Trump's steel tariff


#61

Eventually, it does. But the fact remains; lumber prices increased; RET is wrong.

There’s any number of reasons why he doesn’t see it, but it has increased.

It doesn’t matter where you look for this:

They all show the same uptick since mid 2017.


#62

In past 30 years there was a sea change in how Steel was produced. We went from large factories to minimills.

Steel is going through the same trend as other forms of manufacturing; we produce more, with less labor.

Taking aim at China isn’t going to change that.

And No Dave, China is no economic mastermind.

If they were, the disaster of the Cultural Revolution wouldn’t have happened, nor would they be today in a hole of 67 million empty apartments (and climbing), a real estate bubble that makes our own look like a speed bump.

Scores and scores of empty cities are just collecting dust and falling apart in China. Their form of economic planning, leaves much to be desired.


#63

While the source I’m quoting agrees with you (It’s natural to want to tax your competition, especially when politicians are willing):

In the week ending on March 10, 2018, domestic raw steel production was 1,813,000 net tons while the capability utilization rate was 77.8 percent. Production was 1,716,000 net tons in the week ending March 10, 2017 while the capability utilization then was 73.6 percent. The current week production represents a 5.7 percent increase from the same period in the previous year. Production for the week ending March 10, 2018 is down 1.1 percent from the previous week ending March 3, 2018 when production was 1,834,000 net tons and the rate of capability utilization was 78.7 percent.

http://www.steel.org/about-aisi/statistics.aspx

Incidentally, that rate of production is 93 million annually, which is higher than the 82 million last year. I also read about steel jobs that have been added in the past year – absent a tariff.


#64

A great deal more steel used to be made in the US. Particularly here in PA. Within 100 miles of here there were massive steel mills: Sharon & Pittsburgh. What happened to them? They were driven overseas - by the labor unions.


#65

Businesses need to raise their sale prices concurrent with replacement cost increases, otherwise their margins suffer as soon as they order replacement stock at the new price. If they do not, what would otherwise be profit (to the extent of the price change) on preexisting stock instead goes towards the replacement stocks. If the price change is big enough, it could be more than just lost profit, it could be (for lack of knowing a more appropriate term) a material loss to the company. Negative income. Red ink. Generally frowned upon in boardrooms.

I’m not saying it couldn’t happen, but lumber is kind of a bread-and-butter stock for HD (they move metric $#!*-tons of it), so it’s hard to imagine they would just eat that kind of loss. They buy it by the billions of board feet, so small price changes add up pretty quickly.

Not arguing the tariff issue AT ALL (IDK enough about it). Just making the point that a ‘backlog’ of stock would not in and of itself keep HD from raising their prices to account for an increase in the price of restocking.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled bickering :smiley:


#66

It isn’t scheduled, but it’s predictable…


#67

Can I shut down a thread or what? :wink:


#68

So, protectionism doesn’t work, and there’s no evidence that it does.

Pointing to high imports of steel or its strategic value, does not make protectionism the solution.

For it to be the solution, you need to prove that it works. in solving the problem, and without causing larger problems.

When you don’t prove that it works, you’re just the same as the left, pointing to high healthcare costs as the justification for Obamacare. They hailed it as a solution; economists knew they were wrong and (surprise?) the economists were right.

Who here doesn’t understand that?
Who here has proof that this is a solution? That this has worked in some other time or place?


#69

Nonsense. For the first 140-odd years the ENTIRE costs of operating the federal government were financed by…tariffs, excise taxes and imposts…including fighting 4 major wars–the War of 1812, The Mexican-American War, the Civil War and the Spanish-American War, not including smaller wars such as the Blackhawk War. The income tax act was imposed by the rising “Progressive” movement under the second-worse President in the last 150 years…Woodrow Wilson, who, by the way, was a VIRULENT racist.


#70

Not when Alaska Slim is aroung and someone disputes him…


#71

And our biggest growth item was… commodities, not manufacturing.

Commodities could not be sold profitably overseas vs native supply, so tariffs did nothing to help it.

Indeed, tariff increases, are linked to economic downturns in the 19th century.

If this is all protectionists can leverage, it’s same as admitting that they don’t have proof for their claims.


#72

Except I started the argument, and asked for someone to dispute it.

Your characterization doesn’t work; time for new material.


#73

If it ain’t broke… :wink:

On the other hand, tbf, there isn’t a lot of back-up in any of us.( Of course, since I’m right 96.3% of the time, there’s almost never any reason I should back up or back off! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: )


#74

If it doesn’t apply, it’s the same as broke.

Overall, the comment is just lazy; didn’t take in the situation at all.


#75

You really take yourself very seriously, don’t you? :rofl:


#76

So, can we abolish the income tax before adding new taxes and higher prices on the American public?


#77

Suits me.l

EDIT: Can we abolish 95% of the federal government, too? That’d be great, thanks.


#78

Of course, We the People through our representatives can but we won’t. Maybe we should look at what is happening instead of what isn’t happening now or in the forseeable future.

The “trade war” seems to be fizzling. The Financial Times reported China has offered to buy more semiconductors from the U.S. to help cut its trade surplus with the U.S. Their announced retaliation tariffs are small compared to ours and are mostly for their domestic consumption.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/26/us-stock-futures-dow-data-fed-speeches-and-politics-on-the-agenda.html

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2018/03/26/happened-trade-war/


#79

I love how the trade surplus is now the justification – and IP theft – instead of strategic resources.

Meanwhile, I’ve got to address my trade surplus with grocers… Way too imbalanced.


#80

Mine, too, RWNJ.