Posted on 03/05/2018 6:07:02 AM PST by Kaslin
President Trump’s Thursday decision to begin the process of keeping his campaign promise to protect the American industrial base by imposing tariffs on imported steel and aluminum has seemingly gotten everyone in a tizzy, oddly uniting Big Business, top globalists, the IMF, the GOP Establishment and even liberal Democrats, all of whom never agree on anything yet are united that this particular decision will mean nothing short of an economic apocalypse for the United States.
Truly, to hear these folks tell it we’re looking at an economic scenario to rival the bleak hellscape of The Walking Dead, minus the zombies (unless you count liberals as zombies, which arguably wouldn’t be that far off).
So maybe I’m exaggerating a bit, but Chicken Little does sound pretty reasonable by comparison.
Consider:
The American Chemistry Council, a group that represents some of the world’s largest corporations, including Procter & Gamble, 3M, DuPont and ExxonMobil, says the tariffs will have “punishing” effects for the economy. Anheuser-Busch, the largest beer maker in world, said the plan would “put jobs at risk and would be against the US consumer.”
Columbia University’s Jeffrey Sachs writes on CNN.com of President Trump firing the first shot in a “delusional and destructive trade war,” and that “United States as a whole, and the world, could suffer enormously from Trump's reckless ignorance.” The Washington Post laments the “world-spanning economic consequences” of Trump’s decision. Forbes contributor Steven Hanke even called Commerce Secretary Wilber Ross not just a protectionist, but an “arch” protectionist, as if the “arch” is supposed to make him more like Dr. Evil.
Utah Senator Orrin Hatch called the move a “tax hike the American people don’t need and can’t afford.” Nebraska’s Ben “muh principles” Sasse likened it to “kooky 18th-century protectionism.” Pennsylvania’s Pat Toomey, a Club for Growth supported candidate who barely won reelection by less than 2 percentage points in a state Trump won for the GOP for the first time in almost two decades BECAUSE he promised to get tough on trade, considers Trump’s proposal “a big mistake.”
Liberals, too, are in agreement. The folks at Vox think Trump “decided to put the global economy at risk because he was in a pissy mood.”
Hell, even Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is on board, saying on a recent cable appearance, “To say that trade wars are a good thing is just wrong.”
Other nations are naturally piling on, but only because they see signs that their thus-far lucrative gravy train might be ending. Li Xinchuang, vice chairman of the China Iron and Steel Association, thinks Trump’s move is “stupid” and “does no good to everyone except a few American steel enterprises.”
Because really, if China doesn’t care about American steel enterprises, should anyone?
Canadians are also apoplectic, “flabbergasted” even, at the prospect of American actually standing up for its own manufacturers.
And of course, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned the decision would not only hurt the United States, but other countries as well.
Because apparently the meaning of capitalism these days is for the United States to allow other countries to impose tariffs on its goods at will and never respond in kind to protect its own workers and industrial base.
Thankfully, Trump’s decision isn’t without its defenders in in the media, led of late by Fox Business host Charles Payne, who says he is not a “protectionist” but wants, like most people slandered with the term, fair trade for all. Lately, Payne has waged a heroic Twitter war with those who would sacrifice America’s industrial base on the altar of globalism. As Payne brilliantly points out, despite the grim prognostications of those who seemingly know better, tariffs not only have worked for America in the past, but are currently working for our competitors now.
“I know tariffs are bad but...” Payne tweeted, “It seems to be working very well for the fastest growing economies in world.” The Fox Business host then listed several nations that employ tariffs and the 10 year average growth of each one.
Here are a few more truth bombs from Mr. Payne:
“Let's be clear, the EU is against tariffs when America uses or considers them but they levy 10% on all US car imports we only have a 2.5% rate on their car imports. #justsaying”
“Currently there are certain nations that take advantage of our civility and commitment to rigid belief that "free trade" really exist when there are hundreds of active cases at the WTO at any given moment. China isn't going to risk $500 billion to protect cheap subsidized steel.”
As for a trade war and the prospect for higher prices, Payne isn’t too concerned.
