choices: Let them go under and make us 100% dependant on foreign companies and subject to their price hikes like OPEC or Do something to help level the free market so US companies can compete ?
The providences are also paying the lumber companies up to a 30% cash payment if they cut the lumber in their providence !
The providences are also paying the lumber companies up to a 30% cash payment as a refund if they cut the lumber in their providence !
The cost of the trees is ZERO to the providences because they own the land so it equals the lumber company paying 70% of the actual cost!
No it's not. The added cost will be $1.00 per thousand so a $100,000 house will be $101,000 if it's wood. But, it will probably only be 50% wood so you're looking at maybe $500 on the house price. Add this to a 30 year loan you might be out 50 cents per month or whatever it is?
I read today that NAFTA allows the tariffs on both lumber and steel ! I would say that they should have read the fine print !
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.