A return to the immediate WWIl years is impossible. However, Mr. Trump could attempt to revisit the 1920’s.
4
Pure short-sighted stupidity by the Trump Administration. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the news media uncovered information that Commerce Secretary Ross stands to make millions on investments in firms that would benefit from these tariffs. That's the only rational explanation for this absurd proposal.
11
I don't trust Trump or his appointees' views on ANYTHING. They don't know, they bloviate for propaganda reasons. Instead of "Make America Great Again," it's headlong into "Make America a Red Dwarf Star" (the term used for stars in their death cycle), having insiders profit from looting at every turn. It's "Make America Suck," and the victims are doing the sucking for the profits of the connected.
5
Trump and his ignorance are a threat to our national security.
13
Wilbur Ross. Another business partner of Putin. Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three dozen times is treason. This president and his consiglieres are not working for the American people. They are preying on the American people.
13
Whenever I see cheap steel or aluminum being imported into the US, I worry Dick Cheney will launch 9/11 part 2.
6
Lets make it retroactive and have Trump pay for Chinese steel he’s used
13
This is aimed directly at the undereducated Trump base. It is economically irrational, politically disastrous and represents a true Potemkin village. It does raise the issue of just how stupid and gullible Trump supporters really are.
8
Just over one year into the Trump Administration. Have they had one good idea yet?
5
21st century government based upon 19th century ideas. What could go wrong?
6
U.S. based industries cannot compete with the prices on foreign steel and aluminum. The wages paid by China and other third world countries are so low as to make the cost of export of these product to the U.S. lower than the actual cost of producing them in America. Until that wage disparity is addressed, we will never be able to compete with those countries who treat their laborers as virtual slaves.
10
what would the affect be on the prices of scrap steel overall just curious?
Almost every economist since Adam Smith and David Ricardo has supported free trade.
2
I don't know what to think. On one hand, I am in favor of open global trade. On the other hand, cheap Chinese steel has been used in our roads and bridges, and now they are not durable. Cheap, poorly made steel is actually an ongoing threat to our lives.
5
The USA have a "everything cheap" mentality: China does produce very good quality too, but you have to pay it and buy it!
Your politician did not want that.
Now with the new rules, you will be surely happy, because everything will be more expensive in the USA and obviously uncompetitive!
1
By the time the republican congress gets around to perhaps, maybe, considering legislation, steel will be obsolete. But, they'll all be out of office before then. VOTE!
1
'The Trump administration ... declared imports of steel and aluminum from China and other nations a threat to national security....'
The threat to national security lies at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and the halls of Congress.
9
This is what happens when a yahoo with a sledge hammer is empowered to bang away at complex trade, tax and fiscal policy. Fearless Leader is playing a crazy game of whack a mole, with no idea what the unintended consequences of whacking the mole poking his head up over here will have on half a dozen moles who are having a wild party with impunity, a bit further over there. But then, nobody knew the economy and global trade was so complicated... nobody in the White House anyway.
Just out of curiosity, what ever happened to the oft repeated Republican principle that the federal government should not 'pick winners and losers?' Silly me - of course the principle doesn't apply when the winner you're picking is your pal, or the loser is your arch enemy; see, e.g., the ATT/TWC merger, which provides an opportunity for Fearless Leader to punish CNN for reporting news he does not like (i.e., his own well-documented and utterly abhorrent words and actions).
4
Shouldn't he be making sure we have enough ability to produce our own steel first?
Then he should be making sure the people in charge of our steel industry don't use this as an opportunity to profiteer which is the source reason for why our industry was intentionally collapsed and moved to China and Asia.
2
Tariffs. So nineteenth century. Well, at least U.S. longshoremen won't have to sling those pesky aluminum ingots and rolls of steel around anymore.
2
I wonder how fast China will put tariffs on the US Carbon Fiber industry, in retaliation.
1
Oh no. Where will the Trump organization get the steel to build the building they make? (hint: It hasn't been from US mills in the recent past)
2
Trump is supposed to be a businessman but he says every countryin world is ripping off U.S.andtariffs are needed.fine and dandy,but prices of everything will go up and rest of world is not happy.Friends are in Disney,Orlando and they say lots of South Americans are there spending.however soon there will be less tourists visiting the U.S.
1
Let's see. The Soviet Union limited trade and travel. Their homemade products became laughingstocks in the 1970s and 80s, and gradually, their entire employment system shut down, since there was no market for their products. Their people were impoverished, they were paying their scientists with toilet paper, and they were vulnerable to being taken over by oligarchs, who have kept a choke hold on the people, while enriching themselves on the country's natural resources: drilling madly for oil and chopping down massive forests, while suppressing and murdering critics, promoting hatred for non-Russians, and using nationalist white supremacist groups and the Orthodox Church as clamps to prevent any voices of dissent from being heard.
So twenty-five years after an insular, closed economy broke down and brought about the collapse of an entire country and system of government, we are repeating history: building walls to limit travel, starting trade wars, waging non-stop wars around the world, living under one-party rule with the Party's leaders attacking and discrediting critics and a free press, silencing artists and educators by taking away funding, giving huge economic favors to Party supporters, punishing states that don't support the Party, pushing a nationalist agenda, and trying desperately to keep disgruntled Americans who couldn't be bothered to work hard in school employed, merely because they vote for the Party.
All righty, then. Let's see what happens.
7
Is America no longer the champion of Free Trade?
3
Higher tariffs mean higher prices for middle America. More jobs are centered in companies that use aluminum and steel than make them. Prices will rise and jobs will be lost. Take a look at any history of trade wars. Big business will win in both countries and the people will pay. Trump is doing it again! Go get’em Skippy.
2
The voters demand the lowest price on public projects involving steel, i.e. the new bridge between Oakland and SF; made entirely of Chinese steel. Cheap is cheap.
If he follows through with this, there is an excellent chance that China will retaliate with tarriffs on soy beans and beef ... products from Red states...
1
Just did a quick Google search Trumps last construction projects Las Vegas, Chicago and Washington all used steel from China.
As we should expect from anything involving the Trump organization whatever your political view point throw it out the window this isn't about politics it's about practice what you preach.
So he will bravely strike back at our economic adversaries but refuses to enforce strongly bipartisan sanctions on Patron Putin or to try to address the outrageous issue of assault weapons in the hands of the mentally ill. Let’s just let him go play at Taj Mar-a-Lago for a few days and hope he doesn’t stupidly start a world war.
Trump obviously never heard of Smoot or Hawley.
How much longer are we going to let this man ruin America?
1
"Christine McDaniel... said that for every one steelworker that may be helped by trade restrictions, more than 38 workers in other sectors that could be harmed by it."
That is the key issue here. Undoubtedly Ms. McDaniel's numbers will be much higher if one includes the jobs that will be lost in the US once US manufacturers decide to relocate their factories overseas to have easy access to cheaper steel, cheaper labor, and almost no cost of steel shipment.
Note that Mr. Trump's steep cut in taxes on corporate offshore incomes - designed to encourage US companies to repatriate their offshore profits - does not help this situation. In fact Mr. Trump, unwittingly or otherwise, has removed the main barrier for US companies to move their manufacturing units overseas. And, if history is any indication, most repatriated money will not go into job creation and new facilities in the US. Instead, the companies will largely plow that money into their share buybacks plans and shareholder dividends.
1
Will car prices increase?
1
Does anyone really trust the Trump administration on this (or any other) issue?
1
Tariffs are counterproductive exercises. It is stimulus for the other economies to improve their processes and further reduce their prices so they can boost sales in non-traditional markets. The US loses prospective markets through their arcane use of tariffs.
The government should initiate a recall of AR-15 and other assault weapons, melt them down and use the metal to build something to benefit the people of this country.
1
Why doesn't this article reference the fact that Trump used $350 million of Chinese steel in at least 2 of his building projects? Go to http://www.newsweek.com/how-donald-trump-ditched-us-steel-workers-china-... and
https://aflcio.org/2016/10/12/six-facts-donald-trumps-use-chinese-steel
Maybe, finally, this latest Trump episode will finally reveal to everybody just what he really is. Let's hope so!!!
1
The art of the deal scam artist now trying to save our steel and aluminum industry when he couldn't run his own businesses and went bankrupt 6 times. What could possibly go wrong?
1
Don't expect anything novel from this administration. Rather you will find old world concepts at work because of the mentality of the people in the administration. I mean Wilber "soup cans". One wonders how you became so successful. The truth is Trump has not made a good decision of any significance since he has been in office. The tax cut will one day blow up in the face of our grandkids when Trump is long dead. Hopefully, a new administration will correct the utter stupidity of the current one. America needs to move forward but unfortunately for the time being we are moving back a century.
Why did God/Mother Nature in her infinite wisdom decided to create critical strategic metal resources in nations like Australia, Russia, South Africa, China and Chile who can also play the tariff penalty game?
1
Best to _subsidize_ US steel and aluminum manufacturers than to tax imported steel. (Same as China does.)
This would help the US steel industry, help US manufacurers that use steel, and punish foreign steel "dumpers".
Obviously, neither Trump nor anyone among his hoarde of lackeys ever read a decent book on Economics. The harm this ignorant narcissist and his mob of ignoramuses are causing isn`t limited to the United States; they are harming the global economy.
The Trump `Administration` is a unique example of a government run on sheer ignorance - ignorance at all levels and in every area, a government that would be unacceptable to any nation with a modicum of respect for knowledge. competence and truth. And therein lies the problem. Something is very wrong with a People who freely elect a crass, immoral, and utterly ignorant clown to run their country. What that something is, it will be up to future researchers with nothing better to do to uncover. In the meantime, the US is hurtling towards disaster, assets values notwithstanding, because the stock market is not the same as the economy - but no semi-illiterate Trumpist know the difference, of course.
The view from Canada is that the Trump administration is beholden to inefficient U.S. producers of softwood lumber, steel, aluminum and airplanes who want tariffs to be able to raise their U.S. prices and profits.
Most Americans are not aware that Canada has been for decades, and remains, the largest trading partner of the U.S. Each day some US$2 billion in goods and services crosses the U.S. - Cdn border. Canada is the largest trading partner for 44 of the lower 48 states.
The free trade agreement with Canada was signed by Ronald Reagan in 1987. This was followed by the negotiation of NAFTA (free trade with the U.S., Canada and Mexico) during Bush 41's term and signed in 1993 by Clinton.
Steel and aluminum tariffs seem directed more at Canada, naming China and other producers as the villains to hide and diminish a long and stable relationship between Canada and the U.S.
1
I would like to imagine that China and other foreign steel-producing nations have plenty of other markets - like Africa and India - to export to, and do not necessarily have to rely upon the United States. In addition, automation will have a great impact globally on the production of virtually all products (including here in the United States), upon which punitive tariffs will have very little effect.
This is a situation where prosperity generated by unrestricted free trade is opposed by a need to maintain national self-sufficiency in strategic industries. Both are worthwhile goals but we can't maximize both. We need a balance.
1
Get ready to pay higher prices to prop up inefficient domestic steel producers if tariffs come to pass.
Any help to the steel industry should be contingent on it meeting targets for reducing costs of domestic production to be world competitive. From a national security perspective a non-competitive steel sector is a problem that should be solved by making it efficient.
“…While I'm a stiff proponent of free trade, I'm also as fervently, an advocate for fair trade…”
Charles – 16 Recommend
“Fair” is in the eye of the beholder.
The question is: fair to whom?
1. US producers of the protected goods?
2. The workers of US producers of the protected goods?
3. US consumers?
4. The workers of other US producers?
An increase in the price of protected goods means consumers will have less disposable income with which to purchase other goods and services, whose production will have to be reduced and their workers will have to be laid off.
An example is the number of solar panel installers who will have to be laid off due to the quotas and tariffs on imported solar panels. Consumers will have to pay more for electricity. Is that “fair”?
For all parties to benefit goods and services should be traded freely on the basis of each country’s comparative advantage. However, profits have to be taxed in the countries where the goods and services are sold (as in a VAT), regardless of the producer’s home country. Only then will governments be able to educate laid off workers and minimize the disruptive effects of free trade.
Isn't it funny that the same companies which made enormous profits via global trade before there was any competition are the ones crying now. As long as these corporations, along with their unions, can stick it to the other consumers in the nation they will continue to win. However, the rest of us will end up paying far more.
China uses this excuse to completely block foreign competitors from their markets in many industries, including steel.
The message China should be receiving is what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
While initially there will be whining, this could lead to broader discussions about trade with China and help correct the inequities in the relationship.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Steel_companies_of_Germany
There are still 11 steel mills in Germany.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_iron_and_steel_industry_in_...
The iron and steel industry in the United States is history.
If we would offer universal health coverage to ALL like Germans did starting in 1883, 1883, ALL American businesses will become more competitive worldwide because healthcare will become much cheaper and there will be little risk dealing with volatile insurance premiums. On top of that, our health outcomes will finally catch up with the rest of the developed countries.
1
IT'S NOT JOBS, ITS POLITICS people. Trump wants to carry Ohio in the next election. Just as Obama didn't care about the already lost red Keystone states. Ohio, with it's steel mills is important electorally, as is Iowa with it's first caucuses and aquifer draining ethanol program. Politics and power is what it's all about. Don't waste time trying to make logical arguments.
How will tariffs on foreign steel help to prevent Russia from interfering and even rigging our elections? Or does Trump anticipate starting World War III?
1
There are maybe a dozen steel plants in America. If tariffs are put in place, they couldn't possibly fulfill the demand. Tariffs don't make sense in an era of a global economy on any level but because Trump has an unrealistic idea that we can go back to the industrial era of his youth, he could end up throwing a wrench into our economy that could take years to recover from.
5
OUR commerce department is being run by Robber Baron investor Wilbur Ross. According to Wikipedia, "Before he was appointed (by the Con Don), Ross was a banker known for restructuring failed companies in industries such as steel, coal, telecommunications, foreign investment and textiles who specialized in leveraged buyouts and distressed businesses.
Another hostile takeover Robber Baron who is using OUR United States government to further his own interests. If he isn't caught up in the FBI investigation WE THE PEOPLE must demand that he be thrown out on his ear, along with every other Robber Baron operative.
NOW is the time, before they can further destroy OUR democracy and cause WW3.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Ross
18
Not an economist but bridges use steel, tunnels use steel, power plants use steel, railroads use steel. Buy America infrastructure spending would do more for the domestic steel and aluminum industries than tariffs.
19
Personally, I rather buy my metal, even at a higher price, from other countries than from American companies and workers who supported Unstable Trump in the election.
12
BUT they have been forced to vote for him by past ignorant FREE TRADE deals pushed by reaganistas
1
I see the politics of hate have become a religion. Preserving our ability to build infrastructure and war materials shouldn't be nearly as controversial as it is. I still don't understand how we can talk about retaking the house in the midterms while we continue to do everything we can to ship jobs overseas while padding wall street banker pockets. Get over the hate and come to the table.
2
Why not invest in the country's infrastructure (roads, bridges, schools, etc.) to stimulate the American steel industry? Oh, that's right, we cannot afford it because the U.S. Government gave a $1.5T tax break to the corporations that primarily benefit from these assets. Tariffs will create more problems....plugging one hole on a sinking boat only to create another hole. If we are going to compete, let's compete on quality. Differentiating ourselves from the competition based on quality is the best option to compete worldwide. Investing in the country's infrastructure is a long-term plan that will stimulate innovation and the economy overall while helping the American Steel industry in the process.
11
Your ideas are practical and would work. However, doing what is practical and helpful for the country might slow the flow of money to the rich. Inflict the inflicted and sow distraction, that's how the money moves up.
1
For 8 years the Obama administration sat on it hands as the steel and manufacturing industries in America- and especially in the Ohio Valley- were decimated by terrible trade deals and Chinese dumping of steel by its state-subsidized companies. Those jobs are gone now, and the idled factories are rusting away. This is great news, a decade too late.
3
There are lots reasons for the decline of the American Steel industry. The steel industry started its decline in the 60's. Owners were slow to innovate and the recession in 2008 marked the end of big steel in America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_steel_industry_(1850–1970)#20th_century
6
"American options for aiming at China directly are limited. Because the United States has already imposed a raft of restrictions on Chinese steel in previous years, only 2 percent of American steel imports came directly from China in 2015."
Because nothing says "Make America Great Again" and "I care about the forgotten people" quite like raising the cost of everything made from steel and aluminum. Nothing quite shows concern for those "forgotten people" like sparking off a trade war that raises the costs of everything they buy at the Walmart. Nothing shows concern and caring for the "forgotten people" like increasing deficits and cutting Medicaid and Social Security because of deficits you yourself caused with a great big "tax reform" handout to the very wealthy. Nope, Trump sure knows how to MAGA - "believe me!"
20
Protectionist policies like these proposals usually backfire.
7
The Trump administration is clearly susceptible to blackmail from many fronts and should not be able to make these kinds of decisions until the American Public can be sure that there's no undue influence from inside or outside the country.
8
In the old days, trade was primarily about obtaining material resources unavailable locally. You send me tropical fruit, , I send you maple syrup. Then, with the advent of world wide shipping, it became a function of labor cost and economies of scale. Manufacturing went to low cost areas, food production went to large agribusiness farms. Factories in developed countries shut down, small farmers in undeveloped countries headed for the cities as they could not compete against US mega corporations.
Due to this, individual countries have economically benefitted, but they have lost their resiliency. Many countries now cannot survive without imported food. In the US, there are many products such as TV's and phones that we just cannot make any more. Suddenly 'free' trade is forced trade.
So now the world is unalterably tied together for survival. No country is self sufficient for its survival any more. We made our bed, now it seems that tariffs are a bit like closing the bard door after the horse is out.
11
Cheap steel is already flooding into the US in anticipation of huge tariffs. This rhetoric hastening the demise of US steel.
If the commerce department is serious about foreign steel being a national security threat, then their answer should be nationalizing the US steel industry. That's the only way to ensure a domestic steel supply in case of a war or national emergency.
Huge tariffs just help owners of US steel mill companies maintain profits in the face of cheap foreign competition. Hey, wait a minute...
2
"only 2 percent of American steel imports came directly from China in 2015."
The key word is "directly". China often sends the steel to a third country which stamps its name on the product and the dumps it onto our market. The degree to which that happens needs to be ascertained and accounted for when determining what, if anything, needs to be done re: tariffs and quotas.
3
If implemented, this will buy a bit of time until we lose the challenge at the World Trade Organization. The national security issue is a very thin reed and easy excuse for not slogging through antidumping and anti-subsidy investigations, at the same time saving US industry a boatload in legal fees that would be required to prosecute such investigations. The quota option could be like the managed trade in steel under Presidents Reagan and Bush41. In those days, the Commerce Dept would determine if a product was in short supply domestically and then allow a domestic steel-using company to import a very specific product in excess of the quota. And the Republican party supposedly hates industrial policy!
2
Are you insane???Where do you think most of the material comes from for American military?? How much did Vlad pay you??
So, at issue here is free enterprise, where everyone can try any line of commerce, and the winners and losers reflects patterns of ability, motivation, and resource. Of course, we have long since given up on that: regulation, individual trade laws, application of sometimes contorted ideas of intellectual property have twisted all that up...so, one might think, if you have to have it, then make a far reaching, multilateral arrangement that tried to consider all the issues at once. Hmm, we had done that, it was called the TPP, and Mr Uninterested-before-the-end-of-paragraph-one threw it out. Now we are back to square one, except the content-challenged President is calling the shots, one impulse at the time
One of the purposes of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1948 was making France and Germany dependent upon each other so that they could hate each other if they wanted to, but they couldn't fight each other.
Making China and the United States totally dependent upon one another seems like rather a sensible idea in that light, doesn't it?