“The gauntlet has been thrown!” Payne tweeted, “During campaign when candidate Trump said he would push back against unfair trade including using tariffs I asked Trump voters if they would be willing to pay more for products to make a transition back to US production and everyone said ‘yes.’”
“There will be no trade war,” writes Payne. “Sure, but who would China sell $505,597,100,000 stuff Americans bought from them last year? Cuba? China isn't going to do anything the new Emperor isn't going to risk toppling his fragile empire.”
Of the strong history of so-called “protectionist” policies, the venerable Pat Buchanan, who has been brilliant on this issue for decades, opines, “Under protectionist policies from 1865 to 1900, U.S. debt was cut by two-thirds. Customs duties provided 58 percent of revenue. Save for President Cleveland’s 2 percent tax, which was declared unconstitutional, there was no income tax. Commodity prices fell 58 percent. Real wages, despite a doubling of the population, rose 53 percent. Growth in GDP averaged over 4 percent a year. Industrial production rose almost 5 percent a year.”
So much for the "kooky" theory that trade protectionism equals economic disaster!
Buchanan laments the post-1962 demise of a Republican Party that had been, throughout its history, willing to campaign and win on protecting U.S. industry (just as Donald Trump did in 2016). “Where in the history of great nations,” Buchanan asks, “Britain before 1850, the USA, Bismarck’s Germany, postwar Japan and China today, has nationalism not been the determinant factor in economic policy?”
Payne promises to release a report early this week on the average tariffs for the fastest growing countries in the world. Will those who view the data still insist that America cannot possibly protect its industrial base and win economically?
In a piece last July arguing against Trump’s trade policies, even the Atlantic had to admit that “Many economists and industry experts agree that the United States faces unfair competition and artificially low prices that have damaged the domestic steel industry.”
“But they don’t agree that a tariff is the right approach for addressing the problem,” the piece continued, because tariffs “could backfire,” or something.
Sure, it’s a nice argument, but if tariffs have worked in the past for the United States and continue to work for the rest of the world, it’s not one bolstered by history or reality.
Not that the Chicken Littles have ever been concerned with either.
How can I be racist when Charles Payne is up high on my list of good guys?
Ok, here’s how it is going down.
There exists a world accepted (that would mean global) list of all the products in the world. It is called the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 2018. According to the list, we know what products exported are tariffed by every nation. Conversely we know what items from every specific nations are tariffed by us.
Trump is going to take the Harmonized Tariff List and after listening to all the tons of CEO’s he has met with, can laser like zoom in on a specific item from a specific country. I am certain he has a list of what have been sorted out as the worst offenders and a separate list of lesser offenders. He will go after a very selective number on both lists.
Here’s the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
The US is the most lucrative and biggest market in the world. We have all the leverage, but our leaders have not used it. Trump is changing that.
I think the threat of tariffs on steel and aluminum has to really scare the Chinese, who would suddenly see their market dry up unless they too start investing in US-based metal smelting and refining plants. Watch China Baowu Steel Group, Hesteel Group Company Limited, and other Chinese producers buying up old US steel refineries and/or opening new ones to avoid trouble.
I really like Eric Bolin. I miss him and his smart conservative views. I think about him and lift him and his wife up in prayer often. Life must be so hard for them, right now, thanks for thinking of him too!
No, what he has done is to demonstrate that there is not support for massive tariffs.
He can now proceed to target very specific instances of products severely abused by specific nations and reciprocate.
I added Euro Trash Countries, and the ChiComs to your excellent list.
If it is upsetting Big Business, top globalists, Euro Trash Countries, the ChiComs, the IMF, the GOP Establishment and liberal Democrats then it is most likely a good thing for the People of the United States.
These days, we don’t have to be experts on what President Trump proposes.
We just have to look at the elites screaming that it will be the end of the world. Then we know that his proposal means MAGA!
“FNC took Charles Payne back so why not Eric Bolin??????”
Fox also took back Bob Beckel as a liberal analyst for a while. As I recall his issue was poor performance for either alcoholism or substance abuse.
