Trade Wars are good - Trump

[Breccia]

Its also only about tariffs on imports under WTO.

No, I mean, the graph is useless without describing what it measures. How are non-tariffed goods counted? Are they skipped? Is the average by category, or by total US$ spent? There needs to be more input before the graph can be used as context.

Speaking of input, CNN lays out the cast of how far up the ass Red States will take it when the steel rod is thrust.

A quick example: South Carolina has about 30% of its jobs in manufacturing, or trade. While it's possible a foreign manufacturer, trying to get around tariffs, could build in the USA (say, a Toyota factory), I'm not sure how much that applies to steel here. But one out of eleven jobs in SC is based on their seaports. So whether imports dry up, or just imports become locally-made goods, those jobs are at risk.

Also, crops.

[Breccia]

https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/bo...ofiles17_e.pdf

Thanks, I'll read this over when I get the chance. Numbers require context before they can be slapped into a conversation.

[Breccia]

THese btw seem to simply be MFN tariffs as applied in 2017 (MFN is Most-Favored Nation, i.e. these are the highest tariffs applied).

I still haven't had the chance to read them, but let me explain my confusion on the subject.

Let's say the WTO has eight categories (they do, I read that far).

Let's say Kerplunkistan has no tariffs at all on Categories A through D, each of which is 10% of their imports.

They pay a 5% tariff on E, F, and G, which are 10%, 10%, and 35% of their imports respectively.

And they pay 30% tariffs on H which is 5% of their imports.

Is the average:
1) 5.65%, because they added up 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 30 and divided by 8?
2) 11.25%, because they added up 5 5 5 30 and divided by 4?
3) 3.75%, the weighted average of A-H weighted by their amount of imports?
4) 6.25%, the weighted average of E-H because those are the only ones being tariffed?

The table itself doesn't clarify, and that example alone gives a pretty big span. I mean, you quoted "simple average" which sounds like the least accurate way to do it, but I hope the WTO isn't as bad as that phrase suggests.

[NED funded]

What's the weighting here? Is that "average tariffs of imports with tariffs" or "average based on US$"?

The former.

[Breccia]

The former.

Oh...then, it's basically useless without knowing what % of their imports have tariffs on them.

Again, I'll read it when I get the time. A quick glance told me these stats are more armor-plated than I hoped.

[NED funded]

Oh...then, it's basically useless without knowing what % of their imports have tariffs on them.

Again, I'll read it when I get the time. A quick glance told me these stats are more armor-plated than I hoped.

The entire purpose of tariffs is to discourage imports. Trying to use the latter as a measure of protectionism is missing the point.

[Breccia]

This just in: study shows that Trump's tariffs will cost 146,000 jobs.

More specifically, add 33thousand to some categories but cost 179,000 to others.

Before retaliation.

[Elegiac]

This just in: study shows that Trump's tariffs will cost 146,000 jobs.

More specifically, add 33thousand to some categories but cost 179,000 to others.

Before retaliation.

Remind me how many Trump's "deals" were supposed to have saved?

[Breccia]

Remind me how many Trump's "deals" were supposed to have saved?

Well, if you meant coal, I could tell you "nearly zero".

[NED funded]

It's not about what the other are doing, it's only about doing the right thing for you, for your country.
What other people have tried to argue is the very question "is instating tariff on aluminum and steel a good thing for the US?"

For, it's an apolitical, apartisan question. It doesn't matter if the republicans do it, the democrats do it, the question is always valid to ask?
I suppose what Trump meant when saying steel and aluminium being strategic industry is because they are so deeply involved in production of many product as well as in the production of weapons and defense vehicle and infrastructure.

For the economic stand point, better ask experts, but from everything i read, everything made of steel or aluminum will be more expensive, including weapon and defense material. Beside, it might also trigger a trade war and sully relations with other countries.

Now, will tariff catalize the domestic production steel and aluminum, it's uncertain. Industrial invest when there is a potential profit only. Unless you plan on nationalizing the steel and aluminum industry. In fact, the major importers of steel being some of US closest allies (canada, australia, south korea), i am not convinced calling aluminium and steel strategic ressources is correct.

So again, it's not about what the others are doing, it's about what the US is doing and is it good, is it justified?

This is a fine point to make, but it reeks of hypocrisy from our trade partners when they engage in worse protectionism (especially Brazil) and claim that THIS specific action will trigger a trade war or when China complains when it has a great firewall which is literally blocking a lot of potential US competitors from their market.

[NED funded]

And really, as I said earlier, NTMs are more important than AV level tariffs. The EU's tariff level seems low but the true barrier to trade is significantly harder due to extensive NTMs.

I'm also missing that, but I can't be arsed to go through all of the regulations count them and then compare which one of them has a substantially bigger effect than the other and which are reasonable to have. (Health regulations). For example, I would not put buy america provisions below import quotas. The former has a much bigger impact than the latter.

[Vankrys]

This is a fine point to make, but it reeks of hypocrisy from our trade partners when they engage in worse protectionism (especially Brazil) and claim that THIS specific action will trigger a trade war or when China complains when it has a great firewall which is literally blocking a lot of potential US competitors from their market.

