Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Esteemed Advisor

Buchanan on Tariffs

if they were good enough to build the powerhouse that is the USA, why are they so bad now?


Free trade has always been a myth, and some semblance of Fair Trade is long overdue. Kudos to President Trump for being on the winning side of yet another issue to put America First.

11 Replies
BA Deere
Honored Advisor

Re: Buchanan on Tariffs

Pat knocks it out of the park again!   After Bilderberg meetings, it seems the US is always expected to "take one" for the new world order team.  The funny thing is, 5-10yrs ago if there was any "overlap" I could find with liberals was some at least gave the façade of fair trade and caring about US workers.  Now, liberals are the biggest free trade neo-cons out there....selfishness actually "I wanna buy $25 foreign bearings for my disc, so I can complain and sell them $5 wheat and slowly go broke" .  


But I kid you not, after boo hoo stories about "trade retaliation" and trying to hide trade deficits under the rug, there are now dime a dozen stories about "Trade deficits don`t matter"   Smiley Very Happy         One born every minute- BT Barnum 

Senior Advisor

Re: Buchanan on Tariffs

Now Mueller is going after all of Trump's fiances and those of his family. The coup has to be completed before he wins a trade war.

Re: Buchanan on Tariffs

Trump, Pat, Bernie, Sherrod Brown, Liz all more or less on the same page.

Going to be interesting. It’s not a GDP killer to the degree that some alarmists are saying. More than anything, though, a rather big diplomacy and security matter

I keep falling back to what Truman said about hogs. For this to work, it’s going to take an astronomical amount of new capital to build, convert and retrofit and to train, acclimate, re-locate and even house and logicly transport a workforce. That, at least to start would be paid only nominally. It would be a rentiers paradise. With massive disposability latitude.

Not, to be brutally honest, to say that the status quo is any bargain
BA Deere
Honored Advisor

Re: Buchanan on Tariffs

As a Progressive Bruce, you should understand that trade deficits don`t hurt the 5% in Wall Street so much as they OWN the foreign subsidiaries too.  The trade deficit was taking from the $30,000/yr Peoria lathe operator and funneling those wages to the Warren Buffets due to cheaper wages and environment laws overseas.   You guys talk about "wealth inequality" well that is the root of it.


**I doubt I get through, because it would entail some admitting that Trump is partially correct and Paul Krugman is mostly no breath holding on this end.

Senior Contributor


I'm in agreement with Karl on this point:


"But the focus here, to point at steel and aluminum and slap a percentage on them on a flat basis, is wrong.

I spilled quite a lot of ink on this in Leverage, in which I examined the reason we have such a profound trade imbalance, given that we have a highly-skilled workforce and plenty of technological prowess.

It was simple when you got down to it: Workers rights, environmental conditions and (which wasn't part of the discussion in Leverage but probably should have been) intentional, targeted monetary (exchange-rate) distortion.

Simply put if you have slave labor whether at literal gunpoint or government policy (e.g. steal the peasant's land, turn it into a factory, and the peasant has the alternatives of working for what amounts to dollar a week and some rice or starving!) you can radically undercut anyone else's labor costs and thus make things cheaper.  If you also allow environmental destruction you can do the same; not poisoning the air, water and ground costs money for it is much cheaper to simply throw those poisons out into the environment.

If you then add monetary and IP machinations from a centrally-controlled economy and government, including outright fraudulent debt issuance, theft of intellectual property, forced "partnerships" to sell into the nation and more you can tilt the scale far enough that it's impossible for fair competition to take hold.

Multinational corporations are thus provided incentives to move production there, whether of final, finished goods or various precursors and to give up their IP or they're literally run out of business by the Chinese!"

Senior Advisor

Re: Buchanan on Tariffs

Funny.,...I'm not the only one hollering
Ford and Chev both.....1 BILLION EACH

And now Washington is starting to hear

Ryan is now not for it and the list grows

Senior Advisor

Re: Buchanan on Tariffs

Hey BA....are you thanking trump for making
You go broke ???

No need to answer, it wouldnt make any sense comming from your mouth anyhow.

Senior Contributor

How about Bush's results with steel tariffs?


The news last Thursday sent the stock market into a slump and tossed a wrench into ongoing NAFTA talks. Trump continues to stand firm on the tariffs, but a look at the country’s track record should perhaps give the president pause.

In 2002, George W. Bush imposed tariffs — which are essentially a tax imposed on imported items — on steel in an attempt to revive the industry in the United States.

“This relief will help steelworkers, communities that depend on steel, and the steel industry adjust without harming our economy,” Bush said in a statement at the time.

The opposite largely occurred as a result: job losses, material shortages, production delays and increased costs.

The tariffs added costs for both businesses and consumers, states a 2003 reportfrom the U.S. International Trade Commission.

According to the report, the tariffs resulted in a host of headaches, including:

  • 49 per cent of steel-consuming firms reported some difficulty obtaining steel,
  • 32 per cent of manufacturers, including automakers and canneries, reported delays in production,
  • 19 per cent of firms passed along price increases to customers,
  • Overall employment in the sector generally fell or remained flat.

At a hearing, the commission heard that “most steel-consuming firms who testified reported substantial increases in the price of steel after the imposition” of the tariffs.

Re: Buchanan on Tariffs

Take a breath and do some digging and see what Krugman is saying about this.  He’s not called the fire department.  


What you say about “who owns” was, ahemmm, essentially my point.  


Read slower, or something.