Your insane decision to impose BILLIONS of dollars of tariffs on Chinese imports crashed the markets today, meaning Americans saw their retirement accounts, College Savings Accounts and other investment accounts lose BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars today.
As most all here on the CF have agreed, corporations do not pay taxes, they only collect taxes.
Yet essentially, that's exactly what tariffs do. Because when you come right down to it, tariffs are nothing more than a tax on people and companies who buy stuff.
Those foreign companies then pass the tariffs you want on to the American citizens who buy stuff, whether manufactured in the USA or not.
AMERICANS will suffer most of the costs of your insanely stupid and financially illiterate tariffs, you ignoramus, not Chinese companies.
Your insane tariffs will also cost AMERICANS millions of jobs, because that's what tariffs do. If China retaliates, more MILLIONS of AMERICAN jobs will be lost in addition.
Then again I ask, just where in the Constitution does it give you the authority to bypass Congress to do this?
Answer: NO WHERE!
Dow goes from 18,589 on November 9, 2016, to 25,075 today, for a new all-time Record. Jumped 1000 points in last 5 weeks, Record fastest 1000 point move in history. This is all about the Make America Great Again agenda! Jobs, Jobs, Jobs. Six trillion dollars in value created!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 5, 2018
1. The only accounts that matter are your equity accounts.
2. Many mutual funds don't report their day-end-prices for at least another HOUR!
Or do you just ignore it all because your personal stock portfolio is rolling along all shiny and spiffed up? I don't know the answer. Maybe this will bring them to the table. Everybody said the same "sky was falling" when he was dealing with NK..... but it looks like they are at least coming to the table. We shall see.
Tariffs will have ZERO influence on Tech Theft or Counterfeiting. Those are completely different issues. Those are LEGAL issues and should be dealt with accordingly.
That is the last thing we should pay attention to when investing, otherwise it's betting.
Tariffs good/ bad? We will see. I am leaning to it being good for America albeit not the best thing for my 401k right now.
In the long run ( which is my stategy) that which is good for America is typically good for me.
Pigs get fat. Hogs get slaughtered.
That's why I said net decrease...
There is no 'wait and see' on that because that's the facts, Jack.
President Trump just announced a new series of tariffs on roughly $50 billion in Chinese imports. These new tariffs are the result of a seven-month investigation into China’s continued theft of US intellectual property. “We have a tremendous intellectual property theft problem. It’s going to make us a much stronger, much richer nation,” President Trump told reporters this morning. “This has been long in the making.”
Only a liberal or fool would think the Chicom's would give a shite about so called "legal issues" whatever that is when they have been openly pursuing "Tech Theft & Counterfeiting".
It’s Economics 101. Tariffs = deadweight loss.
This IS a negotiating tactic. There is little leverage available and yes some may suffer but I think we come out the other side in better shape.
Besides, Nva, I thought you were a buy and hold kinda guy. What difference does one day's close make in the big scheme of things?
We shall see.
Well, it's certainly leveling the markets, lately.
Actually, I think everyone may be overreacting a bit. These tariffs only impact about 10% of our imports from China. That's a slap on the wrist. China's response will be interesting.
I guess investors don't care for trillion $$ spending packages any more than they do for tariffs.
I also agree with TD . Unless something is done with trade everything you buy goes to a better life for a Chinese kid not an American kid. If you support this country it is in your best interest not to buy anything from China in the near term.
Hundreds of thousands of American workers will pay the price in lost jobs and reduced incomes as a result.
Well, done, you moron!
So right on que, there's a trade war and the losers will be consumers and American companies who export goods to China.
Thank you, President Trump, you economically clueless idiot!
Only The Witch From Hell is not the problem.
I am most disturbed by this spending bill that was passed and SIGNED and was supremely disappointed that he caved because of military spending. Planned Parenthood? ...and the Republicans went for this because of the military. B.S. Selling baby parts for profits is going to go over big with the Evangelicals. Republicans painted themselves into a corner with this one. He should have vetoed this bill and told Democrats to tell the military why they did not get the money to defend this country. Mad Dog Mattis reportedly told the POTUS to sign the bill at all costs. Well he did and the bill is going to come due and he is not going to like the number.
Funnier yet are those predicting Trump's demise based on a couple of weeks of media driven market hysteria. Get a grip.
I do enjoy a Nva hissy fit though. I can just see the little runt in his room having a tantrum at every 100 point drop in the market.
Maybe we could issue indictments to the Chinese..... like we did to the Russians...... that should have them shaking in their slippers......
I am not abandoning Trump. I like his unpredictable gunfighter style, always have always will. He was pressured into signing this mess by his own party and Mad Dog himself given the present and unstable state of international affairs and the depleted military. I also believe this military spending bill was a message to our foes at a critical time. Bringing in John Bolton, a hawk I agree with at this time, seems awfully ironic.
Now go away. Adults are having a conversation here.
"U.S. Stock Market Rebounds On Report Of Trade Talks With China" Up some 300 points I thought I heard driving to work this morning.
Looks like the Tarrifs greased the skids a bit...... we shall see.
Trump’s Tough Talk On China Works : China’s Premier Pledges Opening Market To Avert Trade War
So, I'll just leave this image.
"Trade war escalates as China says it will impose tariffs on 128 U.S. exports, including pork and fruit".
That’s clearly not the market’s read on China’s response today.
How have you arrived at the point in your career today by only reading half of something?
JTV I was floored that President Trump had hit 50%, looked at Gallup http://news.gallup.com/poll/203207/trump-job-approval-weekly.aspx and they still had him at 39% as of Saturday.
It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out for sure.
Suddenly now it's skirts over the head time with folks running in circles screaming.....
As was stated earlier. EVERY country has tariffs or restrictions/ regulations on some imports. Every one. (restrictions/regs are sometimes harder on imports than tariffs) Time to time some renegotiation is necessary. Hard to negotiate when you're tied over that proverbial barrel......
There will be more talks.
Or...you know, there won't. And there will just be more tariffs. Time will tell. The market isn't putting too much confidence in "renegotiation" as of now - it's putting more confidence in a trade war. If there was optimism, it would show up. Fear and uncertainty are dragging the market down. Doesn't mean we don't ultimately get a better deal with China (aka, more access to their markets, less IP theft, etc) - just that the market is skeptical we will. Nor does this mean that the market isn't going to go back up (it will).
I dunno about the different tariffs between us and China but TD nailed it on China's intellectual property infringements. How do you crack down on that without bringing tariffs into the conversation?
My take; Trump is playing the long game letting the Chinese know we are serious. Remember what we had for the previous admin; Hollow threats, soft policy
Trump is starting tough.....good negotiating tactic.
How many thousands of American jobs will be lost because of China's response to Trump's Populist financial stupidity?
Kyle, Are you drinking again?
Exactly what did I just post that is not 100% accurate?
China imposed tariffs on about 3 billion dollars of imports.....not imposed tens of billions......you think a financial guru would understand the difference.
Tens of billions by one report, three billion by another.
Either way, American workers and the American economy lose.
Stop blindly worshiping your God while refusing to recognize his failings.
FWIW, the 'Tens of Millions' was just from what was reported today. On just one day last week there was another, separate report of 1.5 BILLION in Chinese tariffs. More reports added even more.
Trump IS the reason the market is tanking. His trade bluster, attacking individual companies and tax cuts that don’t help the consumers are destroying investor confidence.
Trump rode Obama's economy throughout his first year.
Now that he's setting his own policies, passing tariffs and attacking American businesses, the stock market has plummeted.
When his Presidency ends, remember these words as you look at your depleted 401k:
The topic isn't market's BEG. It is will this hurt the average american in the long run. Why any human would tie up a lifetime of money investment based solely on what American trade policy does, is beyond me
Oh and I love the feigned outrage by Nva over the "American workers". Please. We all know you care only about your own portfolio and those of the old people you are fleecing.
Kyle, You should be able to get that link posted this morning, hopefully before you start drinking again.
I'm all for negotiation and that is what Trump is doing. I'm also in favor of using a club if a stick doesn't work. I'm very happy we have a president who is finally trying to make these important changes. There will be some short term pain. There also may be some long term gain.
Negotiations don’t work when only one side comes to the table. And I’ll take free trade over “fair” trade any day. Fair trade is a construct of politicians, not economics.
Nobody is saying perfectly free trade exists. What people are saying is that restrictive policies that move away from free trade are not the answer. And people like me are skeptical that they will result in some kind of deal that results in more free trade. Haven’t seen anything that suggests negotiations are ongoing with everyone at the table. If that’s so I don’t see how we ended up with tariffs on $3bln worth of our exports in response to the tariffs on $1bln worth of Chinese steel we import. Sure doesn’t sound like MAGA to me.
Exactly who "forced" America to seek China's cheap labor force and products, thereby risking the theft of our technological ideas?
Matt, it’s a valiant effort but you’re up against individuals who operate under the mindset that we derive no economic benefit from cheap Chinese labor and cheap Chinese products and we’re somehow losing because we have a trade deficit. Hell, even forced technology transfers and IP theft carry with them economic benefits. There isn’t a company in the world that doesn’t understand the risk of doing business in China.
That sounds more like free market decisions than being "forced to play on an uneven playing field", to me.
One, no, they don't have "free reign" here. Nobody has free reign. That said...so what. You don't think the American consumer benefits from China's access to our financial markets?? The individuals who are being hurt most by China's restrictive policies are the Chinese people, not the "average American." Same with Chinese tariffs on US goods. When we go down the path of protectionism, there's only one outcome for the average American - they lose. You're choosing "an even playing field" and trade reciprocity at the expense of American jobs, American wages, and economic growth. You don't think you are because you think this all is going to somehow result in all these tariffs being rolled back and the nice folks in China seeing the evil in their ways and deciding to open up their markets to us and punishing all those bad Chinese companies that steal IP and steal technology. And you think I'm the blind one with my head in the sand lol
Grey Ghost's Link
As far as certain segments in China restricting us completely or nearly so out yes the Chinese do have free reign here in comparison. But, liberals be liberals and sheep be sheep.
In 1981, President Ronald Reagan threatened unilateral action to balance trade with Japan. In the negotiations that followed, he got Japan to “voluntarily” restrain its automobile exports to the United States. As a result, Japanese automobile companies built automobile plants in the U.S. that continue to employ American workers and continue to buy parts from American producers. Again, key word being negotiations. Much more needed to be done there though.
These were both good actions, but actions must be ongoing. Marxist and totalitarian China through its mercantile policies and currency manipulation have an organized menu to create trade deficits with the USA and others knowing it will weaken us in more ways than one.
The Scaled Tariff has a separate variable rate with each trade surplus country, and that rate is adjusted quarterly so as to take in half of the U.S. trade deficit with that country as tax revenue. If China were to react by increasing its tariffs upon U.S. products, it would be increasing the U.S. tariff rate upon Chinese goods, resulting in the U.S. buying, instead, from countries like Canada and Brazil, since no tariff would be applied to the goods of countries that buy as much from us as we buy from them.
Instead, China would probably respond by increasing its imports of American products in order to reduce the U.S. tariff rate upon Chinese products. And the Scaled Tariff would not violate international law, since it complies with the same special rule for trade-deficit countries that made Nixon’s 1971 tariff legal.
I don't think you have to be an economist to know that both countries benefit when trade is balanced. Problem has been, trade isn't balanced. China not the only problem by far, but the biggest.
Yes, a good time to swing the club. Forget about the stick.
It has not been "free" nor "fair" trade with the Chinese for some time. That's a fact. Something needs to be done...... fresh out of carrots, they have really never worked with them anyway. A great deal of the real world sees Obama like conciliation and concession and laugh at the perceived weakness..... weakness not only being shown, but in some cases celebrated.
Apparently some are not used to doing business and dealing with lawless criminals. There are no rules out there but those that we can enforce. Can't call the cops even when they have been caught stealing from you. In fact they have bought and paid for most of them. Nobody is going to do anything if you don't do it yourself.
The rules are meaningless if WE can do nothing to enforce them. That in and of itself is confrontational in nature, not conciliatory. Again, that's why it's called a trade WAR. It is done because the treaties and contracts either need to be changed and the others won't come to the table to renegotiate.... or those who are boldly breaking them need to be reined in.
Like wars they go on as long as they need to. And stuff gets broken and blown up along the way. Oxen get gored to. Until one side or both decide it's not worth it and come to the table. It is not meant to be a normally operating or continual economic system. Just as war is not the preferred normal state between countries.
Wasn't that long ago we were pulling the Chinese butts out of the Japanese fire. Turned a good section of a couple of Japanese cities into glass. Now we are fairly close allies in the world with them (might be said we are protectors of the Japanese from China now). Same with Germany. Both were worth fighting, killing, destroying at the time. But it was not the normal peacetime state between us that it has become. For now.....
i said this on the other thread, but i'll say it again here since everyone is still ranting.
the other side of that infographic is the assumption that specialization of production will be good for all, because those whose jobs are moved over seas will 1) have the ability (ie intelligence etc.) to get better jobs, and 2) training will be available to insure that people can get better jobs.
in reality, #1 just isn't true and #2 just hasn't happened.
the infographic fails to capture the fact that because #1 isn't true and #2 hasn't happened, there are hundreds of thousands of working age people in middle america who are sitting around popping opiates or doing meth because they don't have anything better to do. these social costs are very real, but they are not captured by classical economic theory on specialization and trade.
i am by no means an expert here, but it seems likely to me that in the future 1) people will live longer, and thus hold on to their jobs longer (meaning fewer new openings for people) and 2) more and more jobs will be automated meaning that combined there will be fewer and fewer jobs, and thus the jobs that remain will be more and more valuable.
Silicon valley and other libs think that the answer to this is "Universal Basic Income" or UBI, where everyone gets a check just for waking up in the morning.
I am of the view that this will not work.
Most people need a job of sorts to build their sense of self worth. I believe that simply waking up in the morning and getting a check w/ no opportunity to get a job will lead to wide spread depression, and increased social costs such as drug abuse.
Again, i do not have the answers here, but i think it is at least worth considering that tariffs may provide an answer. NVA and others are correct that in the near term tariffs and trade wars may cost jobs b/c tariffs lead to higher prices, and thus less demand, less revenue, and less ability for companies to pay their people, but in the intermediate and long term, the demand curve will adjust to the new pricing reality, those jobs will come back, and additional jobs will theoretically come back in the industries that have been re-domesticated through tariffs.
all in all, it is a much more complicated issue than what you read in the headlines, and there is potentially some logic behind the idea of tariffs.
as far as the stock market goes, as always it is best to ignore the day to day moves. To quote Warren Buffett, "In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497."
if you are 5 years or less away from retirement, you should probably be reducing your exposure to stocks. If you have a longer term, you should be ignoring them, except to buy when they are on sale. They will go up and they will go down, and in the long run you will be happy to own them.
That is a thoughtful response, Laughingwater. I'm in the camp that I'd prefer for the market to pick the winners and losers, not the government (I'd be happy if we rolled back all the tariffs, Pig Doc, even those which would benefit my industry). Sure, there are societal costs when industries and jobs are phased out. This is a byproduct of being an economic loser. And I'm sorry, but if we're going to decide to subsidize individuals, it's far more efficient to cut them a pay check than to prop up uneconomic industries with uneconomic jobs. Give people the means to move into areas and take jobs that the market actually wants.
Nothing about tariffs will push the demand curve to the right and there are no guarantees that demand will ever shift to the right in the intermediate or long term if tariffs remain in effect.
The warning from China's ambassador to the United States, Cui Tiankai, came after Beijing slapped tariffs on $3 billion worth of US exports including fruit, pork and steel pipes.
Those measures were in response to President Donald Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum from China and other countries. But Trump has also announced plans to impose tariffs on about $50 billion worth of Chinese goods.
The new US measures are still taking shape. The Trump administration hasn't yet announced which specific Chinese products will be hit and is planning to take public comments for a period of weeks before putting the tariffs into effect.
When that happens, "we will certainly take countermeasures of the same proportion and of the same scale, same intensity," Cui said in an interview with China's state-run English news channel CGTN that aired Tuesday in Asia.
Trump was bragging about $250 bln in deals (that he likely had little to do with) with China on his return from his Asia trip. Regardless of how much influence he had on making them happen (if they even will now), there are things he can do to incentivize similar deals. Again, I’d much rather the President test that path before going down the protectionist path.
I’m not guaranteeing any of that will work. But I’ll guarantee they won’t hurt our economy over any timeframe and they won’t leave us off worse economically from when we started.
The Chinese Ministry of Commerce on Wednesday said it plans to impose a 25% tariff on $50 billion worth of US exports. The 106 affected products will also include soybeans and chemicals.
It's a long-standing issue that US business executives and government officials have complained about, including practices like pressuring companies to hand over trade secrets in exchange for access to China's huge markets. But Chinese government officials dismissed the allegations on Wednesday. Vice Commerce Minister Wang Shouwen said claims China had forced companies to share closely guarded technology were "fake news," insisting all such deals were mutually agreed upon by businesses.
Pure nonsense from the anonymous coward. Extortion is obtaining something thru force or threats. US companies were never forced or threatened into doing business with China. If you choose to play the game, you can't complain about the rules afterwards.
How about this? US companies figure out a way to produce products, here, that people desire at a price point that is competitive with the rest of the world. That's truly the only way to correct a trade imbalance.
"China Threatens tariffs on $50B of U.S. Goods"
That would be 'tens of billions,' would it not?
"Buy American" in today's global economy may do more harm in certain avenues than many realize.
The Chinese are allowed to come here and play by the same rules our businesses are. Our businesses are not allowed to go to China and play by the same rules the totalitarians allow their own business to play by. Only a blind dumb sheep or liberal pedophile would like that scenario.
Like I have said multiple times, stand alone tariffs can not work. Not just will not work, can not work. Negotiations can work, and if some short term pain brings positive changes then it is time well spent. Very happy we have an administration that is at least trying to look out for the long term best interests of this country. If it works it will vault Trump to a lock for a 2nd term, which is leaning that way anyway. The Chinese may sit back and hope for a weak Democrat president in the next term, but that's a hope and a prayer and would cost them dearly too. Look for them to be very active at the table. If not, Trump better have a Plan B. I will say that.
Since Jan. 26th Dow Jones has fallen 3,000 points thanks to Donald Trump and his trade wars. This has wiped out $3 trillion in stock market value. You wouldn’t know if you’ve been watching Fox News. Could you imagine the headlines had this happened under Obama.
Brian Duncan, an Illinois hog farmer, had hoped the tough trade talk in recent weeks between President Donald Trump and China amounted to saber-rattling.
On Monday, he discovered otherwise, when the Chinese government imposed tariffs on 128 U.S. products, including pork and various fruits, in retaliation for Trump’s previously announced tariffs on steel and aluminum.
“We were hoping it was just brinkmanship and cooler heads would prevail. But instead, some of our worst fears seem to be coming true,” said Duncan, who’s also vice president of the Illinois Farm Bureau. “This is significant, real and serious for rural America.”
“I’m very concerned,” says John Heisdorffer, a soybean producer from Iowa and president of the American Soybean Association. “If we lose trade to China, our neighbors to the south will be glad to take up that trade.”
American Soybean Association President John Heisdorffer, an Iowa soy grower, said in a news release, “The tariffs announced today by the administration will put the interests of other domestic industries over farmers. Prior to today’s announcement, China has indicated that it may retaliate against U.S. soybean imports, which would be devastating to U.S. soy growers. Our competitors in Brazil and Argentina are all too happy to pick up supplying the Chinese market.”
Not sure there are that many people willing to give up quality of life so someone else can save a buck on a domestically produced widget. Price to extract or harness domestic resources ain't cheap either.
After all, Profit = Revenue - Cost
'Course I was raised not to be a dick, and pretty much in general, take ownership for my words and actions. And not hide behind mommies skirt....aka a keyboard.
All well and good if the playing field is equal, but the cost to produce because of regulation here vs. there(China etc.) is not the same. The US already has subsidies for farmers on soybeans and more. The big question is how much is the federal gov. willing to prop up against these trade war tariffs being imposed. The US is most innovative and highly competitive when x=x. In theory, tariffs are suppose to equalize any disparity.
Honestly, I have no answer, but the trend looks to cause more issues than handle them.
DOW recovered nicely so far today, doesn't look like a 1000 point loss. Means nothing though, what the DOW does today or tomorrow good or bad. What will matter is where these latest moves take us in terms of negotiation. Much to stay tuned for.
And soybeans? Actually, you're sidestepping the question. I'd be willing to bet that the agricultural interests in this country aren't really cool with being a pawn in this escalating trade war and would prefer their products not be subjected to tariffs -- aka, on the same page as me. Either you think differently or you also think that's a laughing matter that they share my opinion apparently.
If we are going to grow the economy in the US all of us may have to sacrifice a little. Maybe pay a little more for products because they cost more to make here. It's a small price to pay vs. continuing to live with a massive trade deficit and companies leaving the US.
I agree, don't complain about price from domestic products and then talk bad about products made overseas. Eventually, the economic lifeblood of circulation will go full circle and long term you will have economic equilibrium.
Of course they are going to threaten more tariffs. You think they'll just roll over and say "OK, ya got us...."?
If you folks are mostly worried about the stock market..... one of the things that have been floated rather than tariffs is barring China from our financial systems, banks, stock market. What would that move do to your stocks?
How did we get to the point that these trade wars have surfaced? How? I will tell you how. America can no longer pay her own greedy bills surviving as a paper tiger and the world, especially the Chinese know it. The POTUS that is attempting to reverse that trend is vilified because the people are AFRAID of the consequences if we slight China or anyone else on every front.
Here we go again FEAR.
Don't bet on the "economic equilibrium" thing. The weight of social, worldwide costs and programs have ground America to halt, a weight America can no longer afford. Weight. It can stop a train and this train pulled into the station long ago.
And you wonder why I keep bringing up the fact that people don’t understand basic economic principles. You don’t grow the economy by giving consumers less for the dollars they spend. This is a tax. Taxes don’t grow economies.
And why do people care about a trade deficit? I don’t understand it. In periods of strong economic growth our trade deficit has always gone up. Trade surpluses come with recessions. Trade balance is not an indication of who is winning and who is losing - it is a reflection of how we are investing and how we are saving. If we are buying more goods and services from the rest of the world than we are selling, then we must also be selling more assets to the rest of the world than we are buying. In short, our trade deficit results in a capital surplus which allows us to consume more goods and services than we produce. It is not an economically bad thing in any shape, form, or fashion.
And there are lots of alternatives, Shuteye. I prefer the ones that don’t add costs to the products we buy and sell.
Remember when you could go to the movies with a quarter or less even? Now an average ticket will run you somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 and most people pay without a second thought.
Why? Wages have increased. Printing money, on the other hand, for the sake of it is a separate issue.
Explain normal when we are living in extraordinary times, abnormal to say the least, that has negated our power and integrity by the last administration. Never take anything for granted save a headstone. One reason America is immersed in these turbulent times.
I am curious where it will sit 2 months from now when planting season is wrapping up along with possible 2 months of tariffs under its belt.
You can't see past the end of your nose. You grow the economy by creating jobs, which creates income, which creates spending. Demand for goods is elastic. If people have money they will spend it. Explain to me how making steel in China is better for our economy than making steel here.
And no, you don’t grow the economy by creating jobs. Jobs are an outcome of growing the economy, not vice versa. Creating jobs before growth is putting the cart before the horse. Find me a time in the history of our country when job growth preceded GDP growth. Here’s the last 30 years.
Argentina is the world's largest exporter of soybean meal. They have huge crushing capacity so they process the beans in Argentina and export soybean meal, primarily to Europe and Indonesia. China is not a huge importer of soybean meal - they import mostly whole beans.
Brazil is the world's largest exporter of whole soybeans and they already ship more soybeans to China than does the US. Over 70% of their total soybean exports go to China now and there is no way they can replace the soybeans the US is currently exporting to China.
There's a finite supply of soybeans in the world and virtually all get consumed every year. There may be some shuffling of which countries import from where but China tariffs will not change the worldwide supply/demand picture one bit and are not likely to have a major effect on US soybean prices.
Again, you shrug off this Econ 101 stuff but if you’re asking this question you clearly need a refresher on deadweight loss. Making steel here, and not in China, results in deadweight loss. It’s a market inefficiency. It’s a misallocation and suboptimal use of resources (economically speaking). Tariffs, quotas, subsidies, taxes, limiting competition...all equals deadweight loss. Economically there’s no debate. Allowing Chinese steel to compete benefits our economy. If we want to move those jobs back over here, it’s an economic loser. You can argue how much it’ll be a loser and say it won’t be that much (we don’t get much steel from China directly, prices won’t rise all that much, etc) - but economically it’s still a loser. Trumps not playing economics, he’s playing politics.
Definition: It is the loss of economic efficiency in terms of utility for consumers/producers such that the optimal or allocative efficiency is not achieved.
Description: Deadweight loss can be stated as the loss of total welfare or the social surplus due to reasons like taxes or subsidies, price ceilings or floors, externalities and monopoly pricing. It is the excess burden created due to loss of benefit to the participants in trade which are individuals as consumers, producers or the government.
Example: if a certain tax is imposed on the producer for each unit of the good he sells, it is likely that the new equilibrium price that is settled for the transaction will be higher and therefore some burden of this will be passed on to the consumer.
This will lead to reduced trade from both sides. The loss of welfare attributed to the shift from earlier to this less efficient market mechanism is called the deadweight loss of taxation. This leads to wastage or underutilization of resources due to inefficient market outcomes.
“But the core issue remains: Making life too easy for U.S. firms will make life worse, not better, for anyone who participates in the U.S. economy. Many economists believe this, as do leaders in the business community. One example comes to mind: As the CEO of The Trump Organization and its many holdings, Trump doesn’t appear to have made any special attempt to use U.S. suppliers or to hire American workers. To the contrary, when a cheaper foreign option was available to make Trump ties or build Trump Tower, like a savvy businessman, Trump seized it. But as chief executive of the U.S. government, Trump’s ideas about how to pick suppliers are different. What’s changed is that now, he’s not looking to his own bottom line, but at his poll numbers.”
Ending stocks (surplus) of soybeans is about 20% of annual usage. This is consistent with what it has been for the past several years.
Dont know if Gary could have done it or not but I am all for the idea.
I don't see how buying steel from China can be a good thing.
We are so strangled with taxes and regs in this country it aint funny.
One thing is for sure DC dont want a Libertarian to win.
again, i don't have a strong view here one way or the other, but i think everyone on both sides should be more thoughtful and acknowledge the debate is way bigger with way more variables than something that can be hashed out on a hunting message board.
Ouch - talk about a paper cut with lemon juice poured on it. But then again, that's what happens when the state legislature is ran by a bunch of good 'ol boy democrats.
Tell me specifically what deals the last four President's "created" that are horrible, debilitating and lopsided. How are you even defining "horrible, debilitating, and lopsided?"
"2. Trump starts tackling the horrible situation by trying to bring balance back to the situation..."
No, he starts tackling the situation by making things worse. Whether this is just a negotiating tactic or these things stick or not remains to be seen. China isn't dumb and they've showed their already more than happy to take protectionist measures that work to the detriment of their people. Trump is stubborn and doesn't like to "lose." So call me pessimistic that negotiations are going to both 1) roll back these tariffs that have gone into place (steel, aluminum) and are being threatened (the other $50 bln) and 2) roll back other "unfair" trade practices (IP theft, technology transfers, etc).
Laughingwater, no one is complaining about Trump's diagnosis. It's his remedy that has people concerned. Dimon is saying this too...
"Recently, the United States threatened unilateral action against China. Of course, anything that starts to resemble a trade war creates risk and uncertainty to the global economic system," Dimon said. "One of the administration's best arguments is that negotiation alone has not worked."
Consequently, Dimon proposed a five-pronged approach for the U.S.: to define clearly what it wants from China, to set up a timeline for China to meet demands, to listen to China's complaints, to take any action in partnership with its allies, primarily in Europe and Japan, and, finally to "revisit" the Trans-Pacific Partnership and "fix the parts considered unfair.
Dimon acknowledged that the trade negotiations are creating uncertainty and could lead to "negative outcomes."
You can enact Dimon's proposed plan without the unilateral action.
I wonder if any of those advising trump on trade have pointed out the US would be far stronger negotiating w China if it had joined TPP and was confronting China w Japan and 10 others who, with US, constitute 40% of global economy and over 50% of Chinese economy. They wouldve negotiated within a day. Nope, trump only listens to trump. Dumb ass. We are a rudderless Government. No leadership. No intelligence, no meeting of minds to promote protect our Country. Irresponsibility and greed have replaced common sense and intellect.
That was the dumbest 4 sentences in the whole post.
Take that as you wish.
The illustration used shows why the knee jerk rxn [of the market] happens with a tariff.
TRUMPS STOCK MARKET RULES: 1=always take credit 2=never take blame
If it turns out Mueller finds evidence of collusion with Russia, what will you say? Fake news? So what, everyone cheats? Russia is not an enemy? Just curious.
Dow dropped >550 points today. Pretty clear due to Trump's tariff stunt.
Oh and Soybeans finished up for the 2nd strait day.
I think we are up to 8 or so in the Trump campaign/family who met with Russians and denied it. Why deny it? There could be something there, we’ll see. There is still plenty of time to think up reasons it is all a liberal conspiracy.
.. .. . .
.. .. .
Pig Doc will like this one . . . . . .
"ICE raids meatpacking plant in Tennessee; 97 immigrants arrested"
Article at the link.
We get called racists, homophobes, bigots, haters of old people and children (Really funny when you consider it is the older folks doing the objecting!), and MUCH worse for DACADES, AND have had most of the important government agencies weaponized against us to suppress our organizations and voters just because we dont see things the same way as the Demon commiEs!!
AND YOUR WITTLE FEEWINGS ARE HURT BECAUSE SOMEBODY TELLS YOU THE TRUTH ABOUT BEING LIBERALS AND LOVING FAKE NEWS!!!
Was there a fart and a burp in there?
Yet some of you even try to paint Robert Mueller as a liberal. Wow. Instead of claiming bone spurs to dodge the draft like Trump did, he served with distinction in Vietnam, receiving the Bronze Star, two Navy Commendation Medals, the Purple Heart and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry as an officer in the Marine Corps. Was appointed by George W. Bush to lead the FBI. Google it.
Read a little, you might figure out you have been duped by a fake. All you have left is to cry "butt-hurt" "snowflake", "liberal" etc. when many actual conservatives can see through a New York playboy reality TV star.
Pig Doc's Link
On the tariff issue, why don't you take a deep breath and let the scenario play out. At this point it's just negotiations. Same with the Russia investigation. 18 months in and there is no evidence of collusion. If and when there is a conviction on obstruction of justice you can throw your tantrum. Right now it looks like a big nothing.
So do we just kick the can down the road like Obama did for 8 years?
We are going to see some short term pain...for improved long term trade and Patent infringement policy.
Unfortunately, the farmers...and the buy and hold crowd are going to take the brunt of this short term pain.
Good time to start averaging back in to the market. Smart money takes some off the table when the market is wayyyy oversold. Its an easy way to control market risk. You don't have to take 80% out like I did...but 30,40,50% is good if you can't stomach these big drops.
Did we forget when the market was going up....that it always drops faster?
President Trump has thus far been better for this country in one year than any other in modern history. President Trump in his first year is clearly more conservative than Ronald Reagan, that documented by the ACU and Heritage Foundation. Poopshooter can get back to his colon examinations.
That is quite a statement!
Please name for me ANYBODY who ascribes to that!
I cannot ever recall anybody here ever thinking Trump was a conservative and his prior actions and positions were well discussed here by all who cared ad nauseum. The only person here who seems to be misled is YOU!
Now, Trump has done many things that I and many others here have asked for for years. I dont really care if he is the biggest clown in the world as long as he keeps doing what I think is good for this country. If/when he starts to do things that are more Demon commiE like I will retract my support in a NY second.
For the moment, most people are waiting on results, the end game results, to determine if he is effective and going the correct direction. Except you Demon commiEs, you dont really want him to accomplish anything. In fact you would rather have him roll over and die so you could take another shot at putting some one-world-government dolt in the WH and the elites could get back to owning us and all our assets again.
Now having painted yourself into a corner..... what are YOU going to do if there are no charges? Somehow I don't see the option of an apology being offered, so what would be proper penance for pushing a false narrative and being proven wrong about it, just as publicly as predicting his guilt?
FWIW....... If the choices were Hillary or Jeb..... I think we came out OK by just having a psycho instead......
Based in McKeesport, Pa., the company makes seamless vessels to store gases at high pressure — steel cylinders of up to six tons that it sells to the likes of the Navy, NASA and T. Boone Pickens’s Clean Energy. It has received the first bill from the 25 percent tariff that President Trump placed on steel from China and a few other countries: $178,703.09 assessed on a steel-pipe shipment scheduled to arrive at the Port of Philadelphia on Thursday.
That’s equivalent to about two weeks’ payroll. Over all, tariffs on steel pipe that the company has ordered from China — some already on its way across the Pacific — will add more than half a million dollars to raw-material costs over six months alone."
I have a lake cabin in NE Minnesota on the iron range. The economy up there has been depressed for several years as steel mines were shut down, primarily due to cheap China steel causing reduced demand for MN iron ore. Mines are opening back up, job demand is up, people are getting hired and the number of people drawing unemployment and other welfare benefits are heading down. Because of the unions this area is typically very liberal but everyone I talk to is supporting Trump on the steel tariffs.
Suggestions above that China is backing down in this trade war might have been a bit premature.
Interesting - which mines are opening up because of these tariffs? Minntac and keewatin taconite were already running full last year. I am not finding any announcements on this. It would be a good thing because that area has way too high unemployment.
The sorghum tariff is just another big nothing. China imported only $1B in US sorghum last year - nothing in the grand scheme of things. Just like the soybean tariff and all the other tariff talk this will cause a blip in the market for a few days and then everything will be back to business as usual.
The ski is not falling. You can crawl back out from under your bed and pull your liberal panties out of the wad they are in.
.. .. .
.. .. .
However, when it comes to China - full Tariff away;
I can start my rant list;
1. Chinese drywall
2. Chinese deadly dog food
3. Adulterated Honey ( yes, Obama tariffed Chinese honey and save the American Honey market )
4. Chinese steel ( they are intentionally flooding the market, backed by Communist dollars, and trying to destroy all other Steel producers )
5. Chinese takeover of JBS ( Brazilian meat producers )
I could go on, but won't.
Anyway, in most cases, Tariffs are not necessary, and negotiation between Countires can usually settle things.
But with the Chinese - SCREW THEM - FULL TARIFF AWAY !
Fluck them, have our Navy mine their damn harbors and be done with them !!!!!!
MKlll, I think you're right. China has agreed to balance their trade difference with the US by buying more goods from the United States. So China will be spending more on US products, maybe not the Ignoramus after all.
They only care about their 401k's, the American worker is of no value to them.
Amazing how the economy with regards to unemployment, 3.8%, consumer confidence etc. continues to improve. After the election we moved our retirement out of equities. Terrible decision based on my belief of what the markets would do because of his anti-trade rhetoric. Most everyone's predictions, including mine, have been wrong. Amazing time we live in. A time like no other.