Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Don't buy the Bush spin that the stell tariff served it's purpose. When the steel workers unions all threw in with Gephardt, the tariff was demonstrated to be a miserable failure.

When threatened a colossal trade war, Bush became smart enough to use his office to lead rather than shaemlessly politic. Being threatened with 100% tariffs on Florida citrus fruit, just in time for Decision 2004, helped remind him of why political tariffs were not good things.

1 posted on 12/05/2003 11:52:26 AM PST by .cnI redruM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: .cnI redruM
It was just a coincidence that he lifted the tariffs after the EU threatened tariffs.
2 posted on 12/05/2003 12:04:08 PM PST by Naspino (I am in no way associated with the views expressed in your posts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: .cnI redruM
Ah. A second guesser.

There was not only a prediction, but a statement, by the President before the tarriffs were ever put in place that they would be temporary.

They were on track to end before they started. It was only a question of 'when'.

6 posted on 12/05/2003 12:16:37 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: .cnI redruM
William Buckley, the conservative, can't wait to sell out our industries to the bottom line
8 posted on 12/05/2003 12:25:31 PM PST by jd777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: .cnI redruM
You know I am going to be respectful, but the idea of being a second guesser still stands. I think you were second guessing the motives for the tarriffs to begin with.

The motive for the repeal right now is something else.

You are making it sound as though tarriffs had NO technical merit to them. That it was done all for votes and NOTHING else.

I disagree with that sentiment.

Did you watch Mr. Zollick's press conference on the repeal of the tarriffs? He was the one announcing things.

He flat out said that repeal right now was the right thing to do because of the circumstances and that most of the goals have been met. He openly admitted that not having retaliation was a very good thing. He admitted that on several occassions.

If you haven't watched it, please do so.

Now, lets talk technicals. Why was US steel losing?

It was not because of sheer labor costs, nor any other silver bullet. It wasn't because of the unions either.

Technically, they lost because of structuring of their industry and technological deficiencies.

The difference between a European steel product (and its prices) and a US one are summed up with those two things.

Before the tarriffs were added, it was determined to bring in those two things back to the US industry. The tarriffs were to allow for that process to happen.

When that takes place, US steel then becomes as cheap in real terms as foreign competitors.

Rolling off the line in Europe will at the factory door be comparable in price to rolling off the floor in Michigan. Thats after we have implemented the reforms.

In reality, in the short term, tarriffs had nominal costs, but in the long term have saved us lots of money. Yes. Saved.

How? If we can now (or in the near future) produce steel in real terms at a comparable price, then we have saved ourselves lots of money. Shipping steel across the ocean isn't cheap.

Our industry was so ineffecient that even with those added costs of shipping we still lost. Now (supposedly) we can match the foreign makers in many aspects, but because of proximity, we can now supply US steel consumers at a cheaper price. It is caused by A) matching efficiency and B) proximity.

The steel producers were moaning and complaining that they were stopped in the middle of the plan which was slated for 3 years. According to those who do the research though, they didn't know how long the reforms would take. 20 months into it, they found out they were 80% to the goal.

Hence (supposedly) the steel tarriffs accomplished largely what they were designed for.

Just try looking at things from a technical standpoint, as to what has really changed in the steel industry in the last 20 months.

10 posted on 12/05/2003 4:51:08 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: .cnI redruM
The real test of the tarriffs as far as I am concerned is the next 24-48 months. If our steel industry isn't winning contracts and fairly healthy, then the tarriffs can be deemed as failures.
11 posted on 12/05/2003 5:01:20 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: .cnI redruM
And the message would have to be spoken out delicately in Detroit, which has been paying more for steel, making the U.S. automobile more expensive because of protectionist steel prices.

Oh I see. Now that the evil steel tariffs are over, Detroit can lower the price of their vehicles and all Americans will benefit from the blessings of "free trade".

buHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

12 posted on 12/05/2003 5:05:08 PM PST by Walkin Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson