The Foreign Trade Thread

#52
#52
Velo Vol said:
I'm not "happy" with Canada's trade restrictions, but in the grand scheme of things the items at issue were very small compared to the total volume of trade between the two countries.

The EU is not growing into a "one world government." I've talked about it in the Brexit thread. I do like the idea of freer trade, which I assume its customs union brings, though I have not studied it much.

You deal with other nation's tariffs through negotiations. That's what supposedly good dealmakers do. Remember that if China is restricting U.S. imports, it's the Chinese people who are being hurt.
Click to expand...

If you take the threat of retaliatory tariffs off of the table, what do you negotiate with?
 
#53
#53
Velo Vol said:
Americans are paying for the tariffs not just as customers, but also as taxpayers.

Click to expand...


When decades of bad trade agreements result in US manufacturing operations shutting down, capacity doesn't return instantly. Supply issues will be a short term speed bump as moth balled US factories come back online.
 
#54
#54
Thunder Good-Oil said:
When decades of bad trade agreements result in US manufacturing operations shutting down, capacity doesn't return instantly. Supply issues will be a short term speed bump as moth balled US factories come back online.
Click to expand...

Output is higher than ever.

Do you know what comparative advantage is?
 
#55
#55
Thunder Good-Oil said:
If you take the threat of retaliatory tariffs off of the table, what do you negotiate with?
Click to expand...

No matter what our trading partners do, we are better off freely trading. We'd be better off without agreements.

There is rarely consensus among economists, but there is consensus on this issue. Even mother****ing Karl Marx was for free trade.
 
#56
#56
n_huffhines said:
Why does that mean they need us more than vice versa?

They're not gonna starve
Click to expand...

That means that China is at an extreme disadvantage when tit-for-tat tariffs are the leverage used in negotiations. When the US is importing 4x as many goods as they're exporting to China, which side is at a disadvantage when tariffs are in play?
 
#57
#57
n_huffhines said:
No matter what our trading partners do, we are better off freely trading. We'd be better off without agreements.

There is rarely consensus among economists, but there is consensus on this issue. Even mother****ing Karl Marx was for free trade.
Click to expand...

Fair trade is better than free trade. When the free trade partners are ripping you off, there are costs.
 
#58
#58
Thunder Good-Oil said:
That means that China is at an extreme disadvantage when tit-for-tat tariffs are the leverage used in negotiations. When the US is importing 4x as many goods as they're exporting to China, which side is at a disadvantage when tariffs are in play?
Click to expand...

I'm asking you to explain why. All you did was repeat yourself.
 
#60
#60
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Fair trade is better than free trade. When the free trade partners are ripping you off, there are costs.
Click to expand...
TGO if you’ve never discussed trade with huff you should understand.

  • All trade agreements are evil and should be voided
  • All tariffs are counter productive regardless of intent and should never be implemented
  • Thus we should never EVER use them.... regardless if they are used against us or not. Let the chips fall where they may

That’s all he can fathom on anything related to trade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thunder Good-Oil
#61
#61
China comes under more and more pressure as Mexico, Canada, Japan, and the UK sign up.

Zeihan:
"The Americans wrote into the new NAFTA treaty that if a signatory signs a trade deal with any non-market-based economy (read: China) then the Americans will up and leave."

Also, the current tariffs on Canadian metal are an insurance policy to get that agreement ratified.
 
#62
#62
NorthDallas40 said:
TGO if you’ve never discussed trade with huff you should understand.

  • All trade agreements are evil and should be voided
  • All tariffs are counter productive regardless of intent and should never be implemented
  • Thus we should never EVER use them.... regardless if they are used against us or not.
That’s all he can fathom on anything related to trade.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think intent matters at all? You and Luther would get along.
 
#63
#63
n_huffhines said:
"Fair" trade is just socialist principles applied to international trade. It requires central planning from corruptible and incapable politicians
Click to expand...

Fair trade is not allowing partners to ignore theft of IP and allowing government subsidies by trading partners to put your industries at a competitive disadvantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#65
#65
Thunder Good-Oil said:
China comes under more and more pressure as Mexico, Canada, Japan, and the UK sign up.

Zeihan:
"The Americans wrote into the new NAFTA treaty that if a signatory signs a trade deal with any non-market-based economy (read: China) then the Americans will up and leave."

Also, the current tariffs on Canadian metal are an insurance policy to get that agreement ratified.
Click to expand...

Why is the USMCA any better than NAFTA? The major differences are we added min wage guidelines and output quotas. It's just increased socialism.
 
#67
#67
n_huffhines said:
I'm asking you to explain why. All you did was repeat yourself.
Click to expand...

If you ignore it all I can do is repeat it. China needs our agriculture. We can get along just fine without the crap that they send here to stock the shelves at Walmart and DollarTree. We're better off in the long run if we're producing our own strategically critical materials instead of accepting what they're dumping. We're better off if China doesn't buy our companies just to steal our technology. We're better off if they pay for licenses to use our IP. There will be a near term cost, but playing hardball with the thieving Chinese has long term benefits. It could be painful for Walmart greeters and DollarTree cashiers.
 
#68
#68
Thunder Good-Oil said:
If you ignore it all I can do is repeat it. China needs our agriculture. We can get along just fine without the crap that they send here to stock the shelves at Walmart and DollarTree. We're better off in the long run if we're producing our own strategically critical materials instead of accepting what they're dumping. We're better off if China doesn't buy our companies just to steal our technology. We're better off if they pay for licenses to use our IP. There will be a near term cost, but playing hardball with the thieving Chinese has long term benefits. It could be painful for Walmart greeters and DollarTree cashiers.
Click to expand...

You completely abandoned your original line of reasoning and made it about agriculture vs cheap manufactured goods...it appears you realized you couldn't support it. Onto the next made up fact.

Is China starving yet?
 
#69
#69
n_huffhines said:
Why is the USMCA any better than NAFTA? The major differences are we added min wage guidelines and output quotas. It's just increased socialism.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be better, however it is on multiple points. What's important is that there are agreements in place strengthening and growing our trading block that aren't being charitable to partners while penalizing our manufacturing footprint.
 
#70
#70
n_huffhines said:
We have subsidies. Should China retaliate?
Click to expand...

Farm subsidies are different. Food production is more critical than even tactical industries. But many of those are ridiculously unnecessary. Yeah, let China retaliate against US tobacco.

What other subsidies are you speaking of? Energy perhaps? If China stops buying from us, we'll simply sell to the buyers that China replaces elsewhere.
 
#73
#73
Amazon split 50,000 headquarters jobs averaging $150,000 a year
Click to expand...

I've read this job claim may be over-hyped, too. Many of the jobs being custodial and the like.
 
#75
#75
Weird that Ford and GM are cutting back employment when the significant differences between NAFTA and the USMCA protected the auto industry.

Central planning is hard
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top