2
If I'm not mistaken Canadian pipe manufacturing is on the list of imports threatened with penalties. You'd think the country that BUYS more US exports than any other country might merit a mention, especially as Canadians are increasingly displeased with the indignities of dealing with Wilbur Ross et al in the context of NAFTA, softwood lumber, and Bombrdier jets. I'd rather buy US goods than from a lot of places, but increasingly we are given incentive to think about alternatives. Just this week Canada commenced trade discussions with Brazil and Argentina. We already signed on for TPP with Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Vietnam, Japan and more. And we have a new trade agreement with Europe. But the US can isolate itself if it is really determined to do so. Would that be "winning"?
6
"Just this week Canada commenced trade discussions with Brazil and Argentina."
.... and Prime Minister Trudeau is also travelling to India this week to discuss expansion of trade between the two countries.
Obviously Canada is getting ready for the worst case scenario, which is Trump withdrawing from NAFTA all together. No doubt there will be many jobs lost in Canada, Mexico, and the US. The sector that will be hit hard in Canada is the car manufacturing and related industries.
As in the past, Canada can quickly adjust and find new customers for its products. But the potential implications for the US economy could be many times worse. A deep recession in the US is not out of question, if Congress does not change hand in 2018 election.
1
I think Canada will be hit harder in the short term, but jobs in the auto sector don't have a great future with the increasing emergence of the auto sharing economy which makes so much sense on so many levels in an urban context. Longer term Canada can do really well with its abundance of well connected immigrants and positive reputation. It is a real shame to see the US decline so badly when in the 1950's you could argue it was the greatest country that ever was - not for "winning", but for showing generosity, compassion and enlightenment toward countries who had been its very worst enemies.
1
So much for the power and majesty of unfettered free market competition. Is there a little irony to the fact that US agricultural production thus agricultural exports are heavily subsidized in this country? We're slipping into crony capitalism, selling off public assets to politically favored oligarchs and protecting politically favored industries to the detriment of the greater public good.
I hope there is at least one person at Wharton who is appalled that they gave 45 a graduate degree in business.
5
Where are the tariffs on oil and coal? Two things Trump values dearly. His imposition on solar is a blatant attack on clean energy. If Trump had any sort of consistency he would place tariffs on all energy imports. Or logically he should aid the soon to be massive industry that is clean energy, instead of inhibiting it. Some business man.
3
You obviously do not understand that Trump's energy policy has done more to lower oil and natural gas prices globally than any tariff could possibly do. Opening new federal and private lands to shale fracking and oil exploration has made the U.s. semi-independent energy wise. That benefits not only american consumers, but also those consumers in other nations to whom we export oil and natural gas.
So, in addition to our (reduced) taxes paying for huge military budget increase/buildup, and waste, we have to pay to protect industries that supply defense with inputs through increased costs on goods that at the same time, makes those goods less competitive globally. Add 15-20% to the cost of your infrastructure effort, Donald. Which means higher costs for users of that infrastructure. You and possibly we, might have been better off if you just said all defense contracts must use US steel, and federally funded infrastructure as well, although I suspect that’s already law. At least that gets paid for over many years, at low interest rates, while this across the board reaction raises the cost on everything we buy, today. Smart, albeit shifty way to pay for your tax cuts.
1
"The Trump administration has said that its steel and aluminum investigation would help address a global issue created by China, which has used generous state subsidies to dominate the global metals trade."
If China has managed to dominate the global metals trade, it is not because of its "generous state subsidies."
We don't want admit that but it is simply due to the fact that Chinese have proven to be highly efficient in basic industries (e.g. steel and aluminium) compared to most other countries.
China's economy is centralized, that is openly controlled by the government. As such, one can conveniently label any money that the Chinese government does spend on expanding an industry or improving its manufacturing techniques as "state subsidies." In light of that, one can ask a fundamental question: why shouldn't the Chinese view the recent 14% tax cuts for US manufacturers to be also "state subsidies"? And, then, which of these two "subsidies" are in fact larger in their relative values?
6
Having worked with many Chinese steel companies, I can assure you they are not succeeding due to their tremendous efficiency.
There is huge government support at city, province and national levels given all steel companies are state owned enterprises (SOEs).
Market pricing of foreign products in the US and global markets does not represent the true cost to the global society. US products must include pension, healthcare and other social costs in the pricing, however Chinese products do not. That is a choice their society may make (or have made for them), however it should be reflected in the overall pricing scheme. If the Chinese products do not price it correctly, then a tariff should help the market pricing mechanism, and redirect the tariff income to the US social safety net. This should be a lesson for all nations, including the US who could have similar tariffs applied due to our large CO2 production which is not properly priced currently.
1
Exactly the sorts of issues the TPP was designed to address. But try explaining that to a Trump supporter!
Republicans were once opposed to tariffs and backed free trade. But now GOP members of congress have been lashed to Trump's populist policies by their fear of Trump's low-information base in the primaries. It's a box of little comfort for the GOP. Hugging Trump may help in the primaries but could prove disastrous in November's general elections.
Hard to feel much sympathy for a party that has cultivated xenophobia and jingoism for decades.
3
I usually disagree with what Trump does. But I have mixed feelings about this. The economic ramifications are complex. Maybe more jobs. Maybe higher prices. As someone who imports products with steel components, my bottom line could suffer, or maybe not.
One thing that seems clear is that there is bound to be less environmental damage by producing steel closer to home. This article features a photo of a Chinese steel yard with a truck that is clearly old and rusting. Talk about a lack of pollution controls! I don't even see an exhaust stack. You would never see a truck like that on the road in the U.S. Of course, mining steel here at home has its own serious environmental costs. But if it is true that more U.S. production of steel has environmental benefits, then I suppose it won't be long before Trump backtracks on his plan, if only to make sure he doesn't do anything good for the environment.
We have Superfund sites all over the United States still in need of clean-up caused by corporations that could care less about the environment.
The problem is bigger than we think.
The Chinese, for example, have been known to adulterate their products -- rivets come to mind, as per a report by The New York Times a few years ago, and, for that matter, toothpaste; but let's not forget that even domestic plants are sometimes owned by multinational corporations. Medications are made abroad. Our soldiers' uniforms are made abroad. It's hard to find a kitchen product that is made in the United States. How is it that even our own port here is operated by a foreign entity?
We are running out of IV bags because they're made in Puerto Rico, still a shambles after the storm -- and not even "foreign."
It's takes a long time to restart a manufacturing plant. You can't retool a factory in a month or even, in most cases, a year. And on the other hand, given our global politics, it isn't smart to rely on other nations for our micro-chips and computer components.
Even some of our anti-bug software are created and made in Russia. How smart is that?
But can we manufacturer all that ourselves? Not any time soon.
4
The question of aduleration, quality it a real one that might be best addressed by changing "least expensive product" bidding for infrastructure. In California this requirement led to the use of Chinese steel and rivets in the construction of the replacement span of the bay bridge. American products were more expensive than the Chinese. But the Chinese rivets in particular have been found inferior and are failing, leading to expensive efforts at repair and replacement to avoid the danger posed by the failing and otherwise questionable rivets. Some of the "solution" is to wrap dubious areas with the conceptual equivalent of duct tape.
3
This article fails to address two important issues stemming from both sides of the debate. First, steel imports are a critical part of the U.S. supply chain. As a nation we produce 80 million tons annually but demand is 110 million tons, meaning that we need to import 30 million tons each year to cover the gap. Domestic mills cannot make up the difference overnight. We also import high quality steels which are not produced by U.S. Producers. On the other side of the debate, this article does not address the issue of circumvention which is when producers, for instance in China, ship steel to countries like Vietnam where the steel undergoes light processing. This is a tactic deployed to evade tariffs and will certainly continue in the future.
What exactly does “overnight” mean? If we have an emergency in steel production, couldn’t there be an intensive program to build steel plants. We ramped up production quickly in WWI. It’s defeatist to claim we can’t do it now. Maybe bring in Mr Mosley.
We are, in theory, going ot start a major upgrade to our infrastructure which will be expensive the way things are at present. Our infrastructure tends to use large amounts of steel and other metals. Aircraft require aluminum and other metals. What trumpy and company are going to do is raise the costs for the US construction/airplane/cars etc industry and we ultimately pay for it through higher prices. A difficult issue beyond trumps capability to solve.
Even w/o retaliation this would be devastating to US manufacturers. Steel is used in manufacturing and at the very least prices would increase. Since it would take some time to bring US steel factories out of mothballs there would likely be shortages. Stere is already a shortage of labor and labor costs are going up. Sudden steep tariffs are a terrible idea.
Source: I own a US factory.
If there is a concern about offshore steel and aluminum production from a national security perspective, a much more important issue is being neglected. Far more important in that regard is the offshore production of semiconductors and the decline of domestic semiconductor production, vital to all of our national defense industries.
Any increase in the cost of aluminum for products like soft drinks would be "trivial"? Absurd for sure. The cost of the container likely makes up 80% of the total product cost, compared to the cost of the contents.
How will they replace the rare earth elements that China has a chokehold on? All our modern miniaturization in electronics is dependent on access to rare earths, especially in advanced avionics.
Steel is easy. Rare Earths are critical and we gave the mining industry to China decades ago. Afganistan is loaded with deposits, BTW. Which is why we're there.
If we go back to the disaster when auto companies convinced congress to limit number of japanese vehicles coming into America. The ostensible reason that Japanese cars were inferior to American and were perhaps not safe.
What happened??
Japanese said heck with this.
We will just build cars in America by setting up plants. Soon, many others followed. And our domestic industry was on that inevitable sliding down into bankruptcies.
So, if I were POTUS - I would go with tariffs.
If we limit their volumes, they will do exactly what the Japanese did and our steel workers will still lose.
Having said this, my own gut reaction is all these trade protections are like shooting ourselves in foot.
In the long run, they do more harm than good.
But extra tariffs - if our domestic industry and unions use this opportunity to get more efficient production. It could just be a win win.
Symbolism is important in politics. This move may hurt our economy and not produce many jobs in the steel industry- robotic technology and other computer driven innovation assures this, but a leader sometimes uses ritualistic gestures to communicate.
Obama did terrible damage to the Dem party by never really going after Wall St. for the shenanigans that led to the 2008 collapse- corporate fines are no substitute for prison time or at least the public shaming of criminal trials. Lives of regular Americans (and people all over the world) were destroyed while the thirst for revenge was unquenched.
Most voters are not paying close enough attention to reward politicians for the minor improvements that come from the legislative tinkering that is really all that can be accomplished by the best of them, at least until we pass effective campaign finance reform.
Trump can do terrible harm to our nation, but if the great showman and despicable human being projects the image of protecting American workers, he may avoid losing the congress to the Dems in 18.
As George Will phrased it, citing Henry George: “with protectionism a nation does to itself in peacetime what an enemy tries to do to it in war.”
And the Steelworkers appear to have taken the bait (and switch).
4
I am a bit surprised at the jump in the stock price of US Steel (USX). I inherited a few shares from my father. I note that there is very little activity in the Pittsburgh area, but (if I remember correctly) USX owns facilities in Slovakia and Korea. Like many US firms, USX may have acquired overseas facilities - not simply as a means of exporting jobs to lower cost places - but as a means of improving supply chains. Clearly, such a tariff could have some negative consequences for the manufacturers themselves. We should have left the 19th century world of tariffs long behind.
1
Our strategic and economic interests should not be held hostage to the Trump re-election strategy. If foreign entities want to sell what is believed to be strategic materials into the US market significantly below cost then buy 5 years worth of the strategic reserves and warehouse it (5 years of strategic reserves of steel and aluminum would actual cost less than one new fleet aircraft carrier and shockingly little floor space compared to the total idle production floor space). Bonus: in the event of a national emergency these materials would then be immediately available rather than depending upon start production time.
Do what is best economically, avoid fake strategic arguments and don't make the US consumers pay for the Trump electoral college votes through higher priced consumer products.
1
OK, slap a big tariff on Steel and Aluminum, but realize that the US is no longer competitive in either area. Between our wage structure, and environmental regulations, you probably can't build a primary steel plant or aluminum smelter in the US any more. You certainly can't open a new iron ore mine and we would have to import the bauxite for an aluminum smelter. So how are you going to replace the steel and aluminum that won't be coming in? Oh, and BTW all those bridges and highways, the administration wanted to build with it $1.0 T infrastructure plan? Forget it, we won't have the steel to do it.
We really shouldn't have to explain to our own government how interconnected the world is, they are supposed to be the experts. Oops! I'm sorry, I forgot who we are dealing with.
4
Import taxes drive up inflation and cost jobs. Period.
4
This will do absolutely zero to produce jobs. The increased cost of the tariffs will simply be passed on to the consumers. Step one in wiping out that pittance of a "middle class tax break".
3
Not to mention substitution. Consumers will buy less since the cost went up (supply and demand). Companies will look to replace metals that have gotten more expensive in their products where they can.
The price for steel per unit will go up but the number of units sold will decrease.
Your article states that only 2% of the steel imports came from China. I think that is a little misleading. Maybe the figure is correct for coils or sheets of steel. What it leaves out is Chinese steel that enters the US in the form of washing machines, refrigerators, car parts, and many other products produced in countries other than China that still use Chinese-made steel. So putting tariffs on or limiting imports of steel from other countries may not have the desired impact. And protectionist actions often lead to retaliatory steps from the other side. What is really needed is a combination of trade agreements that help to level the playing field and efforts to become more competitive through investments in technology and equipment that make domestic steel more desirable. Sadly, that probably ends up costing jobs, but potentially creates a need for new ones. The situation won’t be easily resolved, particularly by protectionist actions.
1
I still remember in business school--it is one of the first things you learn how to do is calculate the benefit/harm of tariffs. Mostly harm. Mostly cronyism. Bush's bailout of the steel mills could have been paid out to every working person in the industry and been less of a drain on the taxpayers who floated the corporate boondoogle instead. The workers could have retired or retrained in comfort. Now we have the DJT Sopranos ensconced in the White House.... ?
Although much has been made of the current administration's trade actions, it remains to be seen whether the amount of commerce impacted by them exceeds that of previous administrations.
Every nation wants to move up the curve into production of higher profit products. In China's case, a tariff on metals combined with the size of the Chinese market and the Chinese penchant for requiring foreign companies to produce in China for the Chinese market will simply increase the profit hungry American producers rate of production in China for export to the US.
As for solar panels... well, it will take a few more months before the legal evasions are in place (either fabbing non-tariff solar products, or winding the products through countries that won't get hit with a tariff. Remember the tariff on Japanese small trucks? Evaded, because Japan could export a chassis and box separately to America and assemble them... the pieces were not subject to tariff. Shortly the same sort of legal evasion will happen with solar and washing machines, wack a mole anytime money is involved).
Trump and his cast of isolationist mongers are starting trade wars that will set our economy back for a generation. Fighting over the prices of washing machines and solar cells is a signal. Arguing over steel is the battle. Tariffs may cause imports to shrink, but will cost all American consumers trillions in the future. Trump's investors don't care where they make their money. It looks like it's going to be coming out of my pocket, more and more.
3
You have nations that allow industry to defecate in the waters and the sky and have little or no pollution controls to pay for. They have a serious competitive cost advantage.
When the pollution that blows our way poisons our air, and kills off our fisheries, then we suddenly feel the pain of cheap imports. I don't buy food farmed in third world nations for that reason.
A tariff would reflect the cost of implementing the same pollution and safety controls we have here, giving the nation in question a reason to enact them, and starting to level the field.
1
Here we go again. The solar installation workers were impacted by the tariff, and now this. China will just retaliate and make us pay for this administration's mistakes.
1
Both Wilber Ross and Donald Trump have made careers out of creating unsettled business conditions for personal benefits. Donald Trump who bled dry his casinos, and Wilber Ross who essentially did the same thing with numerous businesses, including a number of steel companies. Both are now applying the same principles to international trade agreements. Jobs will be lost, agreements will unravel, but the personal wealth of both Mr. Trump and Mr. Ross will remain intact.
1
The concept is to shift American workers from jobs that are competitive (competitive firms that use steel and aluminum) to jobs that are not competitive, and to make those jobs dependent on political favors.
The problem of importation of steel to the US has been a source of wonderment to me for some time. Two decades ago China had virtually no steel industry but today it leads the world in steel production. Why is Chinese steel so cheap that they can afford to mine the ore, smelt the ore and then ship the product halfway around the world for less than it can be made domestically? Their cost advantage is not due to cheap labor because labor accounts for a very small portion of the cost of steel.They may have an advantages of scale as they now produce many times what the US now produces but this given high raw material and energy costs can't explain their seeming low cost supplier status. Most likely they and others, some of whom are our allies (Japan,Vietnam), are dumping production at incremental costs to protect their own nascent domestic industries. By excluding fixed costs and profits from their exported steel they are able to continue to expand their own industry and work force at minimal cost. This is a common tactic used by many nations, including the US during its earlier days, to develop native industries.
This is not something we should start a full scale trade war with China over especially since that nation accounted for only 2% of our imports in recent years.
Rather we might focus in the importation of rare earths and rare metals which truly represent valid concerns with regard to domestic security since they are used for special military purposes.
What do the Economists in Trump's administration say? (never mind- there aren't any- Peter-anti-free-trade-Navarro doesn't count).
2
A tariff on imported steel will raise the cost of car production in the United States. Will we then place a tariff on imported cars? Where does it all end?
1
Foreign companies have been dumping steel on our markets for decades. Tariffs are long overdue and necessary to stop this type of "free trade".
1
Internally the problem is that far more workers are involved in making and building things using steel and aluminum than are engaged in making it. Ross's soup can comment is absurd. Then most of these products are coming from our allies. So in summary the plan is to harm jobs in the US, increase consumer prices in the US, and harm our allies who will almost certainly reciprocate. What could go wrong.
66
This may very well be a greater trade talk negotiation tactics. Or so one should hope. If it is some provincial base appeasement, trade wars are just a mutually assured destruction
9
Pure political stunt that will cost many more American jobs in fabrication and manufacturing than it will save in steel makers. The steep tariffs enacted during the Obama and Bush administration already proved that.
43
I work in metal fabrication. Everyone I know is just kind of barely hanging on. If you force these people to subsidize a small number of foundry jobs by raising material costs, a fair number of them will lose their grip.
Forget republican and democratic, can we just try to make policies that are in our collective best interest? Seems like they just stopped even pretending to try.
9
This administration will cause so much global economic chaos that global trading by co-operation and multi-nation fair trade pacts will be degraded to a dark Machiavellian bi-lateral zest between countries to dominate the world. Shades of "1984" and those other dystopian novel settings will be our future ....
33
The proposed actions would probably have been appropriate in the last century. The rationale is fairly simple: block out foreign imports, increase domestic production, and with it comes more jobs.
But today, in a world ever more automated and with shareholders in search for every last dollar, what stops the large corporations from increasing their production by way of robots? What happens to those promised jobs then?
Protectionism in the 21st century is a half-baked idea!
62
I agree that protectionism is always a terrible action but wonder why then it is the preferred method for dealing with immigration since border restrictions are nothing more than labor protectionism.
1
Do we have the industrial capability of replacing the foreign supplies? What will be the result if there is a shortage and how long will the shortage last?
41
Who cares as long as they can get donations from a coal company!
Tax and restrict the raw materials in bulk form and the same materials will simply move to flow in as finished or semi finished component parts or components in assemblies. The price of raw material in all those parts and pieces will decline for the foreign manufacturers as supply goes up when the raw materials cannot be sold to the US market. That means even more difficulties for US manufacturers trying to compete on parts and components. Our aluminum forgings, made here in the USA using raw material made in the USA, are already at a disadvantage as we do not have a level playing field. We are not able to purchase capital equipment at negative interest rates like China. We don't have "disposable" employees like competitors in several countries, who can simply fire the hurt or injured or make a cheap "cost of doing business" payoff. Businesses in other countries don't carry an equivalent burden of health insurance and other "fringe benefits" that are far beyond our control - made worse when the politicians roil the marketplace. It's very difficult to understand how the large metal producing Companies have made this calculation. They will not get the market share back when those in the US who must subsequently buy their products go out of business because they can't compete with the parts and components that will shift to non US production due to price. If materials are to be restricted, they will need to be restricted in ALL FORMS. Then, here comes inflation, Bigly!
21
Well, the GOP could just decalre all foreign nations with important or strategic assets the US needs for its economic health, "offically part of , or territories of, the USA". In this fashion, we can actually have our cake and eat it too. Or jaguars or Volkswagen or other nominally "foriegn" object of US desire. I bet Trump would not be above at least trying such a scam.
Maybe we could even raid the German, British or other European or Asian medical systems for the doctors we need but don't want to pay to train . . . We could "invite" Cuba to be a part of the USA, (at gunpoint, if needed), as they seem to have about the finest and least expensive medical system in the hemisphere!
It’s about time China gets a dose of their own medicine.
For those who say this will start a trade war, you have to remember that the US has already been in a trade war with China for the past 10+ years that our government had refused to acknowledge. Because of this trade war, the US has lost millions of jobs in many industries, still has its intellectual property stolen, and faces unfair competition because China manipulates their currency.
It’s great that the US now has a President that gets the picture and is willing to fight on its behalf.
15
But American options for aiming at China directly are limited. Because the United States has already imposed a raft of restrictions on Chinese steel in previous years, only 2 percent of American steel imports came directly from China in 2015.
That means that any measures from the Trump administration are likely to weigh more heavily on other countries, including some close allies. In 2016, Canada accounted for the largest proportion of United States steel imports, about 17 percent, followed by Brazil, South Korea, Mexico, Turkey and Japan.
1
Yeah, it's a great idea to start a war because you're losing a battle! I mean sure they have every advantage and will completely wreck us in a war but then we won't be capable of losing this battle anymore! Yay!
May one ask if the amount of money Trump personally owes to Chinese banks concerns you in any way at all?
The outbreak of Smoot-Hawley fever spreads in the Trump administration. The only vaccine is the study of history. There's no shortage of history, just a shortage of study.
126
Pandering to the mookie people who may have been duped into voting for him, the president has come out with yet another irrational initiative. Specialty steel is still important in the USA but we have already dismantled the dinosaurs throughout the Midwest, Pennsylvania and elsewhere that once built our skyscrapers, bridges and even framed our houses. Steel basically occupies a niche where it lives off residuals. Aluminium, which this country has always mispronounced because of its laziness, is cheaper coming from outside our commerce due to raw material and labor inputs. Let's leave it that way...
10
Do the Trump folks have the slightest inkling what happened with steel imports from and exports to Japan immediately prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor? As I understand it, some considered tariffs acts of war, and they used the exports to build the weaponry used to attack Pearl Harbor. I’m not discriminating Japan, but I have absolutely 0 confidence that this administration knows what it’s doing. All this crisis and nationalism is going to flop for sure.
22
It will just be a pass through price increase at the least. No difference in what would happen if we get toll roads to move goods although the toll roads have a greater total impact. Increase the price and everybody pays. . Trump's approach to international trade is kind of thick headed but it looks good politically for his base.
11
Most of the people commenting on this are not in industries that are producers of steel or aluminum. They are being decimated by foreign predatory practices. Some of the people commenting here are just plain shortsighted.
The purpose of predatory practices is to drive your competitor out of business and to take over their market. Then once you take over the market you can raise the price on your product sent overseas. This is gouging. Then while that market is paying higher prices for steel, you keep the prices low at home so that anything produced domestically can be exported cheaper thereby gaining even more export strength. Steel and aluminum are used throughout our country and to lose control of those products is to lose our national strength.
One of the people on this blog gave an example of why Boeing would be noncompetitive if domestic steel prices rose. If domestic steel producers shut down and Boeing was forced to buy from China do you think China would play nice? Is that what you think? They want to take over industries that countries rely upon because then you are at their mercy.
24
As the article mentioned, only 2% of steel in the US comes directly from the US. They've already been pretty much shut out of the US market. China is nowhere near dominating global production (nor is that scenario quite possible), and the US will continue to have a steady supply of steal and aluminum from lower-wage allies like Korea and parts of the EU.
Here's why raising tariffs or imposing import quotas won't be effective: on the supply side, the US has almost no hope of becoming a major steel exporter/producer globally ever again. We don't want our workers earning Chinese or Korean wages. Unless we negotiate with the Chinese politically to address their overcapacity, global supply will remain high and rising. On the demand side, the US is a pretty insignificant market for steal and aluminum. Two thirds of global steal demand currently comes from Asia & Oceania. The whole NAFTA area stands at only 13% of what Asian & Oceanian demand is this year. Overall, the US will have little impact on the global prices of steal and aluminum. All that tariff or quota could do is distort domestic prices beyond international level, and ask US industry and consumers to bear the cost. Another classical case of a small number of corporations that could not compete globally kidnapping national policy and asking everyone to pay for it.
So we should raise the prices paid by 320 million people to protect the jobs of a few hundred thousand? Better if we just shut down the steel and aluminum plants that management is offshoring anyway, for profits, and paid the workers directly. Retire the steelworkers on a government pension, and our taxes will go up less than we would pay for increased prices of everything that has steel in it... Trump is choosing political posturing over what is good for the whole country. Solar panels - a tariff that might save a few thousand solar panel *manufacturing* jobs in the US, but which will kill tens of thousands of solar panel *installing* jobs. And slow down the conversion from greenhouse gas producing electricity to green solar electricity. And someday coming soon we'll be faced higher taxes with building levees, seawalls, and trying to stop the effects of climate change... because we didn't try to slow it down when it would have been possible. Short-sighted, greedy, profit-driven and ideologically-based policy decisions are no way to MAGA! Republicans willingly and eagerly destroy our country's future to put more money in the pockets of their wealthy plutocrat campaign-funding 'owners' now.
This article clearly states that only two percent of steel imports came from China. The rest from allies. USA is continuously angering it's allies and to what end?Is make America great meant to be make America alone? That's the way this is heading.
If we don't have inflation yet, we are about to, and really severely. The entire world will go on a binge of nationalistic tariffs against all other nations over the one or two things they think need specioal protection and taxing. All of a sudden we will be forced to eat US cheese, give up CHilean and South American fruits and vegetables we now eat all year round to supplement our own, and it will start because the big metals companies want protection. I remember how expensive US made goods were and how often they were qualitatively inferior, because they were operating in markets without competion. Consider, however, that there were no bicycles made in the USA of comparable quality or with orbital gears as in so called English 3 speed bikes. There were NO 10 or even 5 speed bikes made in the USA. Schwinn practically controlled the US bike market with inferior designs from the 1930's: 1 speed, balloon tire bikes , made of iron that weighed more than their riders. The USA was so used to having it's way after the war and it's unions were often totally unwilling to aid their manufacturers, thato we ended up on the world's back burner as a manufacturer of second and third rate goods few people wanted, not when they could get Japanese or German makes. The US , like Britai n 50 years earlier,hanged itself on it's own imperial petard.
23
The President's new tariff on solar cells doesn't "help domestic industry," as most solar jobs are in installation, not manufacturing. Making solar panels 25% more expensive is a body blow to the industry and will cost jobs as well as hurt a thriving green energy sector. His decision has more to do with propping up coal and oil than it does helping create jobs. SAD and imbecilic.
83
Oh, the cheap foreign metal that Trump has used for his own development projects?
91
May be Trump Organization should voluntary pay the fines to US govt. for pushing American Steel workers out of work!
By the way, Pittsburgh and Monongahela valley has much cleaner air after its steel plants shut down and its economy supports a large number of high tech jobs.
While I'm a stiff proponent of free trade, I'm also as fervently, an advocate for fair trade. Mr. Trump is not my candidate, however, our other Presidents seemed to turn a blind eye on the so called "dumping" of goods on the American market (solar panels by the Chinese and flat screens by the Koreans, etc.) in effect, essential killing those domestic industries. We've been told that there were other economic benefits despite the loss of those types of manufacturing.
When one looks at the hallowed out landscape that is industrial middle America and its associated problems (welfare, community blight, opioids, crime, etc.) and the political divisions it has brought, it might just be time to have another look at "fair trade".
22
“…While I'm a stiff proponent of free trade, I'm also as fervently, an advocate for fair trade…”
“Fair” is in the eye of the beholder.
The question is: fair to whom?
1. US producers of the protected goods?
2. The workers of US producers of the protected goods?
3. US consumers?
4. The workers of other US producers?
An increase in the price of protected goods means consumers will have less disposable income with which to purchase other goods and services, whose production will have to be reduced and their workers will have to be laid off.
An example is the number of solar panel installers who will have to be laid off due to the quotas and tariffs on imported solar panels. Consumers will have to pay more for electricity. Is that “fair”?
For all parties to benefit goods and services should be traded freely on the basis of each country’s comparative advantage. However, profits have to be taxed in the countries where the goods and services are sold (as in a VAT), regardless of the producer’s home country. Only then will governments be able to educate laid off workers and minimize the disruptive effects of free trade.
Bringing back steel & aluminum production to the USA may or may not be protective of national security, but it will not return enough jobs to middle America to make any difference.
Automation, robotics & AI have replaced most of the human labor needed on the plant floor of these industries. The tens of thousands of jobs lost over the last 30-40 years will probably be replaced by dozens of jobs. In addition, most of the manufacturers would probably skip the industrial midwest for rebuilding in the south. The non-union, low wage/benefit, south. A supposed revival of American industry isn't going to help the midwest much (and it won't be great for the south of every able-bodied person in the midwest flooded it for jobs).
"The question is: fair to whom?"...
5. Is it fair to consider protecting our national security?
The price of steel products has already rebounded considerably from lows hit 2 years ago. China had (and still has) way too much steel making capacity (as it does in many industries) and thought they could export their excess to us and other developed economies. Whoops!
I greatly dislike Trump but I think something along these lines would have happened no matter who was elected President.
10
As someone who reviews the origin of the steel content of equipment as part of my job, I don't think the administration realizes/cares how much comes from overseas and what impact tariffs will have. It's not like you can just spin up an idle mill and in a few weeks be turning out high quality steel and forgings. I doubt there are people out there with the skills needed in sufficient numbers to start up very many mills.
Will finished goods be subjected to the tariffs? Will US based companies be penalized for fabrication outside the US for non-US facilities?
87
I read recently some huge portion of American young men are not eligible to serve in the military due to being obese...
Will we see high tax on sugar/unhealthy food to combat that?
28
This is what happens when people who have no knowledge of how economics work make decisions just to satisfy the hysterical among us.
146
This is not a question of economics. It is national security. You post, however, is what happens when people who have lost all perspective need to satisfy their need for hysterical condescension.
1
Sell off our public lands and mining rights for dimes-on-the-dollar. Sell them to your rich friends (and yourself) through shadow companies. Subsidize the operations with my tax dollars. MAGA.
101
In the backdrop of globalization, every economist and historian knows the idiocy of imposing tariffs and instigating a trade war.
The Republican Party endorses a platform of ideas that completely lack intelligent foundations. What's more: the Republican party endorses ideas that mock and violently oppose intellectual thinking and the GOP seems to relish their anti-intellectualism, as if it's somehow something of which to be proud.
These Republican Congressmen will tap away on their iPhones, use Twitter, and delight in all of the comforts that scientific thinking have brought us, but they proudly proclaim their disdain for "liberal scientists" and their evidence-based approaches to policy.
But we all know how this plays out; any intelligent observer of politics has seen this play before. Republicans will pronounce these idiotic policies, the injurious sequelae will arrive, and somehow the Democrats and their lazy, morally bankrupt inner city base will be at fault. And the American people will roar in approval, while the Republican base votes in individuals who speak and write at a 3rd grade level. Because of course, our government should be filled with people as anti-intellectual as the average American.
121
This will greatly cripple American manufacturing. The cost to produce domestic products that use metals will rise dramatically. Production will move overseas. If other nations retaliate, then we will have a trade war.
23
Yes, it is much better that China puts US producers out of business by dumping steel because then China can raise prices on their steel to the US. That is a real good idea.
1
The effects of imposing tariffs and quotas will ripple throughout the economy--for example, will Boeing's planes (our largest export) become uncompetitive in the world market because the price of metals used in them has gone up--causing a decrease in Boeing sales and increasing unemployment in the US. And on and on and on, rippling throughout the economy. Porter's concept of 'Competitive Advantage' holds that the overall economy maximizes its outputs if each participant (ie: country or company) maximizes its own competitive advantages (one of which is the low cost of labor).
22
That is incorrect. Steelmakers worldwide have enjoyed an 18-month rebound in prices. There is no reason for US-based steelmakers to raise prices.
Every major country should have some steel industry (same goes for other strategic materials).
China went for a global market share grab in 2015 with below cost pricing and the world said, "No thank you!"
17
"one of which is the low cost of labor"....
When goods are dumped on the market below cost, regardless of the cost of labor, more sinister intentions may prevail. Currently, our national security may be at risk having lost, as Tim Cook put it, certain industrial supply chain ecosystems. In the event of an international crisis, we could, possibly, in a pinch, be unable produce the necessary high tech goods needed for survival. For example, what if the supply of metals used in Boeing's planes were disrupted? Would we have a viable, in place, industry to step in?
11
Current admin cabinet doesn’t have the capacity to analyze the consequences of its suggested actions on the whole economy. That is just so complicated, and beyond a salesman mentality.
2
Looks like a trade war is on the horizon. Once the shots get fired, looks for prices to go up and the stock market to go down. It's not my idea of making America great again, but it can sure succeed in making it not great.
75