# Next Recession Caused by Trump?



## can_84 (Jul 2, 2011)

I wanted to see what the concision is on the likely of the next recession occurring in 2018 or 2019 due to Trump and his protectionist polices?


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Recessions happen whether Trump or someone else is in power. More then likely it will be the Feds inability to control the bond market that does them in. The Fed will be forced to raise rates to combat rising longer yields and without QE to manipulate the markets they will be in trouble. Also as yields rise the huge deficit out there becomes ridiculously huge and I don't know how they will service that.

Trump is trying to get dollars and jobs to come back home but I don't think that is enough to stop a recession.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

It does not matter who is president protectionist policies will cycle in & out of favor as will recessions. I would be more concerned with the trend in rising taxes then protectionist policies as history shows the government & the unproductive leaching off the productive brings countries down


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Here is Greenspan on the bond market bubble ending and stocks will fall.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/01/ex-fed-chair-greenspan-we-are-in-a-bond-market-bubble.html


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

Just read a headline blaming the sell off today related to a news event regarding Trump protectionist policy.

Warning trading based on news events is not a good method


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

can_84 said:


> I wanted to see what the concision is on the likely of the next recession occurring in 2018 or 2019 due to Trump and his protectionist polices?


I don't know about caused but perhaps triggered. That's sort of like caused.

It's also clear the 2017 run-up was caused, at least in a reasonable part, by optimistic anticipation of Trump policies.

Isn't it interesting to read supporters write off market reactions to news as pseudo-random. This is investing. What you want to be the case is not relevant. All that matters is what actually is the case.

How many of the above posters were in the group suggesting the markets would implode because of Obama? It turned out, the markets did just fine.

I've come to suspect that active investors tend to be Republican while passive investors tend to be Democrat.

It's amazing how political investment rhetoric tends to be. It seems the markets take notice of politics for brief moments and then they continue doing whatever they were going to do.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

While I'm here, I think a better question is this: Do you think the current fundamentals of the economy are strong enough to resist a recession?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

new dog said:


> Here is Greenspan on the bond market bubble ending and stocks will fall.
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/01/ex-fed-chair-greenspan-we-are-in-a-bond-market-bubble.html




who was greenspan though


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

^we should thank Greenspan. He accidentally demonstrated that Ayn Rand economics will eventually lead to collapse.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

^^

oh. yea. _that_ guy.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

TomB16 said:


> I don't know about caused but perhaps triggered. That's sort of like caused.
> 
> It's also clear the 2017 run-up was caused, at least in a reasonable part, by optimistic anticipation of Trump policies.
> 
> ...


For me I have always said this is a manipulated market regardless of who is president. I have also said Trump is not responsible for the stock market going up and down and shouldn't have taken credit for it going up. However if a political leader does something radical enough I guess that could cause a noticeable stock market reaction.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

new dog said:


> For me I have always said this is a manipulated market regardless of who is president.


Without a doubt.




new dog said:


> I have also said Trump is not responsible for the stock market going up and down and shouldn't have taken credit for it going up. However if a political leader does something radical enough I guess that could cause a noticeable stock market reaction.


It seems clear to me, even with the recent tiny correction, the market is higher because of Trump's activities than it would be if there had been a third Obama term.

I also think the market over reacts to presidential politics. A president doesn't have as much power over the economy as most people think.

For the objective investor, these situations present opportunities.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

TomB16 said:


> A president doesn't have as much power over the economy as most people think.


A normal president, yes. Trump is anything but normal. He is about to start a global trade war because he doesn't understand Trade 101.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/upshot/trump-tariff-steel-aluminum-explain.html



> So does this matter for the economy?
> 
> The American economy is relatively strong at the moment, and has been historically resilient to most disruptions. Companies are good at restructuring their supply chains to minimize disruption because of tariffs like these. In most retrospective analyses, the 2002 Bush administration steel tariffs have been judged to be costly relative to the jobs that were saved, but they were hardly the cause of some economic disaster.
> 
> ...


Can a global trade war cause a recession? You bet. Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 was one of the factors that exacerbated the Great Depression.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot–Hawley_Tariff_Act#Economic_effects

Trump apologists will surely find an excuse to deflect the blame from the Dear Leader. What else is new. Can't fix stupid.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

‘Trade wars are good, and easy to win’: Trump’s tariff threat sends shock waves around world
http://business.financialpost.com/n...s-global-order-shaken-by-trump-tariffs-update

Blame Obama!! Amiright?


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

This could be playing out some what like 1987 when huge trade deficit some blamed for crashing the market. This time a trade war. Though it all shows up in price pattern.


----------



## Esco (Aug 8, 2016)

Recessions and market corrections are inevitable, regardless of who's POTUS.
They usually happen every 10 years or so, so we are due.
Only thing you can hope for its a mild one like we had in 2001


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Trumpkins love to blame Obama for tepid recovery and slow GDP growth. It's all Obama's fault (TM).

Dear Leader starts a trade war? Trade war triggers a recession? Is Trump to blame? Noooooooooooo!!!

The Cult is strong in this one.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

lonewolf said:


> This could be playing out some what like 1987 when huge trade deficit some blamed for crashing the market. This time a trade war. Though it all shows up in price pattern.


1987 was also a year of tremendous budget deficit after the tax cut of 1986.


----------



## Esco (Aug 8, 2016)

GoldStone said:


> Trumpkins love to blame Obama for tepid recovery and slow GDP growth. It's all Obama's fault (TM).
> 
> Dear Leader starts a trade war? Trade war triggers a recession? Is Trump to blame? Noooooooooooo!!!
> 
> The Cult is strong in this one


And the Trump-hate is strong in you


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

This entire system has been an experiment from the early 70's when the gold window closed. There have been deals to keep the dollar strong using it for oil trade and there have been many wars keeping the dollar number one. This has allowed unprecedented money printing and lowering of interest rates to get the debt and the credit out there and this thing is now coming to an end. This has been going on through many presidents and now Trump may be in office for it all coming apart and be the one who has to fix it whether he likes it or not.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

I think china started the trade war 20 yrs ago. We are just playing catch up.


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

Trump is likely right again despite the usual Trump derangement and some w an incomplete knowledge of economics. This is mainly about China and the US don't need China dumping their steel. US gdp growth is the highest in decades and their unemployment is the lowest so he must be doing something right.

Recession will be caused by hiking interest rates to control inflation likely not anything Trump is doing


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

US GDP growth was 4.7% (which is substantially higher than current levels) in 1999. It is currently higher than it's been since 2006.

They are doing pretty well since the meltdown of 2008.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I think it is Trump's inability to understand math. If the US has a trade deficit with another country of $60 Billion dollars or whatever. The US did not "lose" $60 billion. They actually have $60 billion dollars of goods in their possession. 

Those imports came from orders made by US citizens and US corporations. Does he actually think that they cared so little about their money that they just bought this stuff for no reason at all. They did it because it was cheaper to buy it abroad then to buy it domestically. That is the only reason they do it.

Does it make sense to pay higher prices for stuff just so that some loser in Alabama, that probably has a lot more impediments in them finding a job, then Canada and Mexico, can maybe get a job...or maybe not.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Interesting Goldman chart on 10 year yield history.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/2018-03-01_9-32-41.jpg?itok=ob-BHsjg


----------



## Bruins63 (Jan 18, 2018)

Would be interesting to see a stock market overlay on that chart...


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Looking at the chart the word depression was used for each spike in interest rates up until the 1930's great depression. After that the interest rate spike going to 1981 was caused by inflation and we had stagflation. The stock market went through a long up and down period but went nowhere I believe from 1968 to 1982. Since 1982 the stock market has been going up strongly while the bond bull market has raged on. 

Probably the end should have occurred in 2001 and it should have all washed out but that is when the Fed really stepped up and pushed rates down towards zero. That ended in 2007 but after that recession they went for broke and we had QE along with near zero rates. If we are now doing the reverse of QE and normalizing rates I would think that would be very bad for the stock market unless the Fed steps in and possibly creates a near hyper-inflation.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

can_84 said:


> I wanted to see what the concision is on the likely of the next recession occurring in 2018 or 2019 due to Trump and his protectionist polices?


Yup. 

(How's that for concise?)

The man picks up some lame-azz theory that he heard on Fox, or from the last person to catch his ear - and the next day it's official policy.


----------



## 319905 (Mar 7, 2016)

My question ... which of Trump's "buddies" were aware of his intentions, either directly or indirectly, and profited from that information ... "tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum. Shares of US Steel jumped 5.75%, about $460 million in market capitalization, but the overall US stock market capitalization fell by more than 1%, around $340 billion" ... and on and on. This guy is not known for his confidentiality ... just saying.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

Keep in mind that congress can legally inside trade.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

In case anyone is interested...

Check out the comments regarding "political intelligence lobbying".

https://theintercept.com/2015/05/07/congress-argues-cant-investigated-insider-trading/


In case anyone thought the markets were honest....


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

tygrus said:


> I think china started the trade war 20 yrs ago. We are just playing catch up.


Trump’s tariffs on aluminum and steel won’t hurt China. They will hurt Canada and the United States.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Trump supporters, please pay attention. I will be sharing some data.

US steel production: long term view. Looks fairly stable, doesn't it?










US steel production closely tracks consumption:










US produces about *70%* of steel it consumes. Imports comprise the remaining 30%.










Top steel exporters to United States. Canada is #1. China is #11.










Why is China so low? Because US already has *160+* special duties on steel imports to prevent China dumping.

Trump proposed a blanket 25% tariff that would apply equally to all countries. Wilbur Ross, his Commerce Secretary, confirmed today that this is what Trump wants. A blanket tariff, not a new special duty aimed at China.

A blanket tariff that applies equally to all countries will hurt Canada WAY more than China. Not to mention Japan and Germany, two other US allies on the top 10 list of steel exporters.

Trump supporters... look back at the charts above. Does US steel look like an industry in crisis? 

Your Dear Leader is about to start a global trade war. For no good reason whatsoever. Enjoy the ride!


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

One more chart:

US steel producers are printing record profits:










But hey... global trade wars are good and easy to win. Stable Genius says so. Cult members, get in line.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

GoldStone said:


> Your Dear Leader is about to start a global trade war. For no good reason whatsoever. Enjoy the ride!


Its probably not about steel at all. Its probably about sending a warning show across china`s bow for lots of things. Their NK support, South Sea Islands and currency manipulations. Trump probably has some other industries in mind.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

tygrus said:


> Its probably not about steel at all. Its probably about sending a warning show across china`s bow for lots of things. Their NK support, South Sea Islands and currency manipulations. Trump probably has some other industries in mind.


I am sorry but this is wishful thinking. He treats global trade like it's a zero sum game. That's an outdated thinking from 1920-s.


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

GoldStone said:


> Your Dear Leader is about to start a global trade war. For no good reason whatsoever. Enjoy the ride!


I highly doubt our steel prices are competitive as is vs the US let alone need a 25% tariff. Same for a union sinkhole like Germany . This is about China. Don't kid yourself. It isn't true because the CNN hacks say so


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Jimmy said:


> I highly doubt our steel prices are competitive as is vs the US let alone need a 25% tariff. Same for a union sinkhole like Germany . This is about China. Don't kid yourself. It isn't true because the CNN hacks say so


Here... Steel Imports Report produced by Trump's administration in Dec 2017.

https://www.trade.gov/steel/countries/pdfs/imports-us.pdf

I fully expect that you will ignore it, just like you ignored the charts I posted upthread. None of them came from CNN.

As I said, it's a CULT. Dear Leader is never wrong.


----------



## Esco (Aug 8, 2016)

GoldStone said:


> As I said, it's a CULT. Dear Leader is never wrong


You could say the same about any US President


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

GoldStone said:


> Here... Steel Imports Report produced by Trump's administration in Dec 2017.
> 
> https://www.trade.gov/steel/countries/pdfs/imports-us.pdf
> 
> ...


Your little charts didnt' say what our steel rates were vs theirs. Again I highly doubt we can produce steel cheaper than the US on simple economies of scale but you can believe your little conspiracy nonsense if you like. It isn't a cult. Some people just aren't so gullible to accept all that the fake lefty media spoon feeds the masses.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

*Trade report produced by Trump's own administration* = fake lefty media conspiracy

Gotcha. Welcome to my ignore list. Bye.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Goldstone, whatever the target, the strategy is sound. A large trade deficit is a negative and getting cheap junk and products back from china in exchange for our jobs is not a win-win. It short term thinking - a globalist wet dream.

