Replies

Since the rest of the world practices protectionism it would be wise for Americans, who have endured decades of globalist gas lighting on the subject, to learn the positives of tariffs. Those positives are many.

Regaining our standing as a net exporter and as the world’s manufacturing leader – regaining our dominance in production of goods as well as services - and returning America to the defense-related independence necessary for national security – doesn’t require punitive tariffs and anti-dumping duties.

Wrong wrong wrong. The past 30 years proves this is BS.

Consumption taxes, especially the tariff is the fairest most conservative tax of all. Liberalizations and Republican should be in favor of them. They can be used a propaganda foil to assuage the stupid deficit hawks and their zero sum income tax game.

It requires the gradual lessening of the grip of the government (at every level) on our manufacturing sector.

You can do that AND have protective tariffs. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

1. Trade war is not a given - The most repeated statement in the collective analysis thus far asserts that an all out trade war will soon follow the implementation of the tariffs. Certainly in theory a nation that faces import tariffs to the United States could retaliate. But variables on a combination of factors would be a more probable cause for such. With steel we are looking specifically at China-whose steel industry is in part supported by government subsidies and a labor market that can be paid pennies on the dollar for the work necessary. This alone prevents the discussion of “free trade” being in any way “fair,” because China is cheating. China is also dependent for the USA to be a recipient of up to 20% of their total export volume. Our steel production suffers as they cheat. But they do not have the total upper hand.

2. Products may not cost more - The assumption that our products will go up significantly in price is a realistic concern. But it is not an absolute given. In the immediate period of implementation according to some of the best estimates the tariffs may raise the purchase price of a new car something close to $45, and a twenty-four pack of beer by .05 cents. But what happens if steel & aluminum production begins to match volume wise the amount we import from other world sources? Economics 101 teaches us that prices drop as inventory surges. If our steel production grows enough we could wipe out the gains mix-minused in our dependence on China.

3. The world doesn’t like it - Of all the pushback this reasoning is among some of the most inane. When the United States does what we have to do to shore up our markets, jobs, workers, and life we have less and less need to care what the world thinks about it. This isn’t hubris, this is independence. To be tied to China’s cheap steel, Saudi Arabia’s oil reserves, and the good graces of the global community fundamentally puts us at a more vulnerable position from an economic & national security standpoint. Like much of the rest of the Trump focus, America needs to shore up America’s capacity for whatever faces us, and being utterly dependent upon others doesn’t move us in that direction.

4. We shouldn’t pick winners & losers - This is an argument normally made when discussing competition between domestic companies here in the USA. Jonathan Hoenig, appearing on Neil Cavuto on Friday, repeatedly invoked this as some sort of determining factor as to why the tariffs should be prevented. But it’s an illegitimate argument. This isn’t picking one steel factory over another and using tax-payer incentives to cause one or the other to succeed. This is a fight for survival between a metal industry that has suffered enormous loss for the better part of multiple decades, and the slave labor of China. The winners in the near term are steel and aluminum workers.

5. The national security consideration - Those that have argued that a trade war is inevitable, seem to also forget the increasingly perilous hair trigger of real war that the globe is constantly on the edge of. If America were to find itself drawn into a conflict with North Korea or Iran, it is likely whatever degree of imports we get from China and Russia would immediately be frozen. Fifteen years ago more than a dozen aluminum smelters were in operation. Today there are only three and the entire capacity of one of those three is necessary just for the military and related technologies. We are more vulnerable than necessary, and increasing domestic production solves this vulnerability.

6. Had to be (as it was) done in the correct sequence - Because of the rapid growth of the economy by rolling back some 2000+ regulations coupled with the very real impact that Trump tax reform is having now is the absolute right time to push for this “leveling of the playing field.” Most Americans will be more likely to accept an increase in the price of their next car by $45 if they know that Americans are benefiting. They are even more so if they have on average $90 more per week appearing in their pay check.

You cannot place US workers in direct competition with 3rd world peasants without huge social/economic ramifications. That is why we need a tariff.

To balance the difference in labor costs between the USA and the 3rd world would not take much. Frankly, most manufacturing is not labor intensive. That's the point of mass production. Maybe 7% of retail prices goes to labor, and that's for domestic union labor.