Trade wars

Status
Not open for further replies.
We should assure that the US has viable steel, aluminum, and other (semiconductor is another example) manufacturing capabilities.

And TV's , radios, automobiles, textiles/clothing, drugs, oil/petroleum products, lumber, agricultural products etc.
 
And TV's , radios, automobiles, textiles/clothing, drugs, oil/petroleum products, lumber, agricultural products etc.

While you can argue that a number of products have a strategic significance, may don't. TVs? Not really. Petroleum? Sure and the US has ample production and even a strategic reserve.

This isn't about too many socks being made somewhere, this is primarily about the ability to maintain a strong and independent military capability. Other considerations weigh in of course, but how do you build aircraft carriers or fighter jets without steel and aluminum?
 
While you can argue that a number of products have a strategic significance, may don't. TVs? Not really. Petroleum? Sure and the US has ample production and even a strategic reserve.

This isn't about too many socks being made somewhere, this is primarily about the ability to maintain a strong and independent military capability. Other considerations weigh in of course, but how do you build aircraft carriers or fighter jets without steel and aluminum?


Both steel and aluminum manufacture could be ramped up very quickly in a military emergency. What is the cost of making allies around the world angry with us? That should be weighed in the balance also.
 
I believe trade brings more stability not less to the world.
But, if we need to protect the US steel market, I am okay with punishing Canada. I am sure they will understand. Of course, I will need to be reminded how raising prices (tariffs) on US consumers punishes Canada. :D

Steel imports to the US by Country


1. Canada 16.7 percent

2. Brazil 13.2 percent

3. South Korea 9.7 percent

4. Mexico 9.4 percent

5. Russia 8.1 percent

6. Turkey 5.6 percent

7. Japan 4.9 percent

8. Germany 3.7 percent

9. Taiwan 3.2 percent

10. China 2.9 percent

11. India 2.4 percent
 
Lumber tariffs

Not too long ago we imposed tariffs on Canadian lumber. As far as I know the world hasn't ended yet.
 
Not too long ago we imposed tariffs on Canadian lumber. As far as I know the world hasn't ended yet.

Or is it still being held due to legal actions by Canada. The last news briefs I have seen is that Canada has not exhausted appeals and is still in talks concerning NAFTA modifications.
 
My honest opinion , we have seen this before on cars and motorcycles . All it did was give us price increases . The International manufacturers are forced to raise their prices , so the U S manufacturers will raise theirs . Nothing changes . The U S steel no longer makes the day to day common steel . All the U S makes is the Hi tech and exotics . We know the formulas for this steel . Similar to what titanium was in the 1980's This is a wage increase for CEO's and a price increase for all of us .
 
If the world international trade were ever perfectly at equilibrium, tariffs imposed tit for tat would be a zero sum game with the only losers being the consumer because of the price increases.
 
but how do you build aircraft carriers or fighter jets without steel and aluminum?

You don't build aircraft carriers or fighter jets without steel or aluminum.

Instead, you either produce the necessary materials yourself, or you purchase them from a trusted ally that has a price-production advantage. Perhaps an ally that has a cheaper source of electricity needed to make those products (such as hydroelectric power).

Off the top of my head here (just spitballin') ... an ally like Canada.

That way, you get the aircraft carriers and fighter jets you need, and save the taxpayers money.
 
Not too long ago we imposed tariffs on Canadian lumber. As far as I know the world hasn't ended yet.

No the world hasn't ended but a 2x4x10 is now $4.89. Two years ago it was below $3. But I guess since we aren't building wooden battleships it doesn't matter.;)
 
I'm curious. NAFTA had to go through congress before becoming law right? So can a President unilaterally pull the country out of a treaty without consent of congress? In addition, does a President have the right to impose tariffs without input from congress?
 
So can a President unilaterally pull the country out of a treaty without consent of congress?

That's not clear. Legal scholars are divided. He could certainly try and see if Congress has the guts to oppose him.

In addition, does a President have the right to impose tariffs without input from congress?

Yes. In cases of "national security".
 
Last edited:
Does Congress have any recourse when the president unilaterally slaps on a tariff ?
 
Last edited:
Does Congress have any recourse when the president unilaterally slaps on a tariff ?

Yes.

Normally Congress is the one having the power to impose tariffs (or not). But due to a 1962 law, the President can impose tariffs unilaterally, when doing so in the interest of "national security".

Congress could pass a bill that would require the President to get Congressional certification of his claim of "national security threat" before he can go forward with his planned tariff.

But then the President could veto the bill before it becomes law and see if the Congress would have the votes to override the veto.
 
You don't build aircraft carriers or fighter jets without steel or aluminum.

Instead, you either produce the necessary materials yourself, or you purchase them from a trusted ally that has a price-production advantage. Perhaps an ally that has a cheaper source of electricity needed to make those products (such as hydroelectric power).

Off the top of my head here (just spitballin') ... an ally like Canada.

That way, you get the aircraft carriers and fighter jets you need, and save the taxpayers money.

Was watching some programs today and someone said that almost all of this can be tracked back to China.... IOW, China overproduces and will dump in other countries and those countries then dump into the US... they said this is one reason Canada sends us a lot of steel...
 
Shouldn't they close it on actual content rather than on nonposted thoughts?

Or ban an offending poster before his/her post gets submitted. :)

Reminds me of the movie "Minority Report", which I barely recall.
 
While the mod team does have many talents, telepathy is not one of them.:D
Come on. This team is multi-talented, multi-disciplined, they have repetitively shown the ability to accurately predict future events. You sell them way short of their true potential!

How else can you explain well timed "W" word?[emoji12]
 
Last edited:
Make sure you come to the next big meeting of the Clairvoyant Society of America. You already know when and where it will be.
 
Last edited:
Make sure you come to the next big meeting of the Clairvoyant Society of America. You already know when and where it will be.

....and you are also aware of the issues that will be raised and the motions that will be passed......but you already knew I was going to say that.

We anticipate the physical attendance to be zero, as it has been every previous year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this has a pretty decent chance of escalating into a full-blown trade war. I believe that if these tariffs get imposed, the response of our trading partners is going to be dramatic and coordinated. Mexico, Canada, Australia, and the EU will design their response to impact US exporters in very high profile and painful ways.

It’s not just these specific tariffs that is going to shape their response, but the rhetoric coming from the man imposing them. When you keep saying nasty and untrue things about your allies, it eventually costs you.

So if you have a must have staple that is an import, I’d stock up now just in case.
 
Yes.

Normally Congress is the one having the power to impose tariffs (or not). But due to a 1962 law, the President can impose tariffs unilaterally, when doing so in the interest of "national security".

Congress could pass a bill that would require the President to get Congressional certification of his claim of "national security threat" before he can go forward with his planned tariff.

But then the President could veto the bill before it becomes law and see if the Congress would have the votes to override the veto.

+1

Yes, yet another example of Congress ceding their power to the executive branch. Article I, section 8: Clause 1: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

As an aside, tariffs were the main source of revenue for the federal government from the ratification of the constitution until the early 20th century.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
+1

Yes, yet another example of Congress ceding their power to the executive branch. Article I, section 8: Clause 1: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

As an aside, tariffs were the main source of revenue for the federal government from the ratification of the constitution until the early 20th century.


The problem with this is that there already IS a law that is being used to impose them (it it happens)... they are not ceding anything....

Now, they do have the ability pass another law to override, but the prez can veto and then they would have to override the veto...
 
The Russians may like this! At least the ones that own the steel plant in Pueblo, Colorado. As far as national security, the Atlas rocket has Russian engines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom