Trade Tariffs, USA vs. China, Why a one way street? (Corporate Profits, employment)

[NormalCarpetRide]

Trade balance at the national level is notoriously inaccurate as an economic predictor. What needs to be looked at is inidividual trade balances.

[BentBow]

The thing with trade tariffs, is corporate monopolies on a national level, instead of not seeing it when it is spread out on a world level.

It would all come to light that the rich get richer & the poor get poorer.

[ViennaSausages]

Originally Posted by OhioJB

One of the problems is if and when we place tariffs on products coming into this country we can be fined by the WTO. I admit I haven't read up on it recently, so I don't know the specifics, but I do believe it's the WTO that makes those determinations, based on agreements our leaders have signed with other countries.

Depends on what you mean by "tariffs". Over 90% of goods entering the USA come in duty free. The remaining goods are dutied at anywhere from 0.1% to about 9%. the USA is the one who sets NORMAL entry tariffs. The WTO has no say in the matter except that there are maximum tariff limits.

If we wanted to say, everything from any GSP or WTO member nation is dutied at 3%, we could. Tariffs levied in response to "unfair" trade are an entirely different matter.

But remember, its NOT the Chinese or Koreans who pay the tariffs. Import tariffs are paid by the IMPORTERS...

[Chava61]

US Expert says that bashing China won't fix the American Economy:
Bashing China won't fix US economy: US expert|Politics|chinadaily.com.cn

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by Greg_IA

US politicians... the source of so much of our problems.

Most ALL of whom are . . . (R) or (D).

Sort of funny that most Americans are not (R), and most Americans are not (D)

but . . . Most ALL Politicians are (R) or (D).

How can that be?

In WW2 era Germany, most Germans were not members of the Nazi Party. In Soviet era Russia, most Russians were not members of the Communist Party.

But the (R) and (D) Parties are destroying US -- like the Nazi Party destroyed Germany, and Communist Party destroyed Russia.

Getting to the point that it is not too hard to figure out . . . If it is (R) or (D) -- it ain't US.

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by ViennaSausages

Import tariffs are paid by the IMPORTERS...

Yep.

The IMPORTERS are the Transnational Corporations that did the bribing to set this up.

The only thing Free in Free Trade is Tax-Free Transnational Corporate Profit.

So put the Tariffs on the Imbalance, and at the same time, help balance the Federal Budget with that Tax Revenue source, and bring US employment up at the same time.

Amazing that neither the (R) nor (D) types would even consider this. Amazing.

[hawkeye2009]

Originally Posted by rkcarguy

I belive this is a major issue, one that could resolve alot of our problems. As our growing deficit and debt story shows, a nation of consumers does not balance the books.
In times when we see billions of dollars a month in trade deficit between the USA and China, China places a ~17% tax on items they import from the USA. We, on the other hand, charge a commodity based tax from 1.6% to 3% on goods coming stateside from China.
This in-difference is what costs us our manufacturing jobs, and also puts our gov't at a loss when they could be collecting more tax on imported goods.
This seems to be a no fly zone with congress and it's my opinion the kickbacks from our perveyors of Chinese goods must be pretty good. Good enough that as we kick the can further and further with more bailouts, debt, and social programs nothing is done to fix the root of the problem.
Like closing your door behind you, it should be a no-brainer to impose higher taxes on foreign goods to balance trade.
I can certainly do without most of the Chinese crap I buy that ends up in the garbage anyway.
The people that argue they can't afford anything else, well you are having your arms chopped off and fed to you to keep from starving.
What say everyone?

Tariffs have always been shown to DEPRESS economic activity and is not the answer. What is the answer?

1. Renegotiating or abandoning NAFTA

2. Stopping China most favored nation trade status

3. Corporate consumption tax which favors exporters and punishes importers (a legal, backhanded tariff which the Germans and Japanese use). This is a clever means by which net trade imbalances are evaluated and promotes lower and lower trade deficits.


Note that these terrible trade agreements are the bastard children of democratic presidents. However, members of BOTH PARTIES had strong hands in thier implementation. Bush I, had he been re-elected, had stated he was a supporter, like Clinton, of NAFTA and China most favored nation trade status. Further, those representatives of BOTH PARTIES could have worked since to alter these agreements- they have not. Therefore, no one is "innocent" in the onerous agreements, with the exception of ROSS PEROT who has the smug satisfaction of knowing he was right.

NAFTA and China most favored nation trade status, when analyzed, was determined to benefit both trading partners. However, it relied upon the assumption that those US companies who benefitted from the increase trade would REMAIN IN AMERICA. Certainly many companies have benefitted from these agreements; some less efficient companies went broke. The problem is that MANY of those companies who benefitted from the agreements CLOSES PLANTS IN AMERICA, thus eliminating many, if not all of the benefits.

In short- we got hosed

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

Tariffs have always been shown to DEPRESS economic activity and is not the answer. What is the answer?

Your starting premise is totally false.

China has been using Tariffs Very Effectively and Beneficially for the past 30 years.

Did you miss that part of the discussion?

1. Renegotiating or abandoning NAFTA

2. Stopping China most favored nation trade status

3. Corporate consumption tax which favors exporters and punishes importers (a legal, backhanded tariff which the Germans and Japanese use). This is a clever means by which net trade imbalances are evaluated and promotes lower and lower trade deficits.

Not a bad start, but you have to step back and see why and what things are.

Note that these terrible trade agreements are the bastard children of democratic presidents. However, members of BOTH PARTIES had strong hands in thier implementation. Bush I, had he been re-elected, had stated he was a supporter, like Clinton, of NAFTA and China most favored nation trade status. Further, those representatives of BOTH PARTIES could have worked since to alter these agreements- they have not. Therefore, no one is "innocent" in the onerous agreements, with the exception of ROSS PEROT who has the smug satisfaction of knowing he was right.

Actually both (same) Corporate Controlled parties are up to their eyebrows in this. They are just using each to shift blame for the folks in the US who still believe the (R) v. (D) nonsense.

Let me state that a little simpler -- They are both the same.

NAFTA and China most favored nation trade status, when analyzed, was determined to benefit both trading partners. However, it relied upon the assumption that those US companies who benefitted from the increase trade would REMAIN IN AMERICA.

No such assumption was made. That was the marketing cover for the scam.

The real operators behind the scene are sponsored from the CFR.

They populate and re-circulate through upper academia, corporate boards and high .gov offices.

Certainly many companies have benefitted from these agreements; some less efficient companies went broke. The problem is that MANY of those companies who benefitted from the agreements CLOSES PLANTS IN AMERICA, thus eliminating many, if not all of the benefits.

That was the intent from the start. Do you follow what OPIC is?

This is not some misunderstanding or accident.

In short- we got hosed

No. The US got intentionally mis-educated. Targeted on the MBA and Economics/Business types.

MBAs, etc., were easy targets because they tend to be the dummies of upper education. Sorry, but that is what the GRE scores say.

They were programmed with nonsense like -- Comparative Advantage, Tariffs / Smoot-Hawley Bad, Global Economy. You have seen the nonsense rising for years now, have you not? You even started this post with some of it.

Do some Critical Thinking and see where your concepts come from.

[X14Freak]

US corporations and the US government acquiesce to Chinese demands (such as tariffs and technology transfer) because if they don't, the Chinese will lock the US out of its market (including the use of its massive labor force). Being locked out of a market and not having access to China's massive labor force is usually worse than having tariffs being placed on goods. It means that a loss of revenues and profits are guaranteed. Few corporations are willing to risk it so they usually comply with Chinese policies and don't usually protest. Imperialism in China and the Pacific War was mostly about having unfettered access to the Chinese markets and forcing the Chinese to open up with no tariffs or restrictions on foreign economic activities. The Chinese learned a lesson from that and now use their advantages (massive market and labor force) to force concessions from foreign entities.

[pknopp]

No mention yet about what role our debt plays in all of this.