China, Mexico, France, North Korea, now England, wtf?

The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
Yes Originally Posted by Tiny

excellent. then why do you oppose Trump's efforts to make them fair, even if it results in a trade war?

a trade war is not what Trump wants. he wants fair agreements. all China has to do is follow suit.

if not then Trump should crush China into economic ruin.
  • Tiny
  • 06-04-2019, 09:51 PM
excellent. then why do you oppose Trump's efforts to make them fair, even if it results in a trade war?

a trade war is not what Trump wants. he wants fair agreements. all China has to do is follow suit.

if not then Trump should crush China into economic ruin. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
A typical Chinese factory employee works 12 hours a day, six days a week for $8000 a year doing mindless, repetitive work we don't want to do. His company, which operates in a fiercely competitive environment and is less profitable than American businesses, sells stuff to us really cheap. So they send us things like televisions, clothes and kitchenware. And we send them paper, U.S. dollars. They give us our dollars back by investing in our government debt and overpriced real estate. They're getting fucked. We're making out like bandits.

It would be great to see American companies have better access to Chinese markets and better protection for their intellectual property. If that were Trump's aim, he should have teamed up with the Europeans, Australians, Canadians and various Asian countries to open up China, instead of slapping our allies with tariffs on iron and aluminum (and soon autos) and abandoning the Trans Pacific Partnership. As it is, if we impose high tariffs on Chinese goods (which btw is a bad idea), they just sell what they were selling to us to the Europeans or whoever.

Finally, a lot of economists believe we'd be better off with no tariffs, regardless of what other countries are doing. That makes our companies leaner, meaner and more competitive, and we put our resources towards the things we do best, making us more productive and prosperous. When government imposes tariffs, it's playing favorites. You end up with fat, lazy businesses run by crony capitalists, shielded by tariffs from competition from other countries
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
A typical Chinese factory employee works 12 hours a day, six days a week for $8000 a year doing mindless, repetitive work we don't want to do. His company, which operates in a fiercely competitive environment and is less profitable than American businesses, sells stuff to us really cheap. So they send us things like televisions, clothes and kitchenware. And we send them paper, U.S. dollars. They give us our dollars back by investing in our government debt and overpriced real estate. They're getting fucked. We're making out like bandits.

It would be great to see American companies have better access to Chinese markets and better protection for their intellectual property. If that were Trump's aim, he should have teamed up with the Europeans, Australians, Canadians and various Asian countries to open up China, instead of slapping our allies with tariffs on iron and aluminum (and soon autos) and abandoning the Trans Pacific Partnership. As it is, if we impose high tariffs on Chinese goods (which btw is a bad idea), they just sell what they were selling to us to the Europeans or whoever.

Finally, a lot of economists believe we'd be better off with no tariffs, regardless of what other countries are doing. That makes our companies leaner, meaner and more competitive, and we put our resources towards the things we do best, making us more productive and prosperous. When government imposes tariffs, it's playing favorites. You end up with fat, lazy businesses run by crony capitalists, shielded by tariffs from competition from other countries Originally Posted by Tiny

just one example proves your point wrong. Canada, our "ally".

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/...d-unfair-trade


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.1bd959c56d66


so much for "allies"
I agree with COMPLETE free trade...doesn't ever seem to work.
gfejunkie's Avatar
rexdutchman's Avatar
May be the next time Nazis or whoever try to take over the Brits they should handle it THEMSELFS ,,,,,,,,,
  • Tiny
  • 06-05-2019, 10:05 AM
just one example proves your point wrong. Canada, our "ally".

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/...d-unfair-trade


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.1bd959c56d66


so much for "allies" Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
Yep, the only good Canadian is a dead Canadian. Come on Waco, are you trying to prove the OP's point?

One of your articles was written by two retired senators from timber states, who must have received political contributions from the timber industry when they were office and who may be lobbyists for it now. They other was written by Jimmy Carter, who says his family owns 1800 acres of timber land.

In Canada most timber lands are owned by the provincial governments. In the U.S. they're mostly private lands. The argument is the Canadians don't bid out the timber to logging companies on government lands, and therefore they're subsidizing their timber industry. Well, we do the same thing for farmers and ranchers in the western United States. They get long term, low cost leases from the Bureau of Land Management and renew them and keep them in the family for generations. Agricultural interests in the U.S. get huge government subsidies. Many farmers and ranchers, on private and public lands, couldn't stay in business without them.

And we've had import duties, quotas or export taxes on Canadian lumber for most of the last 40 years, supposedly to even out the effect of their "subsidies." Several times the WTO and NAFTA panels determined these "subsidies" are minimal.

While this is neither here nor there, historically we've exported more goods to the Canadians than they've exported to us.

You would have had a better case if you'd picked Canadian dairy btw.