Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3    4  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Made in USA and Trade Law thread

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8235
(8234 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 01:44 PM
Trump's bullsh!t is going to hurt americans, more than help them. and will probably cause a recession.
 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 05:28 PM
quote:
NAFTA gave corporate America access to cheap labor. The very minimal wages were used by many migrants to fund their way to the US. How could this have ever worked in favor of American labor? The whole premise of NAFTA was daft and it had nothing to do with the migrant outcome. What happened was totally predictable. My father-in-law was CEO of a company that had two maquiladoras in Mexico. Believe me this was about making money for corporations. There may have been some rhetoric that if we throw a few pesos at the peasants they will stay home, but this objective was not part of any policy.


You won't find any disagreement from me here.

quote:
What will happen as a result of Trump’s tirade is also totally predictable.


Tell me what you are predicting then?


quote:
On the Central America issue

I said “Mexico has also stepped up security on its southern border and this has stopped the flow of Central Americans coming to the US.”

quote:“Mexico has a lot of chips to play,” said Jorge Castañeda, a former foreign secretary who has staked out a combative approach.

Let Mr. Trump pull the United States out of Nafta, he argues. Instead of stopping Central American migrants at its southern border, Mexico should let them through on their way to the United States. “And let’s see if his wall keeps the terrorists out, because we won’t,” Mr. Castañeda added.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/business/economy/nafta-mexico-free-trade .html " target=_blank> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/business/economy/nafta-mexico-free-trade .html

You didn’t understand the point I was making. There is no way to stop migrants but one can stop the flow. Mexico simply tried to stop the flow by reducing the number of migrants. They monitored the trains that took Central Americans north. But through graft people do get through.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/04/mexico-torture-migrants-citiz ens-central-america

From today’s Washington Post which reiterates my point.

quote: Outside of the economic realm, Mexico also has plenty of cards to play in negotiations with Trump. Last year, Mexico deported nearly 150,000 migrants bound for the United States, most of them from Central America. Without this cooperation, officials predict that the number of migrants turning up at the U.S. border could double.

“He has the Central American card, which he has mentioned, and it’s a very powerful card,” former foreign minister Jorge Castañeda said of Peña Nieto.


Well, the article I linked stated that through August of 2016 there were 369,411 apprehensions and more than half were non-Mexicans (plus remember that the Chicago Tribune reported only 54% of illegals are captured). So through 8 months last year 150,000+ Central Americans were apprehended. It's certainly good for both nations that Mexico has stepped up their own illegal immigration enforcement. There is also a spike in unaccompanied children and families coming with children - 33,743 such people were apprehended first 6 months of fiscal year 2014 and 2015 combined, first six months of 2016 it was 32,117!

http://dailysignal.com/wp-content/uploads/Daily-Signal-Quote-Article_Border Graphs.png

The numbers remain a big problem for our nation, big problem for their nation. Status quo isn't good enough. More people need apprehended, more barriers and difficulties need to confront illegals trying to come here. More people need deported once we catch them, no lenience for children or families. They adapt to what our system does or doesn't do. They come now and just say they seek asylum, they try to game the system whatever way they can.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 05:29 PM
quote:
Trump's bullsh!t is going to hurt americans, more than help them. and will probably cause a recession.


Easy to sit in the back seat and say what won't work.

I'm on record, you know what I believe and advocate. Tell us, what would you do, what do you believe?

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8235
(8234 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 06:14 PM
So, do you think a trade war with mexico is good?, do you think a 20% tariff on mexican goods to pay for a useless, 25 Billion dollar border wall is a good idea?.

[Edited on 1/29/2017 by pops42]

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6044
(6043 all sites)
Registered: 8/11/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 07:04 PM
Haven't read through all the posts so forgive me if this is a stupid question already posed and answered. Has some one pointed out yet to Trump and his supporters that a tariff on Mexican goods is actually a tax on American consumers? In other words we Americans will pay for this useless and unneeded wall should Donnie's proposed 20% tariff actually be put in place.

Has anyone mentioned this?

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 45981
(45982 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 07:22 PM
It is quickly becoming apparent that the division in America is now far, far beyond simple political disagreements.

The visions and understanding of what America itself is couldn't be more different, with the chasm deepening by the hour.

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 07:51 PM
As if Donald Trump is the only one who has talked of a tariff this past election.

quote:
His campaign says Sanders also would impose countervailing tariffs on imports from China and Japan “until they stop dumping steel into the United States and stop manipulating their currencies.”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/03/31/bernie-sa nders-pledges-rewrite-disastrous-trade-deals/82473012/



Go ahead and read some of that article if you like. Could replace the name Bernie Sanders with the name Donald Trump and the trade policy would sound much the same.

quote:
Haven't read through all the posts so forgive me if this is a stupid question already posed and answered. Has some one pointed out yet to Trump and his supporters that a tariff on Mexican goods is actually a tax on American consumers? In other words we Americans will pay for this useless and unneeded wall should Donnie's proposed 20% tariff actually be put in place.

Has anyone mentioned this?


Nobody here has mentioned it, but lots of people in tv and print media are mentioning it. And I think it is a given that any cost or tax a business pays gets passed onto the consumer...minimum wage increases, added regulatory costs...unless somebody is under the impression a business is going to accept less margin then, yes any tax, tariff or increase in overhead costs will get passed onto the consumer.

The idea is to punish the goods being produced abroad and favor the ones that are produced domestically. The revenue the government raises from the border tax or be used to fund any number of government spending programs. Help offset trade adjustment assistance education subsidies, other social program costs that unemployed workers need. It can go towards anything. US infrastructure spending projects. Indeed it could go towards a border wall, if that is what the government sees fit.

The secure fence act of 2006 is already law. If they would've built it then it would've been much cheaper.

quote:
So, do you think a trade war with mexico is good?, do you think a 20% tariff on mexican goods to pay for a useless, 25 Billion dollar border wall is a good idea?.

[Edited on 1/29/2017 by pops42]


You answered my question with two of your own. All you ever do is throw **** on the wall and criticize others. How about telling us what you believe is wrong and how you would fix it? I'm sure you have some well reasoned positions you can articulate.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 45981
(45982 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 08:02 PM
quote:
The revenue the government raises from the border tax or be used to fund any number of government spending programs.


This is based on the premise that the world will always need us or want to do business with us. That might not always be the case.

quote:
Help offset trade adjustment assistance education subsidies, other social program costs that unemployed workers need.


Can you show me the current GOP that would be down with this? Are they in an alternate universe?

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8235
(8234 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 08:23 PM
quote:
As if Donald Trump is the only one who has talked of a tariff this past election.

quote:
His campaign says Sanders also would impose countervailing tariffs on imports from China and Japan “until they stop dumping steel into the United States and stop manipulating their currencies.”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/03/31/bernie-sa nders-pledges-rewrite-disastrous-trade-deals/82473012/



Go ahead and read some of that article if you like. Could replace the name Bernie Sanders with the name Donald Trump and the trade policy would sound much the same.

quote:
Haven't read through all the posts so forgive me if this is a stupid question already posed and answered. Has some one pointed out yet to Trump and his supporters that a tariff on Mexican goods is actually a tax on American consumers? In other words we Americans will pay for this useless and unneeded wall should Donnie's proposed 20% tariff actually be put in place.

Has anyone mentioned this?


Nobody here has mentioned it, but lots of people in tv and print media are mentioning it. And I think it is a given that any cost or tax a business pays gets passed onto the consumer...minimum wage increases, added regulatory costs...unless somebody is under the impression a business is going to accept less margin then, yes any tax, tariff or increase in overhead costs will get passed onto the consumer.

The idea is to punish the goods being produced abroad and favor the ones that are produced domestically. The revenue the government raises from the border tax or be used to fund any number of government spending programs. Help offset trade adjustment assistance education subsidies, other social program costs that unemployed workers need. It can go towards anything. US infrastructure spending projects. Indeed it could go towards a border wall, if that is what the government sees fit.

The secure fence act of 2006 is already law. If they would've built it then it would've been much cheaper.

quote:
So, do you think a trade war with mexico is good?, do you think a 20% tariff on mexican goods to pay for a useless, 25 Billion dollar border wall is a good idea?.

[Edited on 1/29/2017 by pops42]


You answered my question with two of your own. All you ever do is throw **** on the wall and criticize others. How about telling us what you believe is wrong and how you would fix it? I'm sure you have some well reasoned positions you can articulate.
Simple, forget the f$cking wall, and forget about getting rid of nafta [its not going to happen] its just posturing from trump. he will not deliver anything worthwhile to anybody but the super-wealthy. all he seems to worry about is how few people showed up to his inauguration. hows that?

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 09:24 PM
quote:
Simple, forget the f$cking wall, and forget about getting rid of nafta [its not going to happen] its just posturing from trump. he will not deliver anything worthwhile to anybody but the super-wealthy. all he seems to worry about is how few people showed up to his inauguration. hows that?


Not the depth I was hoping for, you are entitled to your skepticism. I just do not know what you want, like if Hillary had won, what would you be hoping she did to address the trade and outsourcing problem? I assume you feel there is a problem here because you commented about TPP something to the effect "bad for most of us".

But anyway, Bhawk's post quoted below touches on some of the problems of not delivering.

quote:
quote:
quote: Help offset trade adjustment assistance education subsidies, other social program costs that unemployed workers need.




quote:
Can you show me the current GOP that would be down with this? Are they in an alternate universe?



As much as people like to paint Trump as just your regular old Republican, nothing new, same old same old - that just flatly is false when it comes to trade and favoring US labor. I mean compare his position to our least favorite Republicans from the past, Trump is in stark contrast to the GOP as we know/knew it.

So then, really I don't know who can be faithfully counted on in the Republican party to support Trump's trade agenda - early 20th century Republicans were all about tariffs and protection, but these modern day Republicans have been bought and owned by corporate and foreign interests, as too many Democrats have too.

I actually don't know how he delivers because I don't think he will get enough people in his party to support him. I had envisioned that Trump might get half of the Republicans and half of the Democrats to go along with new trade deals that put workers ahead of multinational corporations, but the more he pisses Democrats off, the less likely they will want to work with him on anything...even if it is in their interest. I don't know we are just 1 week in and Congress hasn't had a chance to conduct much business yet.

No, I can't show you the current GOP being down with it. However, say what you will about the myriad of reasons Trump won the election, this populist belief against decades of trade agreements that negatively impacted their lives and their communities and enriched foreign countries at their expense, that is a very real and tangible and provable thing. The Republicans I think have an opportunity to flip a whole segment of the voting landscape to their favor, organized labor. If Republicans can make moves closer to them, not just talking, but actually giving them something that they feel is in their interest, it is a huge political win and depending on your outlook of the nation, a win for America as well. That could be the only come to Jesus moment I think the Republicans might be having when it comes to doing trade the Trump way.

Time will tell.

As to your other point about the world needing our business? I think atleast in our lifetimes the American market and the American consumer are going to remain quite necessary for any company domestic or abroad. I guess you could say that China and India someday will be more important, and they might be. The American consumer plays a dominant role currently, let's not throw it away, let's use it to our advantage and get more of what is sold here, made here.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 66994
(67355 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/29/2017 at 11:57 PM
Not sure where I saw this, might even had been one of the threads here. After Trump had his meeting with business leaders and the union, I saw a quote from a businessman who said something to the effect that 'we build factories for 40-50 years of life - we aren't going to move factories because one party comes into power - the policies could quickly change in 4 years. We plan for the future for our company.'

So Trump can say what he want and may have some influence, but I don't see a big rush of factories coming back... just a lot of added costs to consumers.....

 

____________________

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2362
(2361 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/30/2017 at 09:13 AM
These are difficult issues that cant be reversed overnight but the negativity and pushback from Trump opponents to plans to shift things is nuts. I dont see why Americans should accept a porous border and a net outflow of jobs. Its a race to the bottom and we have to make changs that will benefit the American worker. If it means i have to pay 20% more for guac and tequila, so be it.

 

____________________

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4430
(4429 all sites)
Registered: 9/9/2011
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/30/2017 at 11:20 AM
quote:
If it means i have to pay 20% more for guac and tequila, so be it.


but not health care.......lol

 

____________________
The world is full of kings and queens
Who blind your eyes and steal your dreams
It's heaven and hell, oh well

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 66994
(67355 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/30/2017 at 12:33 PM
quote:
These are difficult issues that cant be reversed overnight but the negativity and pushback from Trump opponents to plans to shift things is nuts. I dont see why Americans should accept a porous border and a net outflow of jobs. Its a race to the bottom and we have to make changs that will benefit the American worker. If it means i have to pay 20% more for guac and tequila, so be it.



It's not a porous border - but believe what you want - I'm sure that $20 billion dollar wall will solve all our problems..... you probably have to worry more about Asians taking your job than Hispanics.... funny that the mayor of Berlin is telling Trump not to build the wall.....

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 66994
(67355 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/30/2017 at 05:40 PM
A couple of articles from the Chicago Tribune from the last few days:

The folly of Trump's 'buy American and hire American'

Now that the campaign is over, Donald Trump is no longer willing to fake it. Last year, he insisted, "I love free trade. But I want to make great deals." In his inaugural address, he dropped the masquerade.

"We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs," he said. "Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength." His formula is simple: "Buy American and hire American." In his vision of the future, we may export but we will never import.

Trump is never more certain than when he is completely clueless. The truth is that protection against foreign trade leads away from prosperity and strength. A country that deprives itself of foreign goods is doing to itself what an enemy might try to do in wartime — cut it off from outside commerce. It is volunteering to impoverish itself.

Countries don't "ravage" us when they make "our" products; they help us. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the essence of trade — foreign or domestic — is that it makes both buyer and seller better off. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother.

But preventing such mutually agreeable transactions is Trump's dream. Already he has announced he will renegotiate NAFTA and has walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation deal that President Barack Obama signed but Congress had yet to approve.

Trump may promise "great deals," but he is likely to get — and would probably be content with — no deals. What foreign government will rush to sign an agreement stipulating that our companies will only "buy American and hire American"?

His belief that international commerce is bad for Americans and protection is good for us is not a theory but an ancient superstition. One of the most irrefutable insights of economics is that if a country can buy something abroad for less than the cost of making it at home, it's better off buying it. That transaction allows citizens to consume more for each dollar spent. It makes them richer.

The United States could grow all its fresh fruits and vegetables rather than buy some from Mexico — just as Mexico could grow all the corn and soybeans it needs rather than purchase from us. But the costs would be higher on either side. Open trade allows people in each country to eat more and better.

It also allows each economy to produce more. Trump fantasizes that American companies and workers would be better off without foreign competition. But the steel that goes into American cars and the lumber that goes into American houses would be more expensive if it all had to be produced within our borders. In industries deprived of imported supplies, prices would rise, sales would decline and employment would shrink.

The U.S. auto industry has plants in Mexico that make cars sold in the U.S., to the horror of the new president. But if he guts NAFTA, those jobs won't all move here.

A study by the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., said that American firms that ship car parts to Mexico could lose out to suppliers in other countries. Overall, scrapping the accord and setting high tariffs would destroy 31,000 jobs in the U.S. automotive sector.

Trump defends his protectionism by asserting that "every decision on trade" should "be made to benefit American workers and American families." But free trade does exactly that. It's the classic example of a policy that benefits the many while harming the few.

Only about 14,000 Americans are employed making footwear. About 324 million Americans, on the other hand, wear shoes. Putting up barriers to foreign-made shoes would injure far more American workers and families than it would help.

It would also be a drain on the economy. When President Obama slapped heavy tariffs on Chinese tires, the Peterson Institute for International Economics found, he saved no more than 1,200 jobs — at an annual cost to consumers of $900,000 per job.

Spending nearly a million dollars to save a job that typically pays $41,000 a year is not a recipe for prosperity. It's the equivalent of selling $20 bills for a dollar apiece. Trump's dream of "buy American and hire American" would work exactly the same way.

Trump, of course, is a business magnate whose companies have sold products made everywhere from China to Honduras. In this case, wisdom lies in following his example, not his advice.

Steve Chapman, a member of the Tribune Editorial Board, blogs at www.chicagotribune.com/chapman

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chapman/ct-trump-clueless-trade- jobs-trade-nafta-perspec-0126-20170125-column.html

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 66994
(67355 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/30/2017 at 05:42 PM
Daniel W. Drezner
Special to The Washington Post

Trump administration needs to get up to speed on the auto industry

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump met with the chief executives of Detroit's Big Three auto manufacturers. You can vaguely sense what he was looking for from them when he tweeted:

“Will be meeting at 9:00 with top automobile executives concerning jobs in America. I want new plants to be built here for cars sold here!”

The CEOs of the auto firms said nice things about Trump afterward. But buried in the Detroit Free Press’ write-up of the meeting were these interesting paragraphs:

“In recent months, automakers have announced plans to invest billions of new dollars in the U.S. and create thousands of new jobs — developments for which Trump has, at least in part, taken credit.

“However, in nearly every case those investments were either in the planning stages for months or were made possible by changing market conditions, though (Ford CEO Mark) Fields has said that a belief that Trump will improve the business climate in the U.S. has also played a role in Ford’s decisions.”

Apparently, it's even more complicated than that. Bloomberg News reports that given where the United States is in the current business cycle, the last thing auto manufacturers want to do is go on a huge domestic investment splurge:

“New assembly plants cost General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. or Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV about $1 billion — the sort of investment companies look to avoid making as a market peaks. And while factories boost jobs, economic gains from building them are being undercut by automation and pressure to compete with lower-wage countries including Mexico.

“ ‘This is the nightmare scenario for auto companies, which are being asked to make huge capital investments right before a slowdown in sales,’ said Dan Luria, an analyst who has advised the United Auto Workers union. ‘It seems like hardly the time to spend billions on new plants.’ …

“After the U.S. auto market's 68 percent surge since 2009, sales will be roughly flat through 2020, researcher LMC Automotive said in a report last week. After setting a record with nearly 17.6 million vehicles last year, the industry will keep coming up short of that level through the end of the decade, LMC said.”

Then there's the awkward issue of what the Big Three will do if Trump really does try to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement with higher trade barriers against Mexico. Mexico is an attractive manufacturing hub in part because of lower wages but also because of its plethora of free-trade agreements with other countries. Unless and until Trump's trade negotiators can get duty-free access to the same number of countries that Mexico can, it's not terribly logical for auto manufacturers to relocate their plants to the United States.

Trump’s economic vision seems to be that any car bought in the United States should be made in the United States. But as a previous Detroit Free Press story noted, it's just not economically feasible to produce, say, the Chevrolet Cruze in the United States:

“There probably wouldn't be a Cruze hatchback if GM had to build it in the United States. The Cruze hatch is the poster child for why interconnected global manufacturing footprints make automakers stronger. Chevy sold about 184,300 Cruze sedans in America last year — all built in Lordstown, Ohio. It brought 4,500 hatchbacks in from Mexico. GM wouldn't have invested millions of dollars for that few vehicles at its plant in Lordstown, Ohio, but it makes sense to build them in Mexico, where that body style is popular and they sell well. Without Mexican production, the 4,500 Americans who bought Cruze hatchbacks might be lost to other car brands.”

I bring all of this up because it illustrates the abject lack of knowledge that Trump and his trade/economic advisers seem to display when it comes to the automobile sector. And this is during an economic upswing.

Imagine what happens if the economy starts to run out of steam.

Washington Post

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.

Copyright © 2017, Chicago Tribune

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-trump-auto-industr y-detroit-20170129-story.html


Of course, both of these are opinion pieces/commentary

 

____________________

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4430
(4429 all sites)
Registered: 9/9/2011
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/30/2017 at 05:55 PM
i posted this once before.......

Mercantilism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Mercantilism.html

 

____________________
The world is full of kings and queens
Who blind your eyes and steal your dreams
It's heaven and hell, oh well

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 12:41 AM
quote:
Not sure where I saw this, might even had been one of the threads here. After Trump had his meeting with business leaders and the union, I saw a quote from a businessman who said something to the effect that 'we build factories for 40-50 years of life - we aren't going to move factories because one party comes into power - the policies could quickly change in 4 years. We plan for the future for our company.'

So Trump can say what he want and may have some influence, but I don't see a big rush of factories coming back... just a lot of added costs to consumers.....


Lots of things go into it. Trade law in this country has been steady, the only changes have been up to this point, more trade deals with more nations giving US companies freedom to easily move and operate where they wish.

Nobody pitched NAFTA as a means for a company like SquareD (make electrical breakers/fuses, switches, etc) to close manufacturing plants here, build a plant in Mexico and then sell the exact same stuff at US stores that was once made in USA, but now comes from Mexico. Maybe this was the corporate dream all along, but that is not what we were told would happen.

And the thing is, you don't always save money with a foreign made good. When you keep up with this stuff and look at all the labels where it is made, you see the old stock, you see the new stock and you see the price is the same...somebody isn't passing that savings along.

I have lots of examples for lots of things on this issue.

eLittle over a year ago I was buying some Peerless mounts to put a TV on the wall because they were made in USA (only one of two companies I found that made them here). I was buying them from a local small TV shop. Some months later I needed another, so I called George up and said I need another and he tells me "no problem, the price went up, but I will give you the old price", I go to pick it up and it is in a new shiny cardboard box, kind of a give away on country, packaging can tip me off alot. The old ones were just plain brown cardboard box with a logo and a USA flag and made in statement. The new one, yup, made in China. Price wasn't any lower. Maybe old George was making more money on it, he says he wasn't. Maybe the distributor was making more money, maybe Peerless themselves was making more money. One things is for certain, the savings did not get passed on to the consumer. And this is not isolated case. I see it alot when a brand outsources, they don't pass the savings on to the consumer.

Just start paying attention to things. I walk around the store with my wife and all I do is look at labels and what they have on their shelf. Hardware stores where ever. Need some drill bits? How about Made in USA and made in China drill bits the same price? Yeah, right next to each other 3/8 drill bit made in USA same price as a 7/16 drill bit made in China, old stock vs new stock. They changed suppliers or sources, but the prices stayed the same.

Some times it will cost more, other times it won't. Like I said before, nothing is true across the board. And in my jeans example, a US producer of a good that can now compete on a level playing field can increase sales, expand distribution, buy materials cheaper, maybe lower their price. Are we talking in circles on this stuff or do you not read things I reply to you. I know sometimes we talk past eachother here, both trying to make our points by glossing over someone else's. I think it was in the Liberal/Russia thread from a week or two ago I took up the higher prices thing.

So anyway...

big rush of companies coming back? I'm not sure, maybe. Certainly not at once, true. What I'd hope is we can change new investments in manufacturing plants from there (any foreign country) to here (USA any state, take your pick no matter to me). It won't be all at once and surely they are waiting to see what policy might change, see if their is a penalty or reward for doing so. But they will make their investments where it is wise for them to make it and if we can convince them that they are better off here (by carrot or stick) it certainly could have an effect.

How about the Stanley CEO recently:

quote:
"It’s going to be advisable to have more manufacturing in the U.S,"
http://fortune.com/2017/01/05/stanley-black-decker-trump/



I don't know exactly why the Stanley CEO would feel this way, but whatever the reason I like the sentiment. I want more foreign and US companies to feel that way, and if they think it is in their financial interest to invest here and make more things here that is ultimately a good thing for our country.

quote:
quote:
If it means i have to pay 20% more for guac and tequila, so be it.



quote:

but not health care.......lol



Well, the difference is one can avoid Mexican produced goods if they choose, there is little I can think of that Mexico has a monopoly on. China? That would be harder, but Mexico...if you didn't want to subject yourself to potentially higher priced goods because of the tariff, then you could find substitutes for alot of things made in Mexico that you could buy from another country to not subject yourself to that produce with a tariff on it.

Thing with this compared to healthcare, and I get the playful jab, but here, the consumer can choose to buy products from one country or another, pay more or pay less, whatever you know. But with healthcare, the options are limited (or even singular depending where you live) and you have to buy it...and when it keeps going up and you get less in return for it, easier to have a negative attitude towards that compared to say buying a widget from Mexico, or not buying it, or finding it made somewhere else.

And assuming a duty or tariff gets passed onto the consumer, as it likely would, it is the exact same thing as mandated minimum wage increases, but that cost impact has a much broader effect across the entire economy, and not just for minimum wage workers because some higher wage workers often have their wage as some step up from the minimum wage, so then it has an effect of creating raises across much of the workforce - which if it leads employers to shrink their workforce due to higher wage requirement, then that is ultimately a bad thing.

It all gets passed on one way or the other. But people subscribing to a certain side of the political philosophy seem to push the living wage thing without a hint of what impact is has on good and service prices, but talk of a tariff getting passed on, why.... it leads to a recession!