In addition, we are enriching a potential military and super power rival. Most than just steel here.


----------



## Esco (Aug 8, 2016)

GoldStone said:


> *Trade report produced by Trump's own administration* = fake lefty media conspiracy
> 
> Gotcha. Welcome to my ignore list. Bye


No offence or anything, but the ignore button is for pussies


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

There are country exemptions. I don't agree w Trump's approach and will give you he can be outrageous at times. But the only group he has ever expressed concerns about is China. Wait to see if he actually imposes tariffs on our steel before tearing up your shirt.

All of this now just seems like bluster.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Esco said:


> No offence or anything, but the ignore button is for pussies


I have never looked for an ignore button before and I would guess one can do this?

For me I don't think I could ever use it because I would be curious as to what a person is saying.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

new dog said:


> This entire system has been an experiment from the early 70's when the gold window closed. There have been deals to keep the dollar strong using it for oil trade and there have been many wars keeping the dollar number one. This has allowed unprecedented money printing and lowering of interest rates to get the debt and the credit out there and this thing is now coming to an end. This has been going on through many presidents and now Trump may be in office for it all coming apart and be the one who has to fix it whether he likes it or not.


Read a blog on Martin Armstrong site recently oil accounts for only 4.something % of trading of US dollars. I forget the something of the %. Even if the dollar was not used to trade oil it would probably still be the reserve currency.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

new dog said:


> I have never looked for an ignore button before and I would guess one can do this?
> 
> For me I don't think I could ever use it because I would be curious as to what a person is saying.


 Maybe my miss understanding I kinda think Goldstone was talking about ignoring the media in regards to Trump.

I have never seen anything like it 24/7 none stop, second after second, minute after minute, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, month after month now becoming year after year attack on Trump by the media


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

The medias ratings would probably go up if Trump reinstated the fairness doctrine with both positive & negative having to have equal time spent regarding controversial subjects.

Instead of the medias primary focus of being a propaganda well oiled machine.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

The financial media also could use the fairness doctrine as well.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

The fairness doctrine died on October 7, 1996.

The markets are responding far more to the Mueller investigation than they are to what Trump is doing. If the Mueller investigation ends with no impeachment, I expect the markets will slam back hard in a positive direction.


----------



## Esco (Aug 8, 2016)

lonewolf :) said:


> Maybe my miss understanding I kinda think Goldstone was talking about ignoring the media in regards to Trump.
> 
> I have never seen anything like it 24/7 none stop, second after second, minute after minute, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, month after month now becoming year after year attack on Trump by the media


And amazingly enough, through all that, his approval rating is still between 40 and 50%


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

For the record, both bush and obama tried their own versions of tarrifs. Why is everyone losing their mind like trump is first.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I think the lumber tariffs are much more damaging but since we produce steel & aluminum products in the center of the universe the tariff issue becomes important.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

tygrus said:


> For the record, both bush and obama tried their own versions of tarrifs. Why is everyone losing their mind like trump is first.


tygrus, there is a good explanation for that.

1. Bush/Obama tariffs were much narrower in scope.
2. Bush/Obama tariffs were open to WTO challenges. Bush/Obama didn't risk a trade war.

The affected countries didn't retaliate because they didn't need to. Their response was to challenge Bush and Obama in WTO. Bush lost WTO challenge and was forced to drop his steel tariff. Obama won WTO challenge launched by China. His tire tariff stayed in place.

Trump's tariff is a more serious matter because (a) It's wide in scope, and (b) It can't be challenged in WTO. Trump plans to use "national security" justification. It's not open to challenges under WTO rules. The only thing other countries can do is retaliate. And retaliate they will. Welcome to a trade war.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

so far, with big new tariffs aimed directly at canada, i believe trump has gone after forest products, dairy products, the automotive industry, aerospace, now steel & aluminum.

next, he may hit up on intellectual property. Goodbye, software developers in kitchener/waterloo, toronto, vancouver, kanata, montreal (sincere apologies to the prairie provinces if i'm wrongfully leaving them out). The industry can't survive in this country without US sales.

has washington ever before unleashed anything like this juggernaut of tariffs at canada?

at the negotiating table, canada has only one real card up its sleeve. It's the card trudeau has already begun to play.


.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> next, he may hit up on intellectual property. Goodbye, software developers in kitchener/waterloo, toronto, vancouver, kanata, montreal
> 
> at the negotiating table, canada has only one real card up its sleeve. It's the card trudeau has already begun to play.


The software developers are in Mumbai and Bangalore, not in canada. Been that way for years under wonderful globalization. It will have minimal effect on jobs here.

Trudeaus hand on trade is non-existent. He should have been working the personal relationship with trump and quietly pursuing a Plan B. We saw how his plan B went in india/china and even at home stopping our oil. All things economic are sacrificed for his photo ops.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tygrus said:


> The software developers are in Mumbai and Bangalore, not in canada.



not true. Constellation software is one of hundreds that sell 80% of product out of canada into the US. Kitchener/waterloo is thriving.





> [Trudeau is] stopping our oil.



not true. More fake tygrussification.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Single handedly killed the energy east project. Looks like stopping to me. 

Plus chased off 3 other pipeline and NGL projects. Nero's got nothing on this guy. 100s of billions of investment up in smoke.


----------



## Esco (Aug 8, 2016)

tygrus said:


> For the record, both bush and obama tried their own versions of tarrifs. Why is everyone losing their mind like trump is first


Because they hate Trump.

It remains to be seen if the tarrif will work however, but I believe Trump has a right to protect his country from trade deficits, or unfair free-trade


----------



## Esco (Aug 8, 2016)

Almost all of these tariffs will just be passed on to the consumer, I'm amazed few people have brought this up


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Esco said:


> Almost all of these tariffs will just be passed on to the consumer, I'm amazed few people have brought this up


Pretty much every trade expert I read or listened to in the last couple of days brought up this point. Trade tariff is a consumption tax on the local consumers. Kinda like our HST.

