Trump to enact $7.5 billion in tariffs on EU imports following WTO ruling
Boom! EU is hammered by Trump. Illegal subsidies finally recognized. Level the playing field.
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
https://consumerist.com/2015/05/21/6-...
https://lifehacker.com/the-best-olive...
https://www.becomebetty.com/trader-jo...
Product testing
https://www.traderjoes.com/Faqs/FaqBy...
15 Billion of Launch Aid, seems a bit more than "lower interest rates"....
It cascades, when they have lower costs because the EU chooses to steal money from their people to "redistribute" to Airbus, that allows them to undercut Boeing. The result is an artificial market, and those costs are masked and inserted in other things. The net effect is increased costs for every member of the society in increased taxes, prices fees etc. So, how does higher tariffs on EU products equate to higher taxes on Americans?
http://www.boeing.com/company/key-org...
The mechanism for the EU "subsidies" in this case has been lower interest rates. According to the article you linked to: "The WTO's ruling said the EU subsidized Airbus by giving it preferential treatment on interest rates."
Market distortions created by government subsidies do not disappear by imposing more taxes. Statism does not justify and is not cured by more statism.
The Theory behind absorbing these is based on all things being equal. When ONE side effectively tariffs your goods, to promote their sellers...
In reality. Lets use higher labor costs to pick CA vegetables if all were legal. Yep, the consumer would have to absorb higher prices. NET effect is a WIN, because we don't have to provide BILLIONS in healthcare, food stamps, housing, etc. etc. etc.
So, it is a LOT more complicated than "OMG we will pay more". I will GLADLY PAY MORE temporarily to get an even playing field!
Where is the COURAGE in Conservatives these days?
Apparently the tariffs don't seem to be hurting European people as much as American Producers!
The company I work for buys lots of aluminum. Tariffs have made aluminum much more expensive. That has hurt our business.
How can you have read Rand and not be opposed to tariffs.
Market Analysis
Aluminum MMI: Global Demand Weakness Leads to Index Decline
by Belinda Fuller on SEPTEMBER 13, 2019
Style: Market Analysis Category: Metal Prices, Non-Ferrous Metals
The Aluminum Monthly Metals Index (MMI) dropped again this month, falling by one point to 83.
All but one of the prices tracked for the index dropped this month, with India’s primary cash price showing the biggest drop at 4.4%, followed by the LME primary 3-month price (down by 3.4%).
That is the issue, businesses need to constantly review their supply chains, and when costs change and there is a cheaper source, switch.
""The only tariffs that have been lifted, of all of the tariffs Trump has imposed, were the ones with Canada and Mexico as part of the (U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement). It really seems that a part of the overall strategy is that he really just likes tariffs," says Kimberly Ann Elliott,"
Note, the tariffs on aluminum from Canada and Mexico were lifted.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-stat...
"The tariffs have created more supply, but demand is down and the economy is slowing down," says Bill Reinsch, the Scholl Chair in International Business at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. "I don't think there's anything (President Donald) Trump can do for steel beyond what he's already done, unless he gooses the economy up to 3% growth."
You always have a "choice" to do something else that is not taxed as much in the face of government coercion. That does not justify the coercion.
Today's conservatives are yesterday's "liberal" leftists, increasingly accepting and rationalizing collectivist-statist positions as "pragmatic" and now "acceptable".
"Real patriots" are individualists, not any kind of conservatism. There is no such thing as a "real conservative" -- conservativism, like liberalism, is an imprecise term. The conservative movement at an early point in time had a better understanding of economic principles than today, but was always philosophically hopeless
No "very few" "real conservatives" were enough to elect Trump. Trump is an anti-intellectual populist and nationalist who won a backlash against the corruption of the left in the form of the Clinton mafia. Much of that support was from a corrupted version of the 'tea party' turned populist-nationalist, and evangelicals, all anti-intellectually following the "man on the white horse", but the electoral support was broader than that.
When the left is in power, they corrupt EVERYTHING, the judges, the rules, the education system.
Then, when conservatives get power, they "Must follow the rules" so they look like proper conservatives.