Charles Payne seems to be the only male in the past year who has regained his former position after being charged with sexual harassment. Since the circumstances have not been made public, only he, his employer, and the accuser know the reason.
The self appointed court of public opinion, presided over by left wing intellectuals, thought leaders, and journalists, today determines guilt or innocence based on the politics, race, and gender of the accuser and and accused. Evidence and due process are absent from this court, only the advancement of the leftist agenda matters. Employers will throw an innocent loyal high performing employee overboard in a heartbeat, based on an unprovable accusation, just to avoid a media frenzy.
Unfortunately our culture has lost its adherence to the principles of right due process and presumption of innocence until guilt is proven. Like the Romans who flocked to the Coliseum 2000 years ago too many Americans delight in the public spectacle of the lions devouring the accused in the arena of the 24/7 news cycle. It is impossible to prove innocence when charges are false, much less earn redemption if there is truth to the accusation, when the lion’s teeth are gnashing at your throat.
The breakdown of our common culture, the politicization of the judicial system and the employer/employee relationship, and the divisive politics of group identity are destroying any commonly held notion of “fairness” and justice. Today’s barbarians, the social justice warriors, are inside the gates and gleefully seeking to destroy western civilization. History shows that instead of a new equal and just society, their actions will result in a thousand years of darkness, regression, destruction, and suffering as a broken society struggles to rebuild socially and economically. There were no winners in the dark ages of lawlessness between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance. Even the lives of the lords of the feudal castles were constantly at risk from warfare, rampant disease, and treachery within.
“No, what he has done is to demonstrate that there is not support for massive tariffs.
He can now proceed to target very specific instances of products severely abused by specific nations and reciprocate.”
Then, some earnest and honest negotiations will happen behind closed doors. No economic juju bS, MAGA will be the determining factor!
TRex will be doing most of the behind closed doors for MAGA.
TRex will be different than Joan Kerry or Illiarily in his negotiations for our side, aka MAGA!
I agree. Maintaining the steel and aluminum manufacturing base is a national security issue. It is clear the globalists have been actively trying to undercut America’s national strength, from both an military and economic perspective. We will all be slaves if the globalists get their way.
I’m a big fan of Charles Payne.
Drug and alcohol problems rampant in our culture, pornography is also addictive and many suffer from its addiction but males of all ages are the disease carriers and suffer from it.
Come quickly Lord Jesus!
The thing that folks miss is that profit goes to investment goes to future growth and technology advancement goes to future profit.
To whose benefit do you want that future growth to accrue, the U.S. or China?
As Nathan Rothschild famously quipped, "compound interest is the 9th wonder of the world."
There is about 200,000 pounds of aluminum in a Boeing 777. The raw aluminum is about 1 dollar a pound. A 10% tariff would add around 20,000 dollars to the cost of an aircraft that sells for 300 million dollars.
The added cost is irrelevant.
There is about 200,000 pounds of aluminum in a Boeing 777. The raw aluminum is about 1 dollar a pound. A 10% tariff would add around 20,000 dollars to the cost of an aircraft that sells for 300 million dollars.
The added cost is irrelevant.
Prices on some things will go up, making it profitable for USA-based companies to begin producing the commodity.
Nobody mentions that American steel is far superior, welds up much better, and passes exray at a much better rate. In the long run less expensive.
“but only when the US makes use of tariffs”
It’s been the goal of “enlightened men” to redistribute the capital stock of the US since WWII. At the end of that war we held 75% of the worlds capital and therefore trade was a one-way gift.
The way to adjust that capital stock is one dollar at a time...the US Trade deficit.
The shocking part of it is the number of US Presidents and Congressmen that were willing to go along with it.
” I think we can afford a few cents more for a can of soda/ beer.”
It’s estimated that a 10% tariff on aluminum will add 2 cents to the cost of a six pack. At most.
Combined the steel and aluminum tariffs will add as much as $100 to the cost of a new $30,000 car.
US Consumers will have a hard time even noticing these changes.
What if there's a huge tariff on Chinese airplane wings? That's an "aluminum product".
More likely ... what if the airplane wings are constructed in the U.S. with Chinese aluminum?
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.