Republicans who generally hate taxes are cheering for a consumption tax. It's really amazing to watch.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Esco said:


> Because they hate Trump.


Not really. See my post #54. I explained how Trump tariff is different from Bush/Obama tariffs.




Esco said:


> It remains to be seen if the tarrif will work however, but I believe Trump has a right to protect his country from trade deficits, or unfair free-trade


Under WTO regime (which the US built), he needs to prove that a certain trade practice is unfair. He did that with Canadian softwood lumber. Canada launched a WTO challenge to refute Trump's arguments. All is fair and square... both sides are playing by WTO rules.

He is doing something else with steel and aluminum. He didn't bother to prove that steel/aluminum trade is unfair. Probably because he can't. He is invoking bogus "national security" justification, which is not open to WTO challenges. He leaves other countries with two choices: accept an unjustified tariff or retaliate. There is no precedent for this in the history of WTO (which again is the US creation).


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Trump's tariff may end up doing the opposite of what he wants: INCREASE the deficit. That would be sweet. Ignore trade experts... get more of what you hate.

Countries with Higher Tariffs Have Larger Trade Deficits


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Trump should explain to the people the gains of the jobs coming back to America and America making their own stuff vs higher finished product costs for American consumers. This should be debated and then do what is best for the American people. Trudeau will have a harder time getting his message across because of his poor performance overseas.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

I dont understand how people expect a country to exist and function and support itself if it refuses to have any home grown industries and just fuel consumer spending with borrowing. People have really lost their collective minds over this globalization. They are so wed to it they cant function logically anymore.

Any move that trump makes that creates jobs and keeps industries on american soil, I support 100%. I do not support outsourcing anything overseas ever.

Canada is already a lost cause on this. All we do is ship raw stuff and import depreciating junk in its place. Stupidest trade off ever.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Don't forget we flip houses to each other!


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Funny how things work in the Trump-land.

Remember how Republicans were trying to pass a tax cut in December? The argument was, lower taxes will create jobs. Remember that?

Now, he wants to impose a tariff, which is a consumption tax under another name. The argument I hear from you guys, this higher consumption tax will create jobs.

Pick what you really believe in. You are speaking from both sides of you mouth. Do higher taxes create jobs or kill jobs?

BTW, he is imposing a tariff on steel and aluminum. Not on finished Chinese goods. For every American steel worker, there are 40 workers in the industries than consume steel. For every steel worker job that Trump creates, he will kill several other American jobs up the food chain.

Bush steel tariff in the early 2000-s was much smaller in scope. It killed 200,000 American jobs before W scrapped it.

Here's a first-hand twitter testimony from a small American steel fabricator:

https://twitter.com/MattC_Bush/status/969985073649999872



> I'm a decidedly small potatoes steel fabricator and I can see this being a $25k-$30k cost to us per month. That probably means less jobs as we were looking to add this coming month.


^^^ Every trade expert tells Trump the same thing. His tariffs will kill jobs that use steel and aluminum.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

The entire system of trade is in a state of confusion. Following Bretton woods currencies were fixed to the dollar which in return was fixed to $35 per troy once of gold. There fore the accounting system only measured the amount of currencies moving back & forth. It was assumed you imported more goods if the amount of out flow of dollars increased.
The way we measure trade today has NOTHING to do with the amount of product moving back & forth. If you spent more dollars & the value of the dollar declines by 20% then even an increase in imports by 20% measured in dollars by 20% was not an indication you purchased more goods. It was simply net currency movement.

Canada is the net exporter of steel to the United States. Canada intentionally devalues the Canadian dollar which has helped become the net exporter. We are taxing our selves by devaluing the dollar. Trump is clueles when it comes to impact of currency on foreign trade. If he wants to do tariffs they must be indexed to the currrency.

Failure to do that will cause major problems as the US dollar rallies. He will cause a trade war globally & polititions on both sides are ignorant of foreign exchange & its impact on trade numbers.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

China and Canada dont export, they dump. Its not the same thing. And they use manipulated currency to do it.

If dumped steel is taxed, then less of it finds a home in the US, therefore local plants can profitably fill the demand. And yes, some costs down the line might increase, but thats the price you pay to have an economy. Didn't any of you take economics.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

If Trump taxes steel imports then steel will be cheaper in Canada and Mexico. Won’t that encourage auto and parts makers to set up manufacturing plants where raw materials are cheaper? Maybe there is a silver lining to this for Canada and Mexico.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

olivaw said:


> If Trump taxes steel imports then steel will be cheaper in Canada and Mexico. Won’t that encourage auto and parts makers to set up manufacturing plants where raw materials are cheaper? Maybe there is a silver lining to this for Canada and Mexico.


The automaker moves are about labour, not materials. Very little difference in raw materials because they are set by global market. Wages arent.

They import from Russia as well. Thought they were so bad. Dont they deserve a tarrif just because of the election.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

The Canadian government must stop subsidizing companies to counteract the tariffs the more the Canadian tax payer subsidize the higher the tariff the higher the tariff becomes which results in more subsidizing which in return results in more tariff. This is not good for the tax payer.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tygrus said:


> [Trudeau] Single handedly killed the energy east project.


not true. Another tygrussification. 






tygrus said:


> Plus [Trudeau] chased off 3 other pipeline and NGL projects.


what "3 other pipelines?"

the gummint is supporting the transMountain. It will likely go through, once the last minute rip tides calm down.

the only other valid pipeline extension ever was/is Keystone XL. This has been blocked across many years by factions within the US. Nothing to do with canada's PM. Nothing to do with justin trudeau, or stephen harper for that matter. Harper regularly saw keystone XL go down to defeat, in one US legislature or another, throughout his entire term as prime minister.


.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tygrus said:


> Didn't any of you take economics.



a real economist would know how to spell "tariff"

each:


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

tygrus said:


> They import from Russia as well. Thought they were so bad. Dont they deserve a tarrif just because of the election.


Funny you should mention it.

The U.S. Department of Commerce laid out the following alternative remedies in front of Trump:

Steel

1. A global tariff of at least 24% on all steel imports from all countries, or

2. A tariff of at least 53% on all steel imports from 12 countries (Brazil, China, Costa Rica, Egypt, India, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, *Russia*, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey and Vietnam) with a quota by product on steel imports from all other countries equal to 100% of their 2017 exports to the United States, or

3. A quota on all steel products from all countries equal to 63% of each country’s 2017 exports to the United States.


Aluminum

1. A tariff of at least 7.7% on all aluminum exports from all countries, or

2. A tariff of 23.6% on all products from China, Hong Kong, *Russia*, Venezuela and Vietnam. All the other countries would be subject to quotas equal to 100% of their 2017 exports to the United States, or

3. A quota on all imports from all countries equal to a maximum of 86.7% of their 2017 exports to the United States.

Source
https://www.commerce.gov/news/press...s-steel-and-aluminum-232-reports-coordination

Trump could have picked option #2 to hit China, Russia, et al with *53%* and *23.6%* tariffs. That option spares Canada and other US allies.

Instead, he picked option #1 to hit every country, including Canada, with *24%* and *7.7%*.

If you are Russia, which option is better? #1 (24% and 7.7%) or #2 (53% and 23.6%)? Go ahead, tell me.

Once again, your hero is kissing Putin's ***. And Canada is paying the price.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

tygrus said:


> The automaker moves are about labour, not materials. Very little difference in raw materials because they are set by global market. Wages arent.
> 
> They import from Russia as well. Thought they were so bad. Dont they deserve a tarrif just because of the election.


Great news then. Labour is cheaper in Canada and Mexico. layful:

New automotive plants are all about robotics my Trump loving friend. The cost of raw materials matter.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I thought labor in Mississippi was cheap as well as Arkansas. (without the mandatory mat leave for the husband costs or carbon tax etc etc) I think thats why manufacturing is moving there.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I think labor in general is much cheaper in the US then in Canada. If you ever watch renovation shows it seems ridiculous how much cheaper everything is there then up here.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Energy east was killed by trudeau when he rewrote the guidelines for projects by including carbon impacts downstream, something he didnt make bombardier and others do. He killed it DOA when he did that. Then he let his animal Coderre out of his cage to block it. 

Other projects include, Northern Gateway and several LNG projects - billions directly killed by his govt. Not onlydid the projects die, we ended up giving the entire LNG industry to our competitors. There will now never be an LNG plant built in this country.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

olivaw said:


> Great news then. Labour is cheaper in Canada and Mexico. layful:
> 
> New automotive plants are all about robotics my Trump loving friend. The cost of raw materials matter.


Not really, if a plant become robotic, then it has excess slack to cover a minor tarrif. Trump probably ahead of his time again.


----------



## Pluto (Sep 12, 2013)

TomB16 said:


> While I'm here, I think a better question is this: Do you think the current fundamentals of the economy are strong enough to resist a recession?


For the time being. 

http://www.philosophicaleconomics.com/2016/02/uetrend/

However, if you are concerned about stock prices, typically bull markets end when unemployment is low. Not aways, but typically stokcs have fallen quite far by the time economists announce we are in a recession. Currently we are not in a recession, but if Mr. Market sees one around the next corner, markets will fall in advance of it.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tygrus said:


> Energy east was killed by trudeau when he rewrote the guidelines for projects by including carbon impacts downstream, something he didnt make bombardier and others do. He killed it DOA when he did that.



yet another tygrussifiction. Carbon taxes impact energy producers, pipelines only marginally.






> Other projects include, Northern Gateway



Northern Gateway was only a misty-eyed fantasy. If anyone thinks there's local BC opposition to transMountain right now, multiply that 10,000 times for NG.

plus Gateway had some of the nuttiest proponents canada had ever seen. Hot railcars. Chilled railcars. Dilbit in hockey pucks. Parties with zero experience, zero money & zero backers rushing forward to tout their northern gateway proposals, while coyly refusing to explain why they thought they might be able to raise the funds (there were at least 2 penniless northern gateway projects)

talk about smoking BC herb .each:






> There will now never be an LNG plant built in this country.



oh, stop being so melodramatic. Canadians are good at working patiently (hint) (might be an approach to try out yourself)


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

It's funny how my post #75 didn't garner a response from tygrus or any other Trumpers.

Trump had an option in front of him to 
(a) really stick it to China with 53% tariff on steel, and
(b) spare US allies

That option would be really bad for Russia too. The Department of Commerce lumped China and Russia in the same category of the worst steel dumpers.

Trump picked another option. It hits all countries -- Canada included -- with the same 25% tariff. And it spares Russia.

Live view of Trump supporters' reaction:


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

GoldStone said:


> Trump had an option in front of him to
> (a) really stick it to China with 53% tariff on steel, and
> (b) spare US allies


Cause goldstone, as smart as you think you are, you cant see the end game. The allies who supply steel have no real option to retaliate. They have to take it. And its a warning shot to China that the US is done playing games and will sacrifice a bit of their own treasure so set the score straight. Its a political move, not an economic one.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

tygrus said:


> Cause goldstone, as smart as you think you are, you cant see the end game. The allies who supply steel have no real option to retaliate. They have to take it. And its a warning shot to China that the US is done playing games and will sacrifice a bit of their own treasure so set the score straight. Its a political move, not an economic one.


You are twisting yourself into pretzel. If your main goal is to scare China, 53% tariff is WAY better than 25% tariff.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

new dog said:


> I think labor in general is much cheaper in the US then in Canada. If you ever watch renovation shows it seems ridiculous how much cheaper everything is there then up here.


It was slightly tongue in cheek and this is not an area of particular expertise for me. However, much of what I read suggests that we're wage competitive with the United States due to our low dollar value and medicare. We are not wage competitive with Mexico. 



tygrus said:


> Not really, if a plant become robotic, then it has excess slack to cover a minor tarrif. Trump probably ahead of his time again.


Huh? Profitable business are going to remain in a higher cost jurisdiction because they make too much money already?

-----

The end game here is that Trump's tariff is a bait-and-switch tactic. He promised his supporters that he would bring back low-skill/high-paying steel and coal jobs by hitting back at China. He knows his supporters will believe anything that he tells them so he'll tell them that the tariffs really hurt the Chinese. They don't, but his supporters won't know that.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

What I would like to see is our country start to do some medium to longer term thinking, instead of just what the next election will bring (yeah wouldn't we all).

