The Foreign Trade Thread

#78
#78
Sandman 423 said:
Which is why—-
A: Trump is a Democrat.
B:why it is funny watching the left suddenly be for free trade.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the left has never had a definitive position on trade that I know of. Their position usually seems to be based on partisanship
 
#82
#82
Velo Vol said:
He could have been, but he's not. Weird that the GOP embraced him as they have. They'll regret it.
Click to expand...

He was until he decided to run for president. It isn’t like people should be embarrassed by him being a Democrat but Trump was definitely one until it was in his interest not to be. Being a Republican allowed him to not have to face Clinton in the primary.

Also I was off on Dems being for tariffs until Trump. Both parties are for protectionism for the most part.
 
#84
#84
Who could have imagined that faced with higher costs and uncertain trade policy, U.S. companies might just say, "Screw it" and move to China?

 
#85
#85
Velo Vol said:
Who could have imagined that faced with higher costs and uncertain trade policy, U.S. companies might just say, "Screw it" and move to China?

Click to expand...


It makes sense to build cars where they'll be used. The Germans and Japanese build their cars in the US. Glad that GM is looking at having a footprint in China. Their profits will be exported to the US.
 
#86
#86
Thunder Good-Oil said:
It makes sense to build cars where they'll be used. The Germans and Japanese build their cars in the US. Glad that GM is looking at having a footprint in China. Their profits will be exported to the US.
Click to expand...

It certainly makes sense because of protectionism, not necessatily because of natural market forces.

Your mental gymnastics are astonishing
 
#87
#87
n_huffhines said:
It certainly makes sense because of protectionism, not necessatily because of natural market forces.

Your mental gymnastics are astonishing
Click to expand...

It makes sense to build 3,000 pound objects close to the market they're going to be sold in and near the materials and direct labor that go into the production process. The problem occurs when they're built there and shipped here. GM vehicles made in China and shipped to the US should be taxed like a mofo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
#89
#89
Thunder Good-Oil said:
It makes sense to build 3,000 pound objects close to the market they're going to be sold in and near the materials and direct labor that go into the production process. The problem occurs when they're built there and shipped here. GM vehicles made in China and shipped to the US should be taxed like a mofo.
Click to expand...

Do you think it makes sense to build the same car in two places? I don't, unless there are non-market forces at work. I can't believe that you would save more on shipping than you would on production economies of scale.

If the Ford Ranger sells like crazy in China and modestly here, then you make the Ford Ranger in China and ship it here. It doesn't make sense to make it in both places unless there are government rules and taxes to avoid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: midnight orange
#90
#90
Thunder Good-Oil said:
It makes sense to build 3,000 pound objects close to the market they're going to be sold in and near the materials and direct labor that go into the production process. The problem occurs when they're built there and shipped here. GM vehicles made in China and shipped to the US should be taxed like a mofo.
Click to expand...

By that logic it would even be better to build cars in Tennessee for Tennessean’s. We would have to build greenhouses for rubber, raise cattle for the tannery, bring in engineers and programmers for he engines and navigation systems, find a way to mine aluminum and other elements for the steel, etc.
 
#92
#92
midnight orange said:
By that logic it would even be better to build cars in Tennessee for Tennessean’s. We would have to build greenhouses for rubber, raise cattle for the tannery, bring in engineers and programmers for he engines and navigation systems, find a way to mine aluminum and other elements for the steel, etc.
Click to expand...

You stretched that one out like a rubber band didn’t you . That went from making them in country vs China to state by state because somebody in Tennessee wanted to buy a volt .
 
#93
#93
0nelilreb said:
You stretched that one out like a rubber band didn’t you . That went from making them in country vs China to state by state because somebody in Tennessee wanted to buy a volt .
Click to expand...

Yes I did. The statement was that it is better to build a 3000 lb car close to the market in which it’s sold. If that’s true, then it holds that it would be even better to build a car in Tennessee for Tennesseans as opposed to Detroit.
 
#94
#94
midnight orange said:
Yes I did. The statement was that it is better to build a 3000 lb car close to the market in which it’s sold. If that’s true, then it holds that it would be even better to build a car in Tennessee for Tennesseans as opposed to Detroit.
Click to expand...

Better yet, the Fed tells CA and NY to kick rocks and manufactures are no longer required to build to their standards.
 
#95
#95
Thunder Good-Oil said:
It makes sense to build 3,000 pound objects close to the market they're going to be sold in and near the materials and direct labor that go into the production process. The problem occurs when they're built there and shipped here. GM vehicles made in China and shipped to the US should be taxed like a mofo.
Click to expand...
Especially since the .gov has taxed the US shipping industry out of existence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: midnight orange
#96
#96
hog88 said:
Better yet, the Fed tells CA and NY to kick rocks and manufactures are no longer required to build to their standards.
Click to expand...

I would like to see the feds get out of the auto business altogether. What you stated might make a good commerce clause case though.
 
#97
#97
n_huffhines said:
Do you think it makes sense to build the same car in two places? I don't, unless there are non-market forces at work. I can't believe that you would save more on shipping than you would on production economies of scale.

If the Ford Ranger sells like crazy in China and modestly here, then you make the Ford Ranger in China and ship it here. It doesn't make sense to make it in both places unless there are government rules and taxes to avoid.
Click to expand...
They have rooms full of accountants with micrometers and super computer algorithms that look at that every day. If it costs $.01 more to ship the cars than to build them here, they will build them where they will be sold. It is business. Nothing more.
 
#98
#98
  • Like
Reactions: 1972 Grad
#99
#99
SpaceCoastVol said:
You need a new schtick. Your "central planning is hard" quip got old a few months back.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you loved this schtick the first time, and then it got old, right? No, it was "old" the first time because you don't like facing the reality that he is a big government, crony capitalist, central planner who is neck deep in the swamp.
 
#100
#100
n_huffhines said:
I'm sure you loved this schtick the first time, and then it got old, right? No, it was "old" the first time because you don't like facing the reality that he is a big government, crony capitalist, central planner who is neck deep in the swamp.
Click to expand...
yeah that's it. Damn you're good.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top