Remember "America First"

Why do you expect other countries not putting their interest and the interest of their citizens in first?
Trade deal negotiations are almost like non violent wars, people play their strength and their opponent weaknesses.

Again, do you believe putting a tariff on a raw material so widely used on every industry sectors of the US will turn out well? It will not.

At best, this is a strategic maneuver to attempt to be self sufficient in steel and aluminium, at the cost of having everyday products for the american people raised in price.

At worst, it's a complete stupid decision based on a poor understanding of trade.

[Breccia]

Trade deal negotiations are almost like non violent wars, people play their strength and their opponent weaknesses.

Yes, but, just like with real war, there are differences between "attacked by Russian mercenaries, blew them into fucking chunks, then went back to what they were doing" versus "bombed Pearl Harbor". There are levels of aggressiveness that we, as a species, have proven we are willing to accept. Putin flat-out invaded Ukraine, for example.

But a tax on everyone, for "national security" excuses, even NAFTA allies, and a close parallel to the last time W tried this and got sued into submission -- well, that's some Archduke Ferdinand shootin' right there.

[Noradin]

And really, as I said earlier, NTMs are more important than AV level tariffs. The EU's tariff level seems low but the true barrier to trade is significantly harder due to extensive NTMs.

Which incidentially is why the USA are so keen of getting the UK out of the EU and to align to their regulations.

[Poopymonster]

Stupid as it sounds - i hope Trump continues to threaten especially in direction of the EU. Every time he does that the countries here move closer together. Even though i despise Junker, i felt a very very small sting of european patriotism, when he answered to Trump. So in a deranged way, i think Trump is helping the european unification.

It was all part of my plan. To be the biggest cockmongler to our (((allies))) that I would unite them. Only I could make all of the EU put aside their differences and work together!

[Gref]

It's almost as if steel is heavy, and costs more to ship from China than it does from Canada. Nobody knew, how heavy steel was!

I really would like to ask to a 6 years old Trump which one is heavier? 1kg steel or 1kg feather?

[NED funded]

Emerging markets that are hyped as investment opportunities who worried about being drowned out by American and British investors and hence limit capital inflows and are harboring emerging domestic industries that they are trying to build up.

Of course there couldn't possibly be Americans who understand how stupid a trade war would be for American interests. It's hypocrisy.

Yes, I've already seen this argument. First it's limiting capital inflows because America will wreck up their domestic industries, then America is bad because it is stealing their capital and preventing them from being used in its own territory which is somehow totally not related to the fact that they severely limit capital inflow. And when they close both (capital inflows and outflows) and still fail and do not become the industrial country they were supposed to be, it is the fault of America for isolating them from global capital and thus another protectionist policy is justified. There is always a excuse to justify THEIR policies, but when it is America doing it, it is suddenly bad. Let's say it like it is, they have those protectionist policies due to political pressure from very organized groups and it is much easier for a lot of these countries to keep them up than it is to confront the protected industries, even though it would do their economy a massive favor.

So Brazil's market is like.. 2% of the world's economy. If Brazil slaps a tariff on it, the world doesn't really even recognize it. If America slaps a tariff on their goods there goes 50% of the world's economy.

South Korea and China are like the 11th and 2nd largest economies in the world respectively. Their protectionist policies clearly have an impact on the world, none has threatened trade war over them, it's nothing but hypocrisy. I just used Brazil because they have a much higher steel tariff which is applied across the board and is one of the nations leading the complaints against the US.

- - - Updated - - -

And Europe isn't even much larger by some measure. They have a pride in product superiority and hence want to defend their industry, particularly agriculture. Part of it is cultural.

"If I root my protectionist policies in culture it is ok"

[NED funded]

South Korea is an example of a country where protectionist policy actually worked and they have gradually become more and more free trade.

And for every South Korea there are ten Argentinas.

How much demand is there for American product in China?

Surely, THIS is not your defense for China's protectionist system and that it somehow doesn't affect the world, but US protectionism does.

"If I say incredibly fucking retarded shit, maybe he will accept my argument". My impression of you collapsed overnight weeks ago, however.

Maybe, we should call steel an American way of lifestyle and pride ourselves in a "superior product", we could even form our very own CSP, common steel policy.

[Noradin]

Maybe, we should call steel an American way of lifestyle and pride ourselves in a "superior product", we could even form our very own CSP, common steel policy.

You already do, that is why you import it mainly from countries other than China.

[LMuhlen]

This is a fine point to make, but it reeks of hypocrisy from our trade partners when they engage in worse protectionism (especially Brazil) and claim that THIS specific action will trigger a trade war or when China complains when it has a great firewall which is literally blocking a lot of potential US competitors from their market.

Brazilian protectionism is on all imports, not specific products. Not sure if that helps or not. Also, it is possibly less protectionism and more overall high taxes on everything (even locally produced). Import taxes may be a way to balance things for local producers who also pay a lot of taxes. Just a guess, though.

Their true protectionism comes in the form of a weak currency, which favors exports and punishes imports.