I'll check out the news articles tomorrow. Super tired right now.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 66994
(67355 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 01:35 AM
quote:

Some times it will cost more, other times it won't. Like I said before, nothing is true across the board. And in my jeans example, a US producer of a good that can now compete on a level playing field can increase sales, expand distribution, buy materials cheaper, maybe lower their price. Are we talking in circles on this stuff or do you not read things I reply to you. I know sometimes we talk past each other here, both trying to make our points by glossing over someone else's. I think it was in the Liberal/Russia thread from a week or two ago I took up the higher prices thing.
.



Not sure if the comment about not reading things and talking past someone was directed at me, I just saw 2 articles in my paper that were about the topic you wanted to discuss and I posted them without comment, other than they were opinions/commentary. I didn't say I believed everything in them, just thought I would post some other viewpoints that are out there about this topic.

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 09:11 AM
quote:

Some times it will cost more, other times it won't. Like I said before, nothing is true across the board. And in my jeans example, a US producer of a good that can now compete on a level playing field can increase sales, expand distribution, buy materials cheaper, maybe lower their price. Are we talking in circles on this stuff or do you not read things I reply to you. I know sometimes we talk past each other here, both trying to make our points by glossing over someone else's. I think it was in the Liberal/Russia thread from a week or two ago I took up the higher prices thing.

.


quote:


Not sure if the comment about not reading things and talking past someone was directed at me, I just saw 2 articles in my paper that were about the topic you wanted to discuss and I posted them without comment, other than they were opinions/commentary. I didn't say I believed everything in them, just thought I would post some other viewpoints that are out there about this topic.


Hi Sang. The second part of that was just kind of a general glossing over people seem to do on other's post, myself included sometime.

The first part was addressing you saying that you thought it would just add more cost to consumers, which is a concern you raised previously as well, which I tried to counter. Now, just because I say something may or may not happen isn't reason enough for you to change your mind - I mean who am I just somebody on an internet forum. But if I didn't make my point well or clear enough I am always willing to take another crack at it.

I don't always have to be right and the other side doesn't always have to be wrong. I come here because I enjoy it and hopefully we can all raise a point from time to time that others gain a bit of a different perspective from.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 09:24 AM
quote:
i posted this once before.......

Mercantilism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Mercantilism.html


An irony I find is that Asian countries like Korea, Japan and to some degree China all engage or have engaged in mercantilistic policies to build up their nations, build up their industry - much to their benefit, all while eroding our industrial base as we embraced free trade without barriers coming into our country (with rare exception for dumping).

I do want a strong "state". I want a strong and financially healthy United States of America, which I see our population and communities as a whole benefiting from. My views on trade are a means to that end.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 66994
(67355 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 03:10 PM
quote:
quote:

Some times it will cost more, other times it won't. Like I said before, nothing is true across the board. And in my jeans example, a US producer of a good that can now compete on a level playing field can increase sales, expand distribution, buy materials cheaper, maybe lower their price. Are we talking in circles on this stuff or do you not read things I reply to you. I know sometimes we talk past each other here, both trying to make our points by glossing over someone else's. I think it was in the Liberal/Russia thread from a week or two ago I took up the higher prices thing.

.


quote:


Not sure if the comment about not reading things and talking past someone was directed at me, I just saw 2 articles in my paper that were about the topic you wanted to discuss and I posted them without comment, other than they were opinions/commentary. I didn't say I believed everything in them, just thought I would post some other viewpoints that are out there about this topic.


Hi Sang. The second part of that was just kind of a general glossing over people seem to do on other's post, myself included sometime.

The first part was addressing you saying that you thought it would just add more cost to consumers, which is a concern you raised previously as well, which I tried to counter. Now, just because I say something may or may not happen isn't reason enough for you to change your mind - I mean who am I just somebody on an internet forum. But if I didn't make my point well or clear enough I am always willing to take another crack at it.

I don't always have to be right and the other side doesn't always have to be wrong. I come here because I enjoy it and hopefully we can all raise a point from time to time that others gain a bit of a different perspective from.



My point was that if tariffs are enforced, somebody will pay for it - and according to what you said above about companies 'not passing along the savings', I don't see anybody but the consumer paying for it.

I will try to talk to one of my neighbors - a big Obama hater and Trump lover - who owns a plant in Mexico for the product his company produces. I'll get his take on what he thinks of the tariffs and what he would do.....

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 03:42 PM
quote:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chapman/ct-trump-clueless- trade- jobs-trade-nafta-perspec-0126-20170125-column.html


For those singing the virtues of free trade, they better not be the ones up in arms about the wage gap between blue collar and white collar workers. And they better not be the ones with all those percentages thrown around comparing CEO pay to average worker pay. When and why did this great divide in wages begin? You can thank outsourcing work to foreign countries...companies being able to produce cheaper, pay workers less, make more profit and where does the profit go - alot of places, but one place it goes is to the high (or disproportionate) management salaries? Other people can make this case better than I can, but opening cheap labor markets for US corporations to exploit is a driving factor of this...absent from the story there. Looking at past articles written by Mr Chapman...has he ever said anything positive about Trump or about his proposals?



quote:
Daniel W. Drezner
Special to The Washington Post

Trump administration needs to get up to speed on the auto industry


quote:
Trump’s economic vision seems to be that any car bought in the United States should be made in the United States. But as a previous Detroit Free Press story noted, it's just not economically feasible to produce, say, the Chevrolet Cruze in the United States:

“There probably wouldn't be a Cruze hatchback if GM had to build it in the United States. The Cruze hatch is the poster child for why interconnected global manufacturing footprints make automakers stronger. Chevy sold about 184,300 Cruze sedans in America last year — all built in Lordstown, Ohio. It brought 4,500 hatchbacks in from Mexico. GM wouldn't have invested millions of dollars for that few vehicles at its plant in Lordstown, Ohio, but it makes sense to build them in Mexico, where that body style is popular and they sell well. Without Mexican production, the 4,500 Americans who bought Cruze hatchbacks might be lost to other car brands.”

I bring all of this up because it illustrates the abject lack of knowledge that Trump and his trade/economic advisers seem to display when it comes to the automobile sector. And this is during an economic upswing.


That part in bold and underlined there, that is wrong, Trump was right in his tweets, it is all illustrated below. GM had to come out and correct themselves. Trust me there are Mexican built Chevy Cruze sedans on dealer lots. Lordstown just down the road a bit from me, you can imagine the controversy.

AND the 4500 Cruze hatchbacks sold in 2016 is misleading, so is the statement that if they had to be made in Lordstown the model may not have ever been produced.

Because the hatchback model just began shipping in 4th qrt 2016, a very late arriving model for sale. Let's see what sales are over an entire fiscal or calendar year. Ford Focus and Mazda 3 hatchbacks sell 100,000 models a year combined per year, so there is sales potential there for this new Cruze model. Using early sales from initial shipments at the end of the year and using it to say that not enough sales exist to make the car in the US is at best misleading and at worst a agenda based lie. Maybe the Trib needs to get more up to speed on the auto industry?

quote:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/19/news/economy/donald-trump-chevy-cruze -mexico/

Trump was right about Mexican-made GM cars
by Heather Long @byHeatherLong January 19, 2017: 10:03 AM ET
Can Trump take credit for new jobs?
Donald Trump doesn't like things made in Mexico.

On January 3, he slammed GM, one of America's big three automakers, for manufacturing cars in Mexico to sell across the border in the U.S. He focused his firepower on the Chevy Cruze, one of GM's signature small cars.

"General Motors is sending Mexican made model of Chevy Cruze to U.S. car dealers-tax free across border. Make in U.S.A. or pay big border tax!" Trump tweeted at the time.

A huge debate ensued: Did Trump have his facts right? GM (GM) was quick to say no. The company issued a statement claiming it makes all Cruze sedans sold in the U.S. at a big factory in Lordstown, Ohio. (Read the full statement at the end of this article).

But it turns out, what Trump tweeted was true.

Right now in the United States, there are Chevy Cruze sedans for sale at GM dealerships that were made in Mexico.

In fact, CNNMoney even found a Mexican-made Cruze sedan for sale at a GM dealership in Lordstown, Ohio.

No wonder workers at the GM Assembly Plant in Lordstown are livid. The plant is facing 1,200 layoffs this Friday, the day of Trump's inauguration.

GM told the workers there were too many Cruze sedans on car lots. They weren't selling, so GM had to cut some of the 4,500 workers at the Lordstown plant.

"It's the ultimate insult: Chevy Cruzes with Mexican VIN numbers shipped to Lordstown," says Heather Lexso, a worker at the GM plant in Lordstown. She is losing her job putting carpets in the trunk as GM eliminates the entire third shift.

Related: 2,000 GM workers to lose jobs on Trump Inauguration Day

Mexican-made Cruzes are for sale, even in Lordstown

Lexso is referring to the ID number every car gets when it's build. It's known as the Vehicle Identification Number, or VIN. Car analyst and blogger E.W. Niedermeyer was the first to point out GM wasn't being totally honest. He explained that any Chevy Cruze made in Ohio has a number that begins with a "1," which is the VIN country code for the U.S. Any Chevy Cruze made in Mexico has a number that begins with "3," the VIN country code for Mexico.

Using that information, Niedermeyer found numerous examples of Chevy Cruze sedans for sale online that were made in Mexico. His discovery caught the attention of Car and Driver magazine, which confirmed there was a 2017 Chevy Cruze sedan for sale in Portland, Oregon that was clearly made in Mexico, not Ohio.

Over the weekend, CNNMoney traveled to Lordstown and stopped by the main GM dealership there known as Spitzer Chevrolet Lordstown. It's located about 5 miles from the factory where Cruze sedans are made and workers are losing jobs.

Spitzer had about 30 Cruze sedans for sale on its main lot. Sure enough, CNNMoney found that one had a Mexican VIN number. The sale tag on the window of the car even says "Final Assembly Point: Ramos Arizpe, Mexico."

Related: GM, Chrysler have more workers in Mexico than Ford
chevy cruze mexico 2
The tag on the window of a 2017 Chevy Cruze sedan for sale at the Spitzer Chevrolet dealedership in Lordstown, Ohio.

