Trump's trade war with China

[Brain357]

1. Yes you did.
2. I'm saying they have all combined to help lead to low wages. These are what we should be working on. We have the jobs, now we need to help the worker. Tariffs don't work, see the steel industry.

1. Nope. Didn't. Aren't you overdue for a change of subject?

2. Yet, you just ignore trade deficits, which results on lost manufacturing jobs, which traditionally have had higher wages, AND outsourcing, which also, results in lost manufacturing jobs, which traditionally have had higher wages. How do you determine that those factors should be ignored?

Isn’t it time you admit defeat? Your tariffs fail again and you aren’t honest enough to admit it. Steel layoffs. US steel stock down 80%. Stop being so dishonest.

That was weird. I made a point about trade deficits and outsourcing reducing manufacturing jobs, which historical have had higher wages,


and your response, did not address it at all.



All you did was spout your standard talking point(s).


Does that mean that on some level, you know that my point about manufacturing jobs, and trade, is true, and you don't know how to counter it?

Ah you continue to dodge. Fact is trump did for steel what you claim is great for our country. What happened? Oh layoffs and huge drop in stocks. Failure. How is that good for us?

Your pretense that this is a simple system, with only one variable is noted and laughed at.

It is noted that what you want has failed over and over and you still refuse to admit the facts. Trump did what you want on steel. Now we have layoffs and a huge drop in stock. Way to go. How is that good for the country?

 

[Correll]

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

In the post Civil War era it took longer to get across the country than it now takes to get across the Atlantic, while the pacific took. We also had a glut of cheap labor at the time, and there was no such thing as unions or worker protections or safety regulations.

Oh, so suddenly, when the example supports MY side of the debate, suddenly you remembered that there are all this other factors in a complex system.


Huh. Funny that.

 

[Correll]

Your pretense that this is a simple system, with only one variable is noted and laughed at.

Is that any different than you blaming everything on China?

I don't blame everything on China. Nothing I have said could be sanely be interpreted that way.

 

[Correll]

Of course 2% growth doesn't tell you much about demand for steel. So, you're just putting a number out there and kind of assuming... what? That it supports your position without explaining how?

You are just weaseling out of the fact tariffs didn’t help steel by blaming the business cycle. History is full of examples of tariffs not working.

And of examples of them working. History is big.

No actually you don't have examples of them working as anything but a tax. They have never created jobs or saved jobs. They never work for anything but another tax.

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

Yes they worked great as a tax then. The growth would have been more without them. Unless you think taxes are good for an economy.

I think protecting domestic jobs from foreign competitors, can be good for an economy. And imo, that is what the massive growth of the US, during that time frame shows.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

In the post Civil War era it took longer to get across the country than it now takes to get across the Atlantic, while the pacific took. We also had a glut of cheap labor at the time, and there was no such thing as unions or worker protections or safety regulations.

Oh, so suddenly, when the example supports MY side of the debate, suddenly you remembered that there are all this other factors in a complex system.


Huh. Funny that.

Like I have ever suggested otherwise, but every other factor that I bring up you dismiss as having no impact. Then you want to compare today to the 1880s....you are just a mess.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Your pretense that this is a simple system, with only one variable is noted and laughed at.

Is that any different than you blaming everything on China?

I don't blame everything on China. Nothing I have said could be sanely be interpreted that way.

Of course you do, that is why you want the government to swoop in and save the day.

 

[Correll]

1. Nope. Didn't. Aren't you overdue for a change of subject?

2. Yet, you just ignore trade deficits, which results on lost manufacturing jobs, which traditionally have had higher wages, AND outsourcing, which also, results in lost manufacturing jobs, which traditionally have had higher wages. How do you determine that those factors should be ignored?

Isn’t it time you admit defeat? Your tariffs fail again and you aren’t honest enough to admit it. Steel layoffs. US steel stock down 80%. Stop being so dishonest.

That was weird. I made a point about trade deficits and outsourcing reducing manufacturing jobs, which historical have had higher wages,


and your response, did not address it at all.



All you did was spout your standard talking point(s).


Does that mean that on some level, you know that my point about manufacturing jobs, and trade, is true, and you don't know how to counter it?

Ah you continue to dodge. Fact is trump did for steel what you claim is great for our country. What happened? Oh layoffs and huge drop in stocks. Failure. How is that good for us?

Your pretense that this is a simple system, with only one variable is noted and laughed at.

It is noted that what you want has failed over and over and you still refuse to admit the facts. Trump did what you want on steel. Now we have layoffs and a huge drop in stock. Way to go. How is that good for the country?

How do you know that Steel wasn't about to fall even more than it did, and Trump's tariffs mitigated the drop?

 

[Brain357]

You are just weaseling out of the fact tariffs didn’t help steel by blaming the business cycle. History is full of examples of tariffs not working.

And of examples of them working. History is big.

No actually you don't have examples of them working as anything but a tax. They have never created jobs or saved jobs. They never work for anything but another tax.

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

Yes they worked great as a tax then. The growth would have been more without them. Unless you think taxes are good for an economy.

I think protecting domestic jobs from foreign competitors, can be good for an economy. And imo, that is what the massive growth of the US, during that time frame shows.

Ok so what were we importing during that time? Were imports cheaper than domestic products with or without tariffs? What domestic jobs were protected. Be specific.

 

[Brain357]

Your pretense that this is a simple system, with only one variable is noted and laughed at.

Is that any different than you blaming everything on China?

I don't blame everything on China. Nothing I have said could be sanely be interpreted that way.

Of course you do, that is why you want the government to swoop in and save the day.

And they have done such a good job with steel. Guy is crazy.

 

[pknopp]

WINNER!!

Brazilian owned meat packers.

https://beta.washingtonpost.com/bus...RN8BczBhC4G2cmCbSOMzGZzVBHe5aS35IqJLwWYauyVlQ

 

[Brain357]

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

In the post Civil War era it took longer to get across the country than it now takes to get across the Atlantic, while the pacific took. We also had a glut of cheap labor at the time, and there was no such thing as unions or worker protections or safety regulations.

Oh, so suddenly, when the example supports MY side of the debate, suddenly you remembered that there are all this other factors in a complex system.


Huh. Funny that.

Tariffs did not make the American economy great - AEI

 

[Correll]

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

In the post Civil War era it took longer to get across the country than it now takes to get across the Atlantic, while the pacific took. We also had a glut of cheap labor at the time, and there was no such thing as unions or worker protections or safety regulations.

Oh, so suddenly, when the example supports MY side of the debate, suddenly you remembered that there are all this other factors in a complex system.


Huh. Funny that.

Like I have ever suggested otherwise, but every other factor that I bring up you dismiss as having no impact. Then you want to compare today to the 1880s....you are just a mess.

1. Sorry, confused you with Brain for a second.

2.I dont' deny that other factors have an impact.

 

[Correll]

Your pretense that this is a simple system, with only one variable is noted and laughed at.

Is that any different than you blaming everything on China?

I don't blame everything on China. Nothing I have said could be sanely be interpreted that way.

Of course you do, that is why you want the government to swoop in and save the day.

Your reading comprehension is poor.

 

[Correll]

And of examples of them working. History is big.

No actually you don't have examples of them working as anything but a tax. They have never created jobs or saved jobs. They never work for anything but another tax.

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

Yes they worked great as a tax then. The growth would have been more without them. Unless you think taxes are good for an economy.

I think protecting domestic jobs from foreign competitors, can be good for an economy. And imo, that is what the massive growth of the US, during that time frame shows.

Ok so what were we importing during that time? Were imports cheaper than domestic products with or without tariffs? What domestic jobs were protected. Be specific.

Specifically, you claimed that there were no examples of tariffs working. So , this is a huge example of it working, over many decades. Your desire to muddy that up by focusing on minor details, is noted, and dismissed.

 

[Brain357]

No actually you don't have examples of them working as anything but a tax. They have never created jobs or saved jobs. They never work for anything but another tax.

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

Yes they worked great as a tax then. The growth would have been more without them. Unless you think taxes are good for an economy.

I think protecting domestic jobs from foreign competitors, can be good for an economy. And imo, that is what the massive growth of the US, during that time frame shows.

Ok so what were we importing during that time? Were imports cheaper than domestic products with or without tariffs? What domestic jobs were protected. Be specific.

Specifically, you claimed that there were no examples of tariffs working. So , this is a huge example of it working, over many decades. Your desire to muddy that up by focusing on minor details, is noted, and dismissed.

No, I have stated it works as a tax. There is no evidence they are good for an economy, even after the civil war. As I proved with my link. And the much more recent steel tariffs have led to layoffs. You really have nothing but failure.

 

[Correll]

What about the massive industrial growth of the US in the post Civil War era, of high tariffs? FOR ONE EXAMPLE

Yes they worked great as a tax then. The growth would have been more without them. Unless you think taxes are good for an economy.

I think protecting domestic jobs from foreign competitors, can be good for an economy. And imo, that is what the massive growth of the US, during that time frame shows.

Ok so what were we importing during that time? Were imports cheaper than domestic products with or without tariffs? What domestic jobs were protected. Be specific.

Specifically, you claimed that there were no examples of tariffs working. So , this is a huge example of it working, over many decades. Your desire to muddy that up by focusing on minor details, is noted, and dismissed.

No, I have stated it works as a tax. There is no evidence they are good for an economy, even after the civil war. As I proved with my link. And the much more recent steel tariffs have led to layoffs. You really have nothing but failure.

We have massive growth of the economy, jobs, wages, ect, behind high tariffs. THat is a fine example of tariffs working for a good economy.

Your inability to refute it, undermines your position.


Your inability to be honest about that, undermines your credibility.

 

[Brain357]

Yes they worked great as a tax then. The growth would have been more without them. Unless you think taxes are good for an economy.

I think protecting domestic jobs from foreign competitors, can be good for an economy. And imo, that is what the massive growth of the US, during that time frame shows.

Ok so what were we importing during that time? Were imports cheaper than domestic products with or without tariffs? What domestic jobs were protected. Be specific.

Specifically, you claimed that there were no examples of tariffs working. So , this is a huge example of it working, over many decades. Your desire to muddy that up by focusing on minor details, is noted, and dismissed.

No, I have stated it works as a tax. There is no evidence they are good for an economy, even after the civil war. As I proved with my link. And the much more recent steel tariffs have led to layoffs. You really have nothing but failure.

We have massive growth of the economy, jobs, wages, ect, behind high tariffs. THat is a fine example of tariffs working for a good economy.

Your inability to refute it, undermines your position.


Your inability to be honest about that, undermines your credibility.

I’ve linked full refutes. You however have nothing, the massive growth was in areas not effected by tariffs. Why do you choose to ignore facts? How’s steel doing?

 

[sealybobo]

1. You are making it up and hence can't prove it.
2. I've explained over and over why they are not high paying jobs. Our policy has been anti worker for a long time.

1. NO. Change the subject with your circular arguing. It is what you would do next anyways. Let's just skip ONE step. COme on.


2. How can you tell which factors contribute and which do not?

1. So yes you made it up.
2. I can back up each of my factors with a study. And there is no downside to fixing most of them. Unlike trade where you can see the downside by what is happening with steel.

1. Totally didn't.

2. I'm not denying that the issues you care about had impact. I'm asking you how you know which factors had an impact and which did not. Because you are the one doing that, not me.

1. Yes you did.
2. I'm saying they have all combined to help lead to low wages. These are what we should be working on. We have the jobs, now we need to help the worker. Tariffs don't work, see the steel industry.

1. Nope. Didn't. Aren't you overdue for a change of subject?

2. Yet, you just ignore trade deficits, which results on lost manufacturing jobs, which traditionally have had higher wages, AND outsourcing, which also, results in lost manufacturing jobs, which traditionally have had higher wages. How do you determine that those factors should be ignored?

The Federal Reserve cut interest rates Wednesday for the second time in seven weeks, in an effort to prolong the decade-old economic expansion in the face of rising headwinds.

Tepid U.S. Jobs Report Adds To Economic Jitters
Business investment and exports have weakened, the Fed noted in a statement.

Feds are responding to signs of slowing economic growth, especially in the manufacturing sector which is sensitive to rising tariffs.

Uncertainty around trade policy is causing some companies to hold back now on investment.

 

[Correll]

I think protecting domestic jobs from foreign competitors, can be good for an economy. And imo, that is what the massive growth of the US, during that time frame shows.

Ok so what were we importing during that time? Were imports cheaper than domestic products with or without tariffs? What domestic jobs were protected. Be specific.

Specifically, you claimed that there were no examples of tariffs working. So , this is a huge example of it working, over many decades. Your desire to muddy that up by focusing on minor details, is noted, and dismissed.

No, I have stated it works as a tax. There is no evidence they are good for an economy, even after the civil war. As I proved with my link. And the much more recent steel tariffs have led to layoffs. You really have nothing but failure.

We have massive growth of the economy, jobs, wages, ect, behind high tariffs. THat is a fine example of tariffs working for a good economy.

Your inability to refute it, undermines your position.


Your inability to be honest about that, undermines your credibility.

I’ve linked full refutes. You however have nothing, the massive growth was in areas not effected by tariffs. Why do you choose to ignore facts? How’s steel doing?

Save the drama for the tourists.


Explain how growth of the post civil war era was on sectors of the economy, "not effected by tariffs".

 

[Brain357]

Ok so what were we importing during that time? Were imports cheaper than domestic products with or without tariffs? What domestic jobs were protected. Be specific.

Specifically, you claimed that there were no examples of tariffs working. So , this is a huge example of it working, over many decades. Your desire to muddy that up by focusing on minor details, is noted, and dismissed.

No, I have stated it works as a tax. There is no evidence they are good for an economy, even after the civil war. As I proved with my link. And the much more recent steel tariffs have led to layoffs. You really have nothing but failure.

We have massive growth of the economy, jobs, wages, ect, behind high tariffs. THat is a fine example of tariffs working for a good economy.

Your inability to refute it, undermines your position.


Your inability to be honest about that, undermines your credibility.

I’ve linked full refutes. You however have nothing, the massive growth was in areas not effected by tariffs. Why do you choose to ignore facts? How’s steel doing?

Save the drama for the tourists.


Explain how growth of the post civil war era was on sectors of the economy, "not effected by tariffs".

Don’t you read? How do you arrive at your crazy beliefs?

Were high import tariffs somehow related to the strong U.S. economic growth during the late nineteenth century? One paper investigates the multiple channels by which tariffs could have promoted growth during this period.(12) I found that 1) late nineteenth century growth hinged more on population expansion and capital accumulation than on productivity growth; 2) tariffs may have discouraged capital accumulation by raising the price of imported capital goods; and 3) productivity growth was most rapid in non-traded sectors (such as utilities and services) whose performance was not directly related to the tariff.(13)

https://www.nber.org/reporter/summer06/irwin.html