Keep building bigger box ships when is it going to end.
This book is pretty good. Outlines the 100 year plan China has had since 1948. Pretty eye opening. https://thehundredyearmarathon.com/
I’ll bookmark this to watch. TY
The American propaganda machine at work??
If you can’t compete, blame it on somebody else. Murica #1!!!
BTW; If China decided to stop trading with USA, who would hurt the most?
From Sydney Morning Herald, 22. Dec. 2016:
I just wonder about the logic in starting a trade war to “bring back jobs” when the US is already at full employment. The unemployment rate is at a 17 year low and there are more jobs available than qualified takers to fill them:
In the unlikely event that all those “stolen” jobs are returning, who are going to fill them?
Even if the Labour Force Participation Rate should increase further (it is now only 63%) that is not enough and migration into US is not welcome.
Population growth by natural increase is not very likely as the birth rate are low and the average living age is now rising, thus creating an aging population, not increased work force:
A great place to negotiate for fairer trade would have been within the framework of the TPP, but guess who decided to drop out of it. He’d rather play whack-a-mole with tariffs and to hell with our allies. I don’t have to wonder what a 25% tariff will do to the cost of a new ship built in the US. I can do the math.
Jones Act, it was nice to know ya.
We needed these tariffs 30 years ago. ‘Free trade” is a joke. It’s been “free” for everyone else, but not for the US. We need whatever level of tariffs is necessary to eliminate trade deficits.
We need tariffs to protect basic industries for national and economic security. The same reason we need the Jones Act. It is illogical to support the Jones Act, but not support tariffs.
A 25% tariff on foreign steel will not raise the cost of Jones Act vessels by 25%. I don’t know the percentage, but a lot of American steel is used in US vessels now. The cost of steel is significant fraction of the cost of shipbuilding, but still only a fraction of the cost. Machinery and labor are much larger cost components.
I doubt that the 25% tariffs on foreign steel will add over 2% to the cost of the typical US vessel. Obviously, larger simple vessels (like deck barges) will see larger cost increases than smaller complex vessels.
The American parties negotiating TPP/TTIP/TISA were willing sacrifice the Jones Act for concessions elsewhere.
I wish we could eliminate the trade deficit or at least get it a little closer to real. I don’t think it’s ever going to happen Walmart and Amazon will see to it.
It can be done, especially with bilateral trade deals (the kind China is fond of). Equal trade (not fair trade) should be a cornerstone of our national security policy. Our nation has a standard of living that far outstrips our income, which something we need to rectify moving forward by either increasing revenue, cutting cost, or both. These debt issues are already manifesting themselves at the state level (WV and OK teacher strike, Illinois pensions, Detroit Bankruptcy, etc.) and it won’t take long until it is a national issue.
I agree. The problem I see the American population likes its disposable trinkets coming from a far. And as long as easy credit and cheap merchandise is the norm the problem isn’t going anywhere
This is a bigger problem than we realize and when it manifests itself look out. Many states are so far upside-down now it’s only a matter of time.
If you want to get trade parity you have to produce something that buyers in the countries you have trade deficit with wants.
It is no use to ask; why are we buying more European cars than they are buy US made cars?
You need to ask; what type of cars are wanted in Europe?
Then make cars to suite the taste and regulatory requirements that applies in Europe, just like Europeans do to sell cars in US. (Oh, and every bolt and nut etc. used have to be metric)
PS> For UK, Japan and most former British colonies the cars have to be right hand drive.
A lot of American products are very popular in Europe and Japan, but some countries impose high tariffs and others erect a variety of non-tariff barriers. China requires a lot of technology transfer. Obviously, the US exports trillions of dollars worth of products every year.
I don’t suggest that the uS should do anything unfair. However, reciprocal tariffs, and reciprocal non-tariff barriers should be used to prevent any country from consistently running a large trade surplus against us.
Current trade policy started out 70 years ago as a gift to Europe, Japan, and Korea to help them rebuild their economies after WW II. It’s long past time to stop this giveaway program that we can no longer afford.
Yes the US exports $tr. worth of goods every year, but imports $$tr. as well. Much of the export is military equipment, which is not always based on WTO trading rules. On the contrary, it is often used to offset trade imbalance of other items and/or commodities (oil etc) after pressure from US.
There are also a lot of export in things that doesn’t need transport by sea or air, such as Movies, TV shows, Games etc., just to mention a few.
There are also financial and other services that US has always been the champion of demanding freedom for.
If you look at what the US has gained from free markets in goods and services and US firms having the freedom to operate businesses like mines, oil exploration and manufacturing for domestic and export markets all over the world, the picture becomes VERY different.
In all the years when America have been the world hegemon the flow of export and US overseas business has been to the benefit of the US.
In some cases they have used their position as the dominant partner and military superpower to demand access to markets without reciprocal access to US markets, but that is conveniently forgotten as other countries are now able to not only compete, but actually outcompete and even dominate in many of the markets that America had believed they had a “God given right” to command.
Get used to it and adjust to compete on even terms through fair a reciprocal trade deals, like the TPP. (You got a lot of concessions there)
If Walmart and Amazon didn’t have any customers, then they would not be in business. Let’s face it. The general public likes lower prices and, for the most part, doesn’t really care where their stuff comes from. . . . and it has ALWAYS been that way.
You are correct people don’t care it’s to bad. I won’t say it’s always been that way though.
And it’s a downward spiral. Low priced goods from low standard countries cause decent paying jobs here to go away which makes for less disposable income which causes people to seek lower prices… On and on…a literal race to the bottom. Another example of things we’ve “accomplished” in the last 70 years.
Well put it’s going to be interesting how things play out the next few generations we have become almost exclusively a consumer nation this cannot sustain itself for very long without some changes.
Yes most people like to buy stuff that is cheap, but also value for money. Why pay more for something that doesn’t perform better, taste better, or is of better quality, just because it bears a label that is regarded as a “Brand Name”.
The answer is obviously that it is perceived to carry status to own or wear “Branded goods”, but in most cases the extra cost is for the name, not for the quality. People pay dearly for “status”.
(As long as it has the label on the outside to be easily identified as such)
Nor is it for the cost of manufacturing, as most of the “branded” stuff is made with cheap labour in the same countries as the Walmart get their junk from. You can buy most branded “overrun” items from Factory Outlets in the countries where they are made at a fraction of the price charge at stores in the big cities.
Some, even in China, pay extra for the “Made in USA” label, believing they are getting quality and status by doing so, only to find they can find China made products that has the same, or even better, quality and functionality.
There is a reason why advertising is a major industry and the main revenue source for some of the most “valuable” companies on Wall Street. People are easily fooled.
What you type there is true in very many cases particularly the type of things you’ll find in Wal Mart.
This is why capitalism cannot run without regulations. What the consumer wants (lowest price) and what companies want (highest profits) are not always in the best interest of the country (no decent paying jobs). Unfortunately one of our “accomplishments” of the last 70 years has been our elected officials acting in their own best interests vice the best interests of the country.