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

Skip to comments.

RON PAUL: "Steel Tariffs are Taxes on American Consumers"
Ron Paul's website ^ | 3-18-02 | Ron Paul

Posted on 03/19/2002 5:46:41 PM PST by oursacredhonor

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 03/19/2002 5:46:41 PM PST by oursacredhonor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: oursacredhonor
Steel Tariffs are Taxes on American Consumers

He couldn't be more right.

2 posted on 03/19/2002 5:48:38 PM PST by VA Advogado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oursacredhonor
These tariffs are just the first in a series of moves designed to bring the world around to the fact that they need to curb their propensity of dumping whatever overcapacity that they have on our shores - at the cost of our workforce.

Combining this overcapacity with subsidies by their governments makes the playing field off-level for our workers, who are also facing the fact that their multinational corporate owners prefer to move their jobs overseas. Once overseas, then these same companies sell the product that Americans used to make here in America. Imposing tariffs on things like this will serve to keep those jobs here in the US.

Rep Paul is pandering to the Libertarians and the 'Rats on this one, and his reaction is for the press - typically knee jerk in fashion IMHO. What was once an "America First" and "Constitution First" type of representative is turning into a "me first" one. Too bad he doesn't bother to research what he says before saying it.

Until the rest of the world plays fairly - by removing their subsidies, removing the tariffs imposed upon American goods, and truly trading freely and fairly, tariffs are in our national interest. Mr Bush was RIGHT, Rep Paul is WRONG.

3 posted on 03/19/2002 6:00:10 PM PST by 11B3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oursacredhonor
With this expression of shallowness, Paul and I just parted company.
4 posted on 03/19/2002 6:04:16 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: VA Advogado
He couldn't be more right.

I agree:

"If we’re going to protect the steel industry with tariffs, why not other industries?"

Bush's action's are a step in the right direction, but still inadequate due to inconsistancy.

The optimal solution is a relatively low, across-the-board revenue tariff of 10-20% on ALL imported goods from ALL foreign countries.

"Targeted" tariffs have the disadvantage of providing loopholes and, as others will be quick to point out, the potential to hurt other domestic industries.

A prime example is our failed embargo on the importation of Cuban goods. Cuban sugar has been routinely imported to the U.S. through the back door: Canada. Cuban sugar is shipped to Canada where it is dissolved in molasass. "Canadian" molasass is then legally imported to the U.S. where the sugar is easily refined back out. The leftover molasass is then exported back to Canada where the cycle is repeated. Large sugar-users (such as candy makers) are also closing their domestic factories and moving to Canada where they can legally use Cuban sugar, then import it as candy to the U.S.

An across-the-board revenue tariff of 10-20% would circumvent this type of abuse. Additionally, the revenue could be used to offset a major reduction or elimination of the corporate income tax, providing domestic producers a more "level playing field". (A Proposal to Abolish the Corporate Income Tax)

From a historical perspective, a revenue tariff of 10-20% is NOT excessive:


6 posted on 03/19/2002 6:06:12 PM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 11B3
Imposing tariffs on things like this will serve to keep those jobs here in the US.

I doubt it. Developing nations are exempt from the tariff. We'll see their exports to us increase. This tariff is helping developing countries more than the USA in fact. Our mills have raised prices already so now foreign manufacturers have a decided edge over Americans. UAW and other jobs will be lost.

7 posted on 03/19/2002 6:09:15 PM PST by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: *Ron paul list;*"Free" Trade;*libertarians
index bump
8 posted on 03/19/2002 6:09:20 PM PST by Fish out of Water
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
I think you pervert Ron Paul's statement.
9 posted on 03/19/2002 6:12:21 PM PST by VA Advogado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Do they not teach economics in American schools anymore???? The only ones who are coming out in the negative with these Tariffs are the American consumers. Prices go up HERE! WE are the ones paying for the price increases, to prop up an inefficient industry. This is nothing but a glorified subsidy, and if you like subsidies then fine. But dont act like this fits in neatly with Republican free market ideals.
10 posted on 03/19/2002 6:28:50 PM PST by Blackyce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: VA Advogado
I think you pervert Ron Paul's statement.

I merely quoted the only statement worth repeating.

Ron Paul is capable of making his own perversions.

11 posted on 03/19/2002 6:33:15 PM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
I merely quoted the only statement worth repeating.

You quoted a retorical question posed by Congressman Paul. Your methods of debate are almost as despicable as your intelligence level on matters of international trade.

12 posted on 03/19/2002 6:34:54 PM PST by VA Advogado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: oursacredhonor
A viable steel industry is arguably necessary for national security. It also involves billions of dollars in in-place infrastructure that would take years to duplicate once it is gone or allowed to deteriorate.

Now I want everyone that thinks our current foreign steel suppliers (Russia, China, Europe, Japan, et al.) will still be our good buds 10, 20, 50 years from now, willing to sell us their steel at bargain basement prices, to raise their hands. Come on all you crystal ball gazers.

I think taking the pure libertarian position on this issue is shortsighted and dangerous to our long term national security. I'll bet China and Brazil can build lots of our military hardware cheaper than we can build it here, but everyone would agree that would be crazy. I think the steel industry is important enough that we can't afford to let it die.

13 posted on 03/19/2002 6:40:51 PM PST by CrossCheck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: VA Advogado
Your methods of debate are almost as despicable as your intelligence level on matters of international trade.

You shouldn't allow envy to make you so hateful.

15 posted on 03/19/2002 6:52:39 PM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CTYankeeMike
Do you understand that upon a command from the Chinese Communist Party, most of us will be walking around barefoot?

Are you really that ignorant? Do you really believe that we would go barefoot just because one country decides to stop selling us shoes? Personally, I pray the Chinese stop selling us shoes. I've got some capital I'm itching to plow into scarce commodities with high demand. Aren't you?

16 posted on 03/19/2002 7:38:50 PM PST by SteamshipTime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CrossCheck
There are steel-producers and there are steel-consumers. In order for steel-producers to live, they must sell steel to steel-consumers. If it were otherwise, farmers could charge whatever price they wanted given that the rest of the population lacks the means to produce their own food. In fact, just the opposite is true: competition to supply the market with a scarce commodity, even one that is in virtually unlimited demand, forces prices steadily lower.

This is the iron law of economics that the corrupt, unionized, inefficient U.S. steel industry has been breaking itself against for the last 50 years.

17 posted on 03/19/2002 7:52:49 PM PST by SteamshipTime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
How did you come up with an "across-the-board" figure of 10-20%? Chicken entrails? Star-gazing?
18 posted on 03/19/2002 7:55:24 PM PST by SteamshipTime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SteamshipTime
How did you come up with an "across-the-board" figure of 10-20%?

A Proposal to Abolish the Corporate Income Tax

19 posted on 03/19/2002 7:59:59 PM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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.

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