Anyway, there is no doubt that the US is making a bad strategic move. Importing aluminum/steal or buying it at higher prices will reduce the competitive advantage of many US companies that use that raw material. Those industries are by far, much larger and of greater importance then the aluminum and steel industry.

I don't have the strategic plan but it seems to me that we would be better off letting the US make this mistake and then taking full advantage of the opportunities it might create. Perhaps most of those opportunities might go to China and India etc., but can we not grab some of them.

I think Julius Ceasar once said,

* "Never interrupt your enemy when he is about to make a mistake". *

Might have been Patton or Rommel, but whoever it was, it is a good quote and it definitely applies here.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> I don't have the strategic plan but it seems to me that we would be better off letting the US make this mistake and then taking full advantage of the opportunities it might create. Perhaps most of those opportunities might go to China and India etc., but can we not grab some of them.
> 
> I think Julius Ceasar once said,
> 
> ...


^This. 

The question is - how do we do it? We've been talking about being _hewers of wood and drawers of water_ for decades. Maybe the Trump tariffs on our resources will be the kick-in-the-behind that we need to get past the talking stage.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

It just seems like a better idea to export finished goods made of aluminum and steel then to export aluminum and steel so the US can't make all those finished goods. They still end up with our aluminum and steel. If they saddle their companies with the cost of these tariffs sunk into their input costs, it gives any other country not saddled with that burden a leg up.

As I said, probably China and India or some other country will get the leg up, but it would be nice to see us get a little proactive with this.

In any case, I feel for our citizens in the aluminum and steel business but I think our future would be much better served shipping finished products instead of ingots and sheets. 

Donald Trump is handing the world an opportunity. We may not get an adversary so stupid again. I say, let's not interrupt him while he is making his mistakes and hope that the US Congress is not much smarter.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

OptsyEagle said:


> It just seems like a better idea to export finished goods made of aluminum and steel then to export aluminum and steel so the US can't make all those finished goods ...
> 
> I feel for our citizens in the aluminum and steel business but I think our future would be much better served shipping finished products instead of ingots and sheets.




but hasn't the catch throughout all of canadian history been that - for the most part - we don't have a large enough internal canadian market to make the mass manufacture of finished goods profitable?

put another way, we can't manufacture very much unless we sell product to americans. Our costs are too high to make small, local market manufacturing profitable.

at least, that's what i've always been taught.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

There are a lot of political and economic neophytes on this blog who basically are just CNN clones - single issue, trump is bad, freak out and cant think strategically past their globalization myopia. 

This isnt about just steel. Its about a multitude of issues. Everything from Oil, military, cold war, middle east, currency, next gen manufacturing, and many more intersecting issues. 

Trump is rolling back a stupid 75 year old policy. None of you know what that is of course, but the strategy is sound and its about time.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

tygrus said:


> There are a lot of political and economic neophytes on this blog who basically are just CNN clones - single issue, trump is bad, freak out and cant think strategically past their globalization myopia. This isnt about just steel. Its about a multitude of issues. Everything from Oil, military, cold war, middle east, currency, next gen manufacturing, and many more intersecting issues. Trump is rolling back a stupid 75 year old policy. None of you know what that is of course, but the strategy is sound and its about time.


I hope all you neophyte, myopic clones are listening! 
While yours is merely an opinion, these appear to be the facts from an expert in all fields. :rolleyes2: :rolleyes2:


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Statement from the Chairman of the US National Association of Home Builders:

https://www.nahb.org/en/news-and-pu...y-noel-on-new-steel-and-aluminum-tariffs.aspx



> “It is unfortunate that President Trump has decided to impose tariffs of 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum imports. These tariffs will translate into higher costs for consumers and U.S. businesses that use these products, including home builders.
> 
> “Given that home builders are already grappling with 20 percent tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber and that the price of lumber and other key building materials are near record highs, this announcement by the president could not have come at a worse time.
> 
> “Tariffs hurt consumers and harm housing affordability. We hope the administration will work quickly to resolve these trade disputes regarding lumber and steel so that businesses and consumers have access to an adequate supply at a fair market price.”


Pfffftttt... he is just another political and economic neophyte who is basically just a CNN clone. :tongue:


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tygrus said:


> Trump is rolling back a stupid 75 year old policy



DT can count to 75?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> but hasn't the catch throughout all of canadian history been that - for the most part - we don't have a large enough internal canadian market to make the mass manufacture of finished goods profitable?
> 
> put another way, we can't manufacture very much unless we sell product to americans. Our costs are too high to make small, local market manufacturing profitable.
> 
> at least, that's what i've always been taught.


at this stage he is just threatening a tariff on aluminum and steel, not finished products. That may come later with NAFTA but right now anyone that can manufacture the products cheaper will get the business.

It is a dumb move to put tariffs on your countries input cost. It hurts your competitiveness. This is a mistake. With our government, I am sure we will end up suffering along with the Americans, from this mistake, but it would be nice not to have to.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> It is a dumb move to put tariffs on your countries input cost. It hurts your competitiveness. This is a mistake. With our government, I am sure we will end up suffering along with the Americans, from this mistake, but it would be nice not to have to.


Optsy, I'm not sure what mean. Are you saying that you expect a dumb retaliation from Canadian government in response to a dumb move by Trump?

I'm hoping for a surgical counter-strike, similar to what Europeans are planning to do. EU announced they will put tariffs on:

Bourbon made in Kentucky (target: Mitch McConnell)
Harley-Davidson bikes made in Wisconsin (target: Paul Ryan)
Levi's jeans headquartered in SF (target: Nancy Pelosi)

These are iconic American brands that European consumers can easily substitute. No harm to EU consumers, lots of harm to American manufacturers.

I hope our government has a similar list of smart targets.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Here is a beautiful statistic of the stupidity of globalization.

2016 steel exports Canada to USA - approx 6 billion
2016 steel exports USA to Canada - approx 6 billion

WTF!!!!!!!!!! :culpability:

We have our own steel capacity and so do the americans and we just play ship it back and forth across the border. 

And for the climate fools, why use all that carbon shipping raw materials around the globe that we already have here and so do our neighbors. 

I imagine this happens with dozens of other commodities as well. Bonehead elites.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

tygrus said:


> 2016 steel exports Canada to USA - approx 6 billion
> 2016 steel exports USA to Canada - approx 6 billion
> 
> We have our own steel capacity and so do the americans and we just play ship it back and forth across the border.


I wondered about that as well; seems dumb, but all things being equal, perhaps the shipping cost North-South is cheaper than East-West. I don't know; it's the only thing that makes sense. 

Now, with all things not being equal, it may be worth taking another look at the E-W shipping cost.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

tygrus said:


> Here is a beautiful statistic of the stupidity of globalization.
> 
> 2016 steel exports Canada to USA - approx 6 billion
> 2016 steel exports USA to Canada - approx 6 billion
> ...


This is truly idiotic. No wonder you support Trump.

Not all steel is created equal. There is steel wire, steel sheet, steel bar, etc etc etc.

The same type of steel (wire or sheet or bar) can be manufactured to different specifications.

A steel factory that specializes in (say) a low-end sheet metal cannot easily switch to (say) a high-end wire.

Certain high-end specifications of steel are not produced anywhere in NA. Manufacturers who need these high-end specs have to import them from Germany. There is no other source.

You took Economy, right? It's called SPECIALIZATION.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

Tygrus is an expert in pyrite.

I'll admit to having a laugh when steel was being discussed as though it is a monolithic entity of a single specification.

When someone is doing something that seems like the dumbest thing you've ever heard, it can often be advantageous to dig deeper to see if there are underlying factors in their decisions, instead of knee-jerking an opinion based on the foundational idea that you are the smartest person in the world.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

GoldStone said:


> Optsy, I'm not sure what mean. Are you saying that you expect a dumb retaliation from Canadian government in response to a dumb move by Trump?
> 
> I'm hoping for a surgical counter-strike, similar to what Europeans are planning to do. EU announced they will put tariffs on:
> 
> ...


No. I am suggesting we do nothing. If he wants to put his country in a less competitive position by implementing tariffs, we should let him and then take full advantage of the opportunities that it creates.

As long as NAFTA is still here, if the US automakers can buy steel cheaper in Oshawa then Detroit maybe they may want to build their steal cars there. If aluminum is cheaper in Quebec, maybe it gives a competitive advantage to Bombardier over Boeing. There are probably many opportunities that this trade stupidity can create. If they don't want our raw materials then ship them finished goods. Trump may be a moron but their business executives are probably not. They will do what works the best for their companies and they can build their products in any country they want. 

Never interrupt your enemy when he is about to make a mistake. So do nothing. Let him make his mistakes. No sense reciprocating a big mistake, with a mistake of our own...and trade tariffs are a mistake. That is what I am suggesting.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

GoldStone said:


> You took Economy, right? It's called SPECIALIZATION.


Give me a break, Its called steel capacity. Specialization is done across plants within a country, not across borders. Thats stupid.

We have the product, the manpower, the technology and the know how to make it into any form we choose, yet we actively choose not to. 

A stupid choice by globalists. 

Same thing with our lumber industry. Cut it here, ship it to china, import direct to landfill junk ikea crap. 

You are going to defend that level of stupidity.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

A structural engineer friend told me some years ago that mild steel and general purpose steel invariably comes from China. Hi spec steel that needs to meet stringent quality control for some highly engineered purpose, is probably going to source from North America. I'm pretty sure he learned that by watching CNN.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

The first rule of economics is never export something as a raw product when you can add value to it. 

Second rule is you develop your own capacity for your own needs first, then export the excess. Countries without access to a certain material are forced to import. 

So canadians can make steel pipe but cant make steel wire. Get real.


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

It isn't as simple as that.

When steel cable is being sourced for a major bridge that is specified to last 100 years, that steel is going to be examined closely by an independent engineering company for a variety of specifications. That steel cable is going to be made domestically.

When a steel fence is erected, the material was probably smelted in a dirt floor furnace in China.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

tygrus said:


> Give me a break, Its called steel capacity. Specialization is done across plants within a country, not across borders. Thats stupid.
> 
> We have the product, the manpower, the technology and the know how to make it into any form we choose, yet we actively choose not to.
> 
> ...


"We" do not make the decisions. The decisions are made by individual *private companies*. 

Private steel companies have plants on both sides of the border. They will produce whatever they can sell, at the highest profit, home or across the border.

Private car companies have plants on both sides of the border. They will buy steel wherever they can source it, as cheaply as possible, home or across the border.

Are you advocating for a Soviet-style planned economy where all the decisions are made by the government? I think that's what you do when you say "we".


----------



## TomB19 (Sep 24, 2015)

This doesn't really fit in this conversation but I'm sharing it because there seems to be a lack of understanding and respect for engineering. Steel is an engineered material.

A person could go to engineering school, get a masters degree in engineering, and study and research steel their entire life. That person would add a ton of value to society.

An engineering prof once said to us first year students, "Any number of people can build a bridge or a structure that can carry a specified load but it takes an engineer to design a structure that can _just barely_ do it.

I still enjoy that one.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> No. I am suggesting we do nothing. If he wants to put his country in a less competitive position by implementing tariffs, we should let him and then take full advantage of the opportunities that it creates.
> 
> As long as NAFTA is still here, if the US automakers can buy steel cheaper in Oshawa then Detroit maybe they may want to build their steal cars there. If aluminum is cheaper in Quebec, maybe it gives a competitive advantage to Bombardier over Boeing. There are probably many opportunities that this trade stupidity can create. If they don't want our raw materials then ship them finished goods. Trump may be a moron but their business executives are probably not. They will do what works the best for their companies and they can build their products in any country they want.
> 
> Never interrupt your enemy when he is about to make a mistake. So do nothing. Let him make his mistakes. No sense reciprocating a big mistake, with a mistake of our own...and trade tariffs are a mistake. That is what I am suggesting.


Thank you. Makes sense.

Unfortunately, the kinds of adjustments that you described take years, under the best conditions. Right now, while NAFTA remains in limbo, it seems unlikely that companies will shift production to Canada just because they can build a car for $180 less.


----------



## hboy54 (Sep 16, 2016)

tygrus said:


> Same thing with our lumber industry. Cut it here, ship it to china, import direct to landfill junk ikea crap.
> 
> You are going to defend that level of stupidity.


This is very funny. You did not intend it fo be funny, but it is very very funny. You should probably stick to your area of expertise, the steel industry, and stay out of the panel products (not lumber) industries.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Actually China and Canada are fully capable of manufacturing any kind of heavy spec steel products as long as the customer is willing to pay. 

China is obviously very good at what they are doing, we may not get an LNG facility unless we allow China to manufacture it...they eat our lunch (and the USA's). 

We want gender neutrality and fancy outfits,they want to make money.

Most chain link and barb wire fence around Alberta is made in Canada btw lol. Probably on a dirt floor.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

GoldStone said:


> Are you advocating for a Soviet-style planned economy where all the decisions are made by the government? I think that's what you do when you say "we".


Then trump did both countries a big favour. Keep the 5 billion of steel here and make finished products from it. Stop wasting money shipping and changing currencies.

And for hhboy, absolutely every piece of finished furniture is coming in here from china, made from canadian wood. Maybe you dont buy anything so you dont know. Its all crap too.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

tygrus said:


> Then trump did both countries a big favour. Keep the 5 billion of steel here and make finished products from it. Stop wasting money shipping and changing currencies.


Shoot a quick email over to the CEOs of GM, Ford and Chrysler. So much waste in their supply chains... and so easy to fix. :tongue:


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

GoldStone said:


> Shoot a quick email over to the CEOs of GM, Ford and Chrysler. So much waste in their supply chains... and so easy to fix. :tongue:


You mean the guys who got a $50 billion dollar bail out and then closed plants anyway and moved operations to mexico. Hold back my tears...:wink:


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

tygrus said:


> Then trump did both countries a big favour. Keep the 5 billion of steel here and make finished products from it. Stop wasting money shipping and changing currencies.
> 
> And for hhboy, absolutely every piece of finished furniture is coming in here from china, made from canadian wood. Maybe you dont buy anything so you dont know. Its all crap too.


 Not practical when a business plan can not be made when the Canadian government can not be trusted. If you can build a factory overseas & x amount of taxes will be guaranteed for next 20 years its more practical to go with it. If a factory is built here have to deal with min wage increases, more stat holidays, higher taxes based on the whim of the politician that wants to tax the rich. If you own a factory your rich.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

lonewolf :) said:


> Not practical when a business plan can not be made when the Canadian government can not be trusted.


LW, there is a solutions for that. Vote the socialists down for a generation.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The auto companies steel is pressed so thin we had to be careful we didn't leave fingerprints in the panels.

If I recall correctly a lot of the panels come from Japan for assembly in North America.

In the auto manufacturing world, people would be surprised where all the parts come from and how many manufacturers share the same parts and suppliers.


----------



## Brainer (Oct 8, 2015)

Nope, (last week) , according to Gallup, he had a 39% approval rating
http://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx




Esco said:


> And amazingly enough, through all that, his approval rating is still between 40 and 50%


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Dammit. Trump figured out his monumental mistake. Maybe he is reading our posts. 

So now he decides that instead of just reverse coursing his stupid tariff plan he is going to use it as leverage to get his stupid NAFTA deal.

So maybe a few non-consequential reciprocal tariffs from Canada might not be such a bad idea to take away that negotiating point for the NAFTA negotiations. I never cared for Levi jeans or Harley's but I do actually enjoy Wild Turkey Kentucky Bourbon. Oh well. I can take one for the country. Our rye is not so bad and I am mainly a beer drinker anyway and our beer can stand up to anyone's.


----------



## Argonaut (Dec 7, 2010)

As a student of history, I always find it fascinating how political parties ebb and flow in their beliefs over time. Issues that a party's fierce rivals held a generation earlier are later clung to with the utmost devotion.

Case in point the issue of Free Trade vs. Protectionism. In the 19th Century, free trade was a "liberal" ideal, with protectionism being adopted by more "conservative" parties. Then in the 20th Century the reverse was the case, with conservatives adopting both pro-business and free trade ideals, while liberals espoused more taxes and regulation. And now in the 21st Century under Trump pigs are in flight as you can see self-professed conservatives defending tariffs. Tariffs! The most anti-market tool you could think of.

I like Trump for many reasons but I certainly can't defend tariffs. Especially when the nation that stands to lose the most is Canada. It's important to take all issues at face value and not just tow whatever the party line is today. I've always been right-leaning but now have what is perhaps a "classical" and not a current right-wing view, that tariffs are bad and free trade is good.

I did suspect that perhaps this was just a negotiating tactic by Trump, as that has lots of precedence and is even outlined in his book. It looks like that may be the case, we shall see. Despite what the left thinks, he is a smart guy. A trade war would be a dumb thing though.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Protectionism has more immediate results. Free trade benefits a society over generations of time. Therefore, politically this creates a problem.

Obviously *a citizen or company has a specific reason or benefit in mind when they decide to buy something abroad*. If I am looking at an identical item with an identical price and one is made in Canada and the other somewhere else, I would of course buy the Canadian one. Since almost nothing is identical, I buy what benefits me.

Therefore, it is safe to say that if protectionism benefited a society more, then most people and corporations would buy internally all the time. They would not need tariffs. But it doesn't. So they don't. And *these benefits of buying abroad go much deeper then people getting cheap stuff.* It's companies getting cheap stuff so they can hire people to so something to that stuff to sell it competitively in their country and in others. It's those people who that company hired willing to work for less money because all the stuff they can buy is cheaper, making their companies more competitive and growing larger and larger and hiring more and more people. That is why free trade is better then protectionism. That is how an economy grows.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

This one is for OptsyEagle. Your predictions are coming true? 

DowDuPont Says Trump Steel Tariffs Hurt Case for New U.S. Plants
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...teel-tariff-hurts-case-for-more-u-s-factories

"DowDuPont Inc., the world’s largest chemical company, *is considering Canada* or Argentina instead of the U.S. Gulf Coast for its next major investment as President Donald Trump’s proposed steel tariffs make domestic construction pricier."


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

This man-child will absolutely cause the next recession.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The problem with the free trade theory really isn't about work, where it is located or who does it.

It is about income. Replace the income and nobody cares about the jobs.


----------