And we get our Arses Kicked ALL DAY LONG! On the corrupted RINOs stick around. And they BEAT UP Other Non-Leftists with the Conservative Values.
Finally, just give me someone who is going to fight for the American PRODUCER, and the American People.
I will GLADLY PAY MORE to help Trump remove the Tariffs that DONT SEEM to be punishing Japanese people when we can't sell our cars there, etc. etc. etc.
Exactly. It's 2019 but the conservative movement is more and more looking like the democrats from 1919.
It's understandable that people who don't know the history and the proper principles could be mislead by today's widespread demagoguery, but you would think that on an Ayn Rand forum there would be more intellectual curiosity. Those influenced by conservativism mistakenly thinking that it is the philosophical basis of America don't have to stay that way.
Then when I point out that is basically socialism they respond with something like "stop being autistic."
They just don't have any grasp of politics, because of no grasp of the more fundamental philosophical concepts and so are reduced to a childish level of Trump-good, democrats-bad.
They just can't see that Trump isn't all that different from democrats. They don't have the knowledge, the principles, nor the thinking skills to even begin.
I for one want the state to be "Controlled Opposition". ie, as the drug companies poison actual research, the job of the govt is to tax them (10% tax on drugs), and provide that money as RESEARCH grants for OPPOSING points of view.
The problem we have, and I know because I am invested in a small biotech. Is that the novelty of the research GETS Federal Aid $$$ (Millions) to help pay for the research. But none of this gets paid back. And our goal is to simply get snatched up by one of the big players as we think we have something... So the richest companies are USING Fed $$ indirectly to fund their R&D. LMAO.
The govt should be more like Police than participants. Keeping the rules applied evenly, PREVENTING the Soros kind of interference we have.
Unfortunately, even our forefathers couldn't predict HOW the MONEY would be used to attack our politics and the people who run the various governmental schemes. They just knew it would!
.
Conservatives used to know that, as illustrated by the Curtiss book from the 1950s on tariffs and some recent articles from the Heritage Foundation.
If someone does not want to buy imports from businesses in another country then he can choose not do it. We can't control foreign governments taxing their own citizens but can educate foreign citizens to oppose their own statism. Taxing American citizens with punitive tariffs is an additional injustice from our own government.
https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/acc...
They also are imposing 7.5 billion in tarrifs on US products in retaliation of Trumps imposition. Trumps impositions are based on a WTO ruling, which the EU is a member of, yet they ignore that.
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2...
So, they were found guilty of illegally providing support to Airbus, and the WTO gave the US 7.5 billion in compensation, and when the US imposes the compensatory tariffs, you get all weirded out and cry foul?
Illogical.
While tarrifs in and of themselves are a negative thing, basically manipulation and looting, the moment one country uses them, or subsidies or any artifical support, it is doomed to a spral cascade of everyone else doing it. It can either be 0 tarrifs and supports, or a free for all, and the 0 idea will never work when people vote politicians in based on their percieved protection of their constituents, even when it is detrimental overall.
There are still conservatives writing about this today who know better, but not from the more extreme Trump followers who emotionally cling to his demagogic sales pitches.
Claiming that opposition to tariffs as punitive taxes on the innocent is 'out of date' because of increasing "complexity" is a very old fallacy of the left and unprincipled pragmatism from long before the 1950s. Classical liberal economists like Von Mises addressed that fallacy long ago.
Socialism is worse today in this country. In most of the world in the 1950s it was worse then, in the more extreme form of growing totalitarian communism in much of the world. Today's increase in collectivism and statism here is not an excuse for more of it promoted to solve problems caused by government with more government.
Now, if a foreign enterprise practicing free trade principles without government induced "market distortions" can out perform and out price a domestic enterprise, then so be it and let the best producer take the profit.
You have no moral right to impose taxes on innocent people to punish someone else. It does not "negate" statism; it adds to it. Taxes are what "siphons off" wealth. Nothing good comes from piling statism on top of statism.
