Trade wars

[joeea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtbach I don't see how increasing tariffs will be good at all for the market.

It won't be good for the market as a whole.

Trade wars are the kind of wars that neither side wins.

Quote:

Will this be the straw that breaks the camels back?

It depends on the camel, and the strength of the back.

[joeea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley My biggest concern is the price increase in soda, which I drink a lot of (diet, so don't give me a hard time). I drink beer out of bottles, but I'm sure when they have to raise the price of cans, they'll spread it to the bottled beer too smooth the increase.

If that's truly your biggest concern, you needn't worry. The price increases on those products are unlikely to matter a whole lot.

My biggest worries are the stock market and jobs. I can afford to pay a little more for my soda and beer.

[frayne]

I can understand the need to restrict or penalize a country that dumps materials such as steel and aluminum because of their government subsidies and over capacity but why use a shotgun when a rifle would be so much more effective in punishing the perps. It seems like a rather knee jerk reaction even if it is a negotiating tactic.

[Mr._Graybeard]

Quote:

Originally Posted by copyright1997reloaded [Let me say up front that as a Econ major and investor, I don't like that it is being proposed/done.] It't not, unless the market is US Steel et al. Not necessarily. Remember the game of chicken in the 50's? It depends on who blinks first....unless neither blink. It also helps (potentially) in terms of the voters of PA, OH, MI, WI - which are key to the 2020 election.

This is not good news for Wisconsin. Harley-Davidson needs to expand exports as its domestic fanbase ages away. Several builders of heavy mining machinery rely heavily on exports. And we can't eat all that cheese ourselves!

[capjak]

Here is link to all the trade tariffs/agreements etc I think:

https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryPr...er/by-country/

[harley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeea If that's truly your biggest concern, you needn't worry. The price increases on those products are unlikely to matter a whole lot. My biggest worries are the stock market and jobs. I can afford to pay a little more for my soda and beer.

Yeah, that was pretty thoughtless on my part. Sorry. I hate to see people suffer, especially for political gamesmanship. The stock market is a different issue, since I think it's overly exuberant and could use a little shake up.

But seriously, last year this time I could get a 12 pack of diet Pepsi for $2.50 on sale. This year, $3.33 is the best I've found. And that's before the tariff announcement. Between inflation and tariffs I guess I'll have to break out my SodaStream again.

[Meadbh]

The economics of a trade war are one thing. The loss of goodwill may have longstanding adverse effects.

[marko]

Maybe it's a phase I'm going through, maybe I'm getting old, maybe I've just seen it all before...but this stuff doesn't seem to bother me anymore.

If I have to pay a few bucks more for A, B or C, I just don't care all that much.

Like digging bomb shelters in the 60's, acid rain, the energy crunch of the '70s, global cooling, which became global warming, the Great Recession; it all seems to eventually work itself out. It just seems that things folks worry about most never materialize.

As for this topic, my guess is that this is a negotiating ploy.

[joeea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley The stock market is a different issue, since I think it's overly exuberant and could use a little shake up.

That's kinda thoughtless too, don't you think?
Some retired folks (and those who hope to retire some day) sort of depend on their portfolio.

[harley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeea That's kinda thoughtless too, don't you think? Some retired folks (and those who hope to retire some day) sort of depend on their portfolio.

Nope, the stock market is a choice, and it goes up and down for good reason and for no reason. Depending on it always going up is a foolish choice. I'd never retire if I needed the market to stay at a certain level all the time. I personally think a price drop now and again is healthy, and can be an opportunity for those still accumulating or those retirees like myself that still have cash available.

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley My biggest concern is the price increase in soda, which I drink a lot of (diet, so don't give me a hard time). I drink beer out of bottles, but I'm sure when they have to raise the price of cans, they'll spread it to the bottled beer too smooth the increase. I know one of the main reasons given for the tariffs is a national security issue, that we need to be producing the materials for our weapons instead of importing it from potential enemies, but the major trading partner for aluminum is Canada. As someone else said, if it gets to the point where they are an enemy, we've got bigger problems than aluminum imports. I hope this doesn't go through. Nobody wins a trade war.

According to some talking head the increase in cost is .6 cents.... not something that will be passed along IMO...

[marko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley Nope, the stock market is a choice, and it goes up and down for good reason and for no reason. Depending on it always going up is a foolish choice. I'd never retire if I needed the market to stay at a certain level all the time. I personally think a price drop now and again is healthy, and can be an opportunity for those still accumulating or those retirees like myself that still have cash available.

+1 Everything you said.

[samclem]

Tightly-focused tariffs are okay if they are designed to address an underlying structural disadvantage that has been identified, enunciated, and no solution has been possible through normal trade negotiations (bilateral or multilateral). Punitive, hasty, and poorly-thought-through tariffs just based on bottom-line trade balances are not good for either side.

I hope what we are seeing is just an opening position for negotiations.

Just a thought: If a person has a set of negotiating strategies/tricks/bluffs etc and a negotiating "M.O.", they will probably be more successful long-term if there's a nearly unlimited pool of folks to play on the other side (like in a private business setting) and if the negotiations are fairly confidential (so not everybody can see the tactics play out in each case). This would allow a person to keep using the techniques for a long time, since there would be a constant supply of new adversaries negotiating partners to whom they would be novel.
But if the negotiations are public, if your organization leaks like a sieve, and if the universe of adversaries negotiating partners is limited (and they talk to each other all the time), you should expect that your negotiating tactics will lose a lot of power quickly.

[copyright1997reloaded]

[Disclaimer: I am a free trader, and don't like tariffs. However, that doesn't mean I can't discuss the other side of the issue.]

This is being made out to be a big deal (as it seems that everything is a big deal these days), but a little history perspective might help. In March of 2002, President Bush imposed a steel tariff of 8-30%. These were later lifted earlier than expected in December 2003, likely because the EU won a dispute on the matter in the WTO.

[joeea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley Nope, the stock market is a choice, and it goes up and down for good reason and for no reason. Depending on it always going up is a foolish choice. I'd never retire if I needed the market to stay at a certain level all the time. I personally think a price drop now and again is healthy, and can be an opportunity for those still accumulating or those retirees like myself that still have cash available.

Got it.

So "Sorry. I hate to see people suffer, especially for political gamesmanship." really means "I hate to see people suffer, especially for political gamesmanship, unless they are stupid enough to be invested in the stock market in which case they get what's coming to them as a result of a trade war due to political gamesmanship."

Okay.

[copyright1997reloaded]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeea Got it. So "Sorry. I hate to see people suffer, especially for political gamesmanship." really means "I hate to see people suffer, especially for political gamesmanship, unless they are stupid enough to be invested in the stock market in which case they get what's coming to them as a result of a trade war due to political gamesmanship." Okay.

There are TONS of posts here on this site from people who are looking for stock prices to go down from fearful people selling so that they can pick up shares on the cheap. That is the nature of a market, buyers and sellers. In each transaction, someone must be wrong. Even if you buy with the intention of holding a long time are doing so with the hope that someone else buys it from you and pays more.

[joeea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by copyright1997reloaded There are TONS of posts here on this site from people who are looking for stock prices to go down from fearful people selling so that they can pick up shares on the cheap. That is the nature of a market, buyers and sellers. In each transaction, someone must be wrong. Even if you buy with the intention of holding a long time are doing so with the hope that someone else buys it from you and pays more.

I understand.

It's the "due to political gamesmanship" (your words) part I find troubling.

To each, his own.

[alaska55]

Can any one guess what the tariffs are on imported cars into EU from US compared to cars into US from the the EU.

[flintnational]

Quote:

Originally Posted by alaska55 Can any one guess what the tariffs are on imported cars into EU from US compared to cars into US from the the EU.

The EU has significantly higher tariffs (AKA taxes on consumers). But, this poses a significant cost on EU consumers. They suffer from higher prices or less selection (fewer imports) or both. I don't think it makes any sense to retaliate against the EU by imposing higher costs and less selection on the US consumer through tariffs.

And while adjustments in theory might make sense, my experience is governments rarely act correctly. They dole out favors to politically powerful groups and distort markets. Their aim is rarely to restore economic equilibrium.

[foxfirev5]

Smoot Hawley.