GM confirms Mexican-made Cruze sedans

This week, GM admitted to CNNMoney that at least 8,400 Chevy Cruze sedans were built in Mexico at the end of last year and brought to the U.S. for sale. It's a small fraction of the 188,876 Cruzes the company says it sold in the U.S. last year, but the Mexican imports did happen.

"A small number of Mexico-made Chevrolet Cruze sedans were produced in 2016 for sale in the U.S. This supplemental production ended in December. Lordstown is now the sole source for the Cruze sedans," said GM spokesman Tom Wickham.

The frustration in Lordstown is palpable. Everyone is talking about Trump's tweet and how it's true that Mexican-made Cruzes are being sold there. They hope Trump will save their 1,200 jobs.

"How messed up is it that someone in Lordstown could be driving a Mexican-made Cruze?" says Robert Sheridan, another GM worker about to lose his job.

What GM sent CNNMoney on January 3:

"General Motors manufactures the Chevrolet Cruze sedan in Lordstown, Ohio. All Chevrolet Cruze sedans sold in the U.S. are built in GM's assembly plant in Lordstown, Ohio. GM builds the Chevrolet Cruze hatchback for global markets in Mexico, with a small number sold in the U.S."

What GM sent CNNMoney on January 17:

"A small number of Mexico-made Chevrolet Cruze sedans were produced in 2016 for sale in the U.S. This supplemental production ended in December. Lordstown is now the sole source for the Cruze sedans."



Finally, on the auto issue, we need only look at the explosion of growth Korean built autos have had in our market. Sure Kia and Hyundai throw us a bone and build a couple of their models here, while importing 3/4 of what they sell here. Good for Koreans, bad for US workers.

I'll be visiting the Cleveland autoshow end of this month. My favorite thing to do is look at MSRP and country of origin data on window stickers. Tells you alot about what is going on in the auto industry, where things come from. Last year I saw a large number of Korean tires on US branded cars and trucks. First time I had saw such a thing. You know normally you'd have Goodyear, Firestone, Cooper, Michelin, the normal household type names, some of those are US companies, some of those are made in USA, some are not. But everyone has to watch out now, here come the Korean tires ready to race the big boys to the bottom. Wonder if we'll be seeing more job losses at US tire plants as a result?

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 04:05 PM
Here is an excerpt from a story relating to Ford halting the 1.6 billion facility in Mexico:

quote:
The loss to the economy, Eaves calculates, could run into the hundreds of millions of dollars, and maybe even into the billions, over the next five years, as manufacturing, contracting and indirect jobs all fall short of plans. Officials say they are still analyzing the economic impact of the Ford decision.


Hmm, sure would be nice to have hundreds of millions of dollars or maybe into the billions over the next five years as manufacturing, contracting and indirect jobs here in the US wouldn't it?

That is what they are saying the loss of that plant cost Mexico, and all of that shot in the arm of the surrounding economy, but it certainly illustrates the overall impact the auto industry has when they decide where they want to build their next plant.

The US didn't gain a new plant in this Ford decision, but did get some investment to expand an existing facility and 700 created jobs. I'll take that as a good trade off for us.

In that article it also states:

quote:
Ford's chief executive Mark Fields said market forces had swayed Ford's decision to not build the San Luis Potosi plant, with low gas prices and low interest rates hampering small car sales.

Fields also noted President-elect Donald Trump's promises to make the US more competitive by lowering taxes and easing regulations.

"We believe these tax and regulatory reforms are necessary to boost US competitiveness," Fields said
, speaking in Flat Rock, Michigan, where the assembly plant is located.

During his presidential campaign, Trump said that if elected, he would not allow Ford to open its plant in Mexico and threatened to add tariffs to any vehicles Ford imported from the US' southern neighbor.

http://www.dw.com/en/ford-to-scrap-16-billion-plant-in-mexico-as-trump-targ ets-general-motors/a-36993603


Should Trump take credit for that? He can't take credit for "market forces", but he certainly could take credit for painting a picture of a more competitive industry with less tax and regulations - then the whole tariff boarder tax thing is just there in the corner, play a role? Really it may not matter in light of the tax and regulatory changes Ford CEO is hoping for, which Trump has stated.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8074
(8099 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/31/2017 at 04:09 PM
quote:
My point was that if tariffs are enforced, somebody will pay for it - and according to what you said above about companies 'not passing along the savings', I don't see anybody but the consumer paying for it.


Or it might cost Mexico really...cost them jobs. If consumers buy products from other countries instead, or if ultimately companies look to locate somewhere else to evade the tariff. There is a financial cost with the tax being applied to the product and passed along and then there are other costs that the country of Mexico could bear.

quote:
I will try to talk to one of my neighbors - a big Obama hater and Trump lover - who owns a plant in Mexico for the product his company produces. I'll get his take on what he thinks of the tariffs and what he would do.....


Great, I look forward to it. If he is anti-Trump on this issue, spin it around like you are pro-Trump on it, that sounds like it would be a hoot of a conversation!

 
<<  1    2    3    4  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software


Privacy | Terms of Service
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com