Trump's demagoguery is not economic, let alone moral, argument. Foreign governments do not "strangle into oblivion" a free society and do not create "unemployment" outside their own countries. Wealth must be produced before being traded; it is not "siphoned" -- or as Trump calls it "stolen" and "ripped off" . There is no basis for demanding that wealth remain "domestic". We pay for what we acquire through imports. We produce what someone else pays us for or we have no money to buy anything. Foreign statism cannot compete with a free society.
Conservatives (including Milton Friedman) used to understand the economic principles of this issue before following Trump the Pied Piper on the White Horse for an ex-tea party movement that has morphed into a militantly emotional and intolerant populist nationalism.
You have no right to punish innocent American citizens with high taxes to try to impact foreign countries. Defending the rights of the individual is not a matter of what I "don't like". There is no excuse for conservative statism.
That seems like a false premise, The United States was founded on import duties, it funded the government for many years, until the War of 1812 almost bankrupted the country and then the Civil War. While all taxes are a form of looting, elimination of them is not in the cards, because of TANSTAAFL. If you will have any form of government, you will always have to pay for it somehow. The only question is in what form?
Your promoting punishing innocent Americans with high taxes in order to control and manipulate behavior is a statist violation of rights and most certainly is anti-American. The use of tariffs for government interference in favoring selecting industries with coercive protectionism was an early example of the anti-individualist trend described by historian Arthur Ekirch's The Decline of American Liberalism.
There is no political "solution" to economic conditions that you don't like. Demanding such a political "solution" to impose what you want in the economy is a statist false premise. Refusing to give you what does not morally exist, rejecting your false premises, is not a "dodge".
Ayn Rand once observed that conservatives and liberals differ only in that each wants to coercively control what it believes to be most important. That used to mean liberals controlling the economy and conservatives controlling personal and social behavior. Now both want to control both realms.
Well someone does downvote me. By the hundreds. And only a triggered leftist would be doing that given what I post.
"However, you and ewv seem predisposed to adopting a specific position"
Yes it's called "Objectivism." It should be the position the majority of posters here share, but alas the majority of posters here are politically illiterate leftists, of the conservative variety.
"A lot of us believe in the basics of the Objective viewpoint, but have been trying to make it fit the current reality"
No that's not true. Most of you do not support Objectivism and are militantly opposed to it's ideas. Again, just look at my downvotes.
Most of you here do not understand it and are trying to make it fight with your incorrect understanding of reality.
"For example, to claim that all tariffs are simply statist imposition of theft is unreal and illogical"
It is absolutely real and logical. It can be no other way if you understand the fundamentals.
The rest of your points are equally 180 degrees wrong.
"You have no right to punish innocent American citizens with high taxes to try to impact foreign countries. Defending the rights of the individual is not a matter of what I 'don't like'. There is no excuse for conservative statism."
Well, that will basically hurt the French and the Danes, both fully ripe for getting their nose broken on cheese and wine import.
As for fruit juice: would anyone tell me why do we need to import fruit juice? We have plenty of orange trees in CA and FL.
https://www.queencreekolivemill.com/
But yes, I agree, Trump likes to remind folks that we carry the bigger stick as they approach the negotiating table. I for one think its about damn time.
It is also not true that no intervention at all is the only possibility other than rampant statism. We have a mixed system. It is becoming more statist because of the widely accepted 'pragmatist' statist premises implementing collectivist-altruist premises. Getting government interference out of the economy is a very long term goal that depends on first changing the culture to become individualist based on reason and egoism. In the meantime, advocating more statism and punishment of the innocent for government policy is exactly the wrong approach.
Many CA Chardonnays and Cabernets are of way higher quality than the French.
The Italians keep the best they make at home, imo; I was astounded by the fantastic table wines when I was in Italy. The best from Australia are consumed quickly in Oz by "friends" of the small wineries. The French wines I have enjoyed most were very expensive and not affordable for me.
I tried very expensive French wines when I was in France, a long time ago. Tell you frankly, I wasn't that much impressed. I got a headache after but it may have been due to other factors.
Yes, Silver Oak Cabs! Heavenly! When I lived in Sonoma, I learned to appreciate the Sonoma wines - Sonoma and Napa are very chauvinistic about their regions. Would you believe that Sonoma Market (an exclusive private supermarket where I used to shop) did not carry Napa wines? I was flabbergasted when first went there asking for my favorite wine that happened to be made in Napa, and the guy educated me that they don't carry Napa wines only from Sonoma and he was happy to show me his best selection. I wasn't disappointed.
I don't have much experience with Italian, the ones available here are third rated and I did not drink much wine when in Italy. I am not particularly eager for Chianti.
Yes, I agree about the Aussies. In Sidney I had the chance to try some heavy red ones. Delicious! New Zealand is right up there with some silky whites.
About the French: I think the fame of French wines is all in the past. Sure they made excellent wines in the past, but it doesn't mean others did not catch up to them. Grgich Hills won the Grand Prize with its Chardonnay in Paris many years ago, stunning the French. I had the chance to visit his boutique vinery and meet the owner when I moved to CA. It was an out of world experience to taste his Chardonnay! Then he ruined it by experimenting with all kinds of things and now the Grgich Chardonnay is a sour, unpleasant product you try to forget. Only its price stayed the same, not the quality - in the stratosphere.
Speaking of other countries, when traveling in Europe I tried Hungarian wines. Absolutely great experience! They had a wine production before WW2 which the communists managed to drive to the ground like many other branches of the economy but they recovered after 1990. Now they make some of the best whites in Europe.
Thanks for sharing your experience in Budapest. I hope I'll be able to visit there sometime.
In my trips to Australia I bought wine throughout the trips and found a retailer in Sydney that would ship it back to the US for me (when I bought 2 cases from his store, too.)
The French got over their obsession with their language, demanding that foreigners speak it if wanted to be considered for attention a long time ago, They made room for English, even the clochards on the street.
I'd love to share your wine tasting experiences around the world.
I'd like to add my own, from Budapest Hungary.
Whenever in the country for my consulting projects, I stayed at the Hilton in Buda. If you ever visited the country, this would provide you with a delightful experience in tradition and wine tasting.
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractio...
I hate to use this link for its commercial push, just to provide a background.
The thing to concentrate on is the Faust Wine Cellar that has been set up in the 13the century remains of the Dominican Monastery as the foundation of the Hilton.
https://www.danubiushotels.com/en/our...
At any rate, we have had a superb time there. It is an experience you pay anything to have.
Descending on the steps into the belly of the building, you are surrounded with evidence the past 800 years before your time.
Then you find present state delights like the best Chardonnays and Cabs.
You can't want more than that from life!
Why is nobody slamming this on what is meant to be an Objectivist forum?
Advocating more leftist government is not "understanding reality", it is unprincipled Pragmatism with collectivist criteria creating more "evil and malice" -- such as imposing new high taxes on innocent Americans for price controls in the name of punishing a foreign country. Proper principles are required for understanding and living in reality. Pragmatism does not "work".
Trump is trying to get a fair and balanced foreign trade. You think you have all the answers in your objectivist mind. People get tired of a self imposed know it all. We have allowed China to devastate our manufacturing base. Trump is returning much of it to the US. Record low unemployment and rising wages have been a result. All while fighting off a coup.
Rejecting statism (and pragmatism) on an Ayn Rand forum is and should be routine, not an excuse for militant conservative resentment with "you have all the answers in your objectivist mind" and "people get tired of a self imposed know it all". If you don't like Ayn Rand's philosophy you are welcome to post somewhere else.
Trump has been infatuated with statist tariffs since the 1980s. "Fair and balanced" trade in the mind of a statist is not economic freedom, and neither are his "solutions" of nationalist trade wars with higher taxes punishing innocent Americans.
The "pattern" here is rejection of militant statist conservatives routinely and stubbornly promoting the violation of rights of the individual. Especially on a forum for Ayn Rand's philosophy of reason and individualism it should be no surprise that such statism is and should be rejected and denounced.
That was Peter's point, for which he is savagely 'downvoted' into oblivion in order to 'hide' all of his post by militant, anti-Ayn Rand conservatives, and which evidently went over the heads of the same anti-intellectuals who maliciously corrupt the purpose of this forum and militantly attack with seething resentment anyone who dares to defend the rights of the individual on an Ayn Rand forum.