2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: eyeeatingfish on August 31, 2018, 09:17:29 AM
-
Just saw this news story. In Trump's quest to negotiate better trade deals the European Union offered to eliminate all tarriffs on cars of the US did the same. Trump rejected the offer saying it wasn't good enough because Europeans preferred European cars.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/08/30/trump-rejects-eu-offer-to-eliminate-auto-tariffs.html
When I first learned of the criticisms of NAFTA I discovered one of the biggest objections from conservatives is that it wasn't truly free trade. It still had protectionism with all sorts of tarriffs.
So now we manage to get a proposal that would be truly equal, no tarriffs on either side and Trump is rejecting it? He wants something better for us because of customer preferences? That sounds like protectionism, am I missing something?
-
To me it sounds like we would be losing out. Because he's right, EU likes EU cars (Benz, BMW, etc..). And more EU cars get shipped here than US cars (Ford, Chevy, etc...) that get shipped over there.
So we would be losing money if we called it even Steven. I'm not an economist so I didn't research it fully. But just the above makes sense in my head.
Same goes with Asian countries probably. When I was in Taiwan, I didn't see 1 US car. Lots of Toyota's. Maybe a few EU cars.
So if my above statement is correct then the fake news would spin a title like "Trump hates free trade".
-
Trump's statement is either intentionally left open-ended by the author to imply the he means to impose tarriffs of his own on European automobiles or Trump really hasn't stated what his intent is. While imposing tarriffs on European cars can certainly be included in the list of things he could have meant by his statement, it is by no means exclusive. He is an experienced negotiator and may be using the opportunity to leverage other aspects of trade where other European protectionist measures are in place like parts manufacturing, jobs, etc. It may become apparent what Trump is shooting in the coming days. Let's see what shakes out.
-
Eliminating tariffs on U.S. auto imports would do little for General Motors Co. and Ford Motor Co., but would lend
a major boost to Germany’s BMW AG and Daimler AG. SUVs assembled by the German carmakers in the American
South dominate the models exported to Europe from the U.S.
BMW for example is projected to sell nearly 70,000 X3 SUVs in Europe made in its South Carolina factory this year,
according to data from LMC Automotive. Compare that to roughly 15,000 units of Tesla Inc.’s Model S sedan, which
LMC, an industry data consultancy, projects will be the top-selling model in Europe assembled in the U.S. by an American
automaker.
Trump has ordered his Commerce Department to investigate whether car imports imperil national security, under the
same provision he invoked to impose global tariffs on steel and aluminum earlier this year.
The findings of the auto study are due by February, though the president could decide to act before then. This week, Trump
threatened Canada with auto tariffs if the country failed to join his trade deal with Mexico to replace Nafta.
One of the issues to be examined is the presence of European car makers in the US. Many have factories here so they can avoid the tariffs. Some on them brought in workers from Poland, Slovenia, and Croatia rather than hire US workers. If we drop the tariffs, European cars made in US plants could more cheaply be shipped to EU countries, further increasing the imbalance in European vs. American brands sold there.
Free trade isn't just about tariffs. It's also about being able to compete with countries that don't pay workers or provide comparable benefits and retirement packages as US makers. Labor costs and taxes keep US car makers from being able to compete with lower-priced foreign cars.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbsn-on-assignment-foreign-workers-used-to-build-auto-plants-in-us/
-
One of the issues to be examined is the presence of European car makers in the US. Many have factories here so they can avoid the tariffs. Some on them brought in workers from Poland, Slovenia, and Croatia rather than hire US workers. If we drop the tariffs, European cars made in US plants could more cheaply be shipped to EU countries, further increasing the imbalance in European vs. American brands sold there.
Free trade isn't just about tariffs. It's also about being able to compete with countries that don't pay workers or provide comparable benefits and retirement packages as US makers. Labor costs and taxes keep US car makers from being able to compete with lower-priced foreign cars.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbsn-on-assignment-foreign-workers-used-to-build-auto-plants-in-us/
So Trump is playing 4D chess again. Art of the deal.
