All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Sunday, March 04, 2018

Why Trump threatened tariffs

From Abraham Lincoln to Ronald Reagan, Republican presidents have been protectionist, placing American business interests above those of Europe and later, Japan.

Bear that in mind as globalists harp about the jobs we will lose. The phonies do not give a whit about factory jobs lost overseas, or jobs lost to both legal immigrants and illegal aliens.

Campaigning for president, Trump made no bones about doing what Reagan did, and imposing tariffs on cheater countries.

He is not initiating a trade war. He is fighting back and the victors on Wall Street are so angry they should be wearing pussy hats.

But this post is not a defense of tariffs because every true American conservative knows we need to protect our industry.

No, this post is about why President Trump announced that he will impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum.

NRA.

Because last week, the president foolishly attacked the National Rifle Association.

Who does he think he is? Delta Airlines?

President Trump needed to change subjects STAT after giving himself that black eye.

NRA Executive Director Chris Cox met with Trump and Vice President Mike Pence, and they had a come to the Second Amendment moment.

"I had a great meeting tonight with POTUS and VPOTUS . We all want safe schools, mental health reform and to keep guns away from dangerous people. POTUS and VPOTUS support the Second Amendment, support strong due process and don’t want gun control,” Cox tweeted.

Guns don't kill people -- and the NRA does not kill people either.

Name the NRA member who committed an atrocity.

We have had gun control for a half century. Convicted felons cannot legally buy guns. Mentally ill people cannot legally buy guns. Wife beaters cannot legally buy guns. Dishonorably discharged people cannot legally buy guns.

That's the law. That became the law since 1968.

Sarah Sanders did damage control on Friday, telling Fox News: "I don’t think the NRA has had concerns with this president. He’s been very committed to supporting the Second Amendment, but also looking for ways that we can promote school safety and reduce gun violence. This is something that we’ll been having ongoing conversations with."

With Trump, go by his actions and not his words. This week, his words failed him.

One last note about tariffs, Nobel economics laureate (and former Enron adviser) Paul Krugman wrote a column today blasting Trump (yawn) but disclosed that the United States sells 9% of the world's exports - and buys 14%.

Like I said, we already are losing this trade war.

@@@


The media chose to go to war with Donald John Trump in 2017 rather than accept him as president.

The media chose poorly.

From Leslie Eastman's review at Legal Insurrection:
Surber, a recovering journalist with over 30 years of experience, has been cataloging the #FakeNews that has been regularly offered as serious analysis of President Donald Trump’s actions, policies, and opinions. He has brought his enormous collection together in the longest, most serious book he has yet written: Fake News Follies of 2017.
Fake News Follies of 2017 is available on Kindle and in paperback.

Autographed copies are available. Email me at DonSurber@GMail.com for details. I am including a "director's cut." I will give you the original Chapter 1 that I cut because while the chapter was amusing, it really had nothing to do with the Fake News Follies of 2017.

19 comments:

  1. I tried to research tarriffs history in the US using Gulag (Google)knowing full well Gulag would make my search as difficult as possible.
    .
    First US Tariffs date back to 1789.
    .
    The Federal government was financed almost entirely by tarriffs from the nation founding until the implementation of an income tax in 1913.
    .
    The US places a 2.5 % tarriff on European cars.
    .
    The European Union (formed as a tarriff alliance, not a military one - NATO is the military alliance) has a 10 % tarriff on US made cars!!!!!!
    .
    The liars in the fakestream media dont want you to know Europe taxes US cars FOUR times as much as we tax theirs!!!!!!!!!
    .
    the trade war talk is fakery built upon myths and fairy tales. Fake news

    ReplyDelete
  2. One thing I heard (or saw) that I liked was Reciprocity. Basically, we tax them the same as they tax us.
    I've been after reciprocity in trade and other international deals for years. If we can't buy land in Japan, the Japanese shouldn't be able to buy land here. Same with China, the EU, the Arab States, and so forth.

    Reciprocity. Doing to them as they do to us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe make it that only U.S. Citizens can buy land period. We do not need foreign interests gobbling up American soil.

      Delete
  3. once you read this article you see why the need to protect US steel production.

    http://energyskeptic.com/2015/power-transformers-that-take-up-to-2-years-to-build/

    "In 2010, 6 power transformer manufacturing facilities existed in the United States, and together, they met approximately 15% of the Nation’s demand for power transformers at a capacity rating greater than or equal to 60 megavolt-amperes (MVA)."

    …only a limited number of producers worldwide are capable of producing the high- permeability steel that is generally used in LPT cores…In 2009, China’s four companies produced 35% of the world’s electrical steel, the majority of which were consumed domestically. Conversely, Japan produced 14% of the world’s electrical steel mainly for the purpose of export. The two U.S. producers accounted for 14% of the world’s electrical steel production."

    Need steel to build Large Power Transformers (LPTs)

    Oh, by the way, need coal to produce steel!

    Trump gets it.

    Which is why I love the man.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah, Big D, not a good week for Mr. T. Not worried yet, but he needs to clean up his act a little.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Were his statements on gun control a blunder or a calculated move? He has said some really strange stuff that turned out to be bait for the commies.
    If this is a vocal blunder, it is nearly his first. If it was intended as bait, it is #3,575,345,769 and if he was sincere, he is one and done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seeing Feinstein's face light up when Pres. Trump started speaking her language just scared me spitless. She & Schumer rubbing their hands together in glee is worse than any slasher film, it's truly horrifying and can have murderous consequences.

      I love our Trump, but I wish he'd stop putting his supporters through the rollercoaster of fright, worry and bad feelings!

      Still, when I was a kid I loved the cliffhanger serials at the movie theaters- Rocketman was my favorite, and every week Rocketman would be finished, no possibility of survival, he's a goner. Then next week we'd find out how he DID survive, and he'd only feigned his death to trick the bad guys!

      It was easier on my heart back when I was a kid, and I knew it was all make-believe anyway!

      We really need another couple of staunch conservative Americans on the SCOTUS, so that we can get some breathing space on our 2nd Amendment right!

      Delete
  6. Fast-draw shooting is attracted to the foot and leg. This was likely fast-draw talking. He'll recover.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thomas Sowell: [B]eing able to produce anything more cheaply is not the same as being able to produce everything more cheaply. When there are scarce resources which have alternative uses, producing more of one product means producing less of some other product. The question is not simply how much it costs, in either money or resources, to produce chairs or television sets in one country, compared to another country, but how many chairs it costs to produce a television set, when resources are shifted from producing one product to producing the other

    ReplyDelete
  8. I’m with you much, Mr. Surber, on Trump. But, not on anti-Capitalist policies that protect a few in an industry at the expense of many, the consumer. The gains in the economy will reverse quickly if Trump pursues this path.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I used to be an ardent free-trader. No more. We need juice, via electricity, to power our economy. No electricity, no economy.

    So, what happens when we need China to sell us the steel to upgrade our large power transformers? Yeah, the theory of free trade falls of cliff there.

    "They hold our debt", we are told. "So, they have an incentive for us to stay solvent."

    Yeah, when we're without juice, they'll gladly sacrifice our debt to take our land.

    But hey, free trade, Adam Smith et al.

    I agree when it comes to the baker and candlestick maker, but not when it comes to the Commies. We KNOW what their intentions are and it's not for a productive US.

    Oh, and by the way, rooftop PV panels, hydro and wind turbines in the Midwest are not going to get the job done.

    Not if we intend to maintain, and increase, our consumption levels.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The classic economic crow of free trade is not the “free trade” we are experiencing now. We can’t sit still and do nothing.

      Delete
  10. I think the whole concept of a trade deficit is nonsense. If we buy $1mm worth of steel from China, they wind up with $1mm in dollars and we wind up with steel.

    The $1mm is analogous to a check. Until a check is cashed, it may have potential value but no actual value.

    If the Chinese just hang onto the dollars, they have given us free steel. They have 3 options:

    1 Spend the dollars on US goods (US Exports)

    2 Invest or spend the dollars in the US.

    3 Lend money to the USG in the form of treasury notes and bonds.

    That last helps finance the deficit. If tariffs result in the Chinese et al having less money to lend to finance govt spending, that would seem like a good thing to me.

    Starve the swamp creatures AND drain the swamp.

    What's not to like?

    Note: In #1 they can spend the dollars buying from other eg oil from Kuwait but that merely shifts the problem to the Kuwaitis and they have the same problem.

    Note 2: I am about as hardcore absolutist in free trade as it is possible to be. I am against selective tariffs, though I would be open to a uniform tariff on all imports. Sort of like a sales tax.

    So I am against the President Trump tariff's in principal and hope they don't come to pass. I do see a potential silver lining to the dark cloud, though.

    John Henry

    ReplyDelete
  11. I said:

    The $1mm is analogous to a check. Until a check is cashed, it may have potential value but no actual value.

    Let me rephrase that. If I write Don a check to pay for his book, until he cashes the check, I have a potential expense but no actual expense. I still have the money AND the book.

    That is how trade works.

    That is why I am an ardent free trader.

    John Henry

    ReplyDelete
  12. I never did like the idea of complete unrestricted free trade, and I am an ardent conservative capitalist. This is for two reasons: employment of our own citizens in factories and needed materials for national defense. If you carry free trade to its logical conclusion (the worst case) then we would get all our goods from other countries as cheaply as possible. But then we have no manufacturing of our own and who is to buy these goods from other countries? Eisenhower started the interstate system so that defense equipment and personnel could be moved around the country faster and efficiently. If all our equipment were built by other countries we would be in a world of hurt in a large war. So what is the right balance of free trade versus protectionism? I don't know but I think when other countries take advantage of the U.S.A. the balance is tipped too far toward free trade. Mike A.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Screw Europe. They are not any more our allies than the Chinese. Run America for the good of Americans!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Mr. Scandlen, unfortunately this tariff is not aimed at just China but also our allies, example, Canada. It is Canada that provides most of our steel.. China, as I believe I read earlier, supplies about 2%.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Moreover we impose tremendous extra costs and burdens on manufacturing b/c of a choking regulatory environment--env regs, safety regs, red tape up the wazoo--plus idiotic crap like 'diversity quotas. If we could cut through some of this nonsense we would much more cost competitive.

    ReplyDelete