-
To me it sounds like we would be losing out. Because he's right, EU likes EU cars (Benz, BMW, etc..). And more EU cars get shipped here than US cars (Ford, Chevy, etc...) that get shipped over there.
So we would be losing money if we called it even Steven. I'm not an economist so I didn't research it fully. But just the above makes sense in my head.
Same goes with Asian countries probably. When I was in Taiwan, I didn't see 1 US car. Lots of Toyota's. Maybe a few EU cars.
So if my above statement is correct then the fake news would spin a title like "Trump hates free trade".
The reason you see lots of Toyota's is that they make vehicles that don't have to conform to the EPA BS regulations,
and can be used anywhere in the world, except America.
Our car companies only make cars that can be sold in The Democrat state of California, thus making them too in-efficient and
expensive, for the rest of the world.
.
-
As said above, the issue of free trade is way beyond tariffs. Tariffs is what is most discussed because it generally affects the bottom line pretty quickly. However in order to get the bigger picture, you have to look into how things changed as a result of previous arrangements and also be able to try to envision how the market will respond. I can't remember the details, but the issue of tariffs was brought up on the subject of tariffs applies to washing machines. Essentially, LG and other asian products were thriving and threatening companies like Kenmore, GE, etc. The tariffs were applied to imports, to LG started to product their products in the US and they hired mostly foreign workers, so initially somewhat of a backfire as it didn't level anything. There are also companies that get into the finer details to find ways around. Like I believe the current tariff discussion is looking toward setting a minimum percentage of parts produced in the US to avoid just the product being assembled in the US and get around the import tariffs, fees, etc. It's super complex and these companies are damn smart!
Anyways, like many discussion with Trump, will just have to wait and see. Though I have to applaud his efforts in trying to improve things in favor of the US, as opposed to failures to do anything by previous administrations as they gave in to the threats by EU, China, etc, which appears not were largely them blowing smoke. Their economies are just as vulnerable and need to play nice as well with trading partners. Just that now, Trump is challenging that balance.
-
As said above, the issue of free trade is way beyond tariffs. Tariffs is what is most discussed because it generally affects the bottom line pretty quickly. However in order to get the bigger picture, you have to look into how things changed as a result of previous arrangements and also be able to try to envision how the market will respond. I can't remember the details, but the issue of tariffs was brought up on the subject of tariffs applies to washing machines. Essentially, LG and other asian products were thriving and threatening companies like Kenmore, GE, etc. The tariffs were applied to imports, to LG started to product their products in the US and they hired mostly foreign workers, so initially somewhat of a backfire as it didn't level anything. There are also companies that get into the finer details to find ways around. Like I believe the current tariff discussion is looking toward setting a minimum percentage of parts produced in the US to avoid just the product being assembled in the US and get around the import tariffs, fees, etc. It's super complex and these companies are damn smart!
Anyways, like many discussion with Trump, will just have to wait and see. Though I have to applaud his efforts in trying to improve things in favor of the US, as opposed to failures to do anything by previous administrations as they gave in to the threats by EU, China, etc, which appears not were largely them blowing smoke. Their economies are just as vulnerable and need to play nice as well with trading partners. Just that now, Trump is challenging that balance.
And this is the problem with the fake news. They only report that "Trump doesn't want to deal". Vs. explaining why and hows.
-
And this is the problem with the fake news. They only report that "Trump doesn't want to deal". Vs. explaining why and hows.
It seems only one person in this forum falls for the fake news ... again and again and again ...
:wacko:
-
It seems only one person in this forum falls for the fake news ... again and again and again ...
:wacko:
and his "research" never shows how wrong he is...
-
It seems only one person in this forum falls for the fake news ... again and again and again ...
:wacko:
CNN ads on FB are slowly turning my coworker. Good thing she knows to ask me what's up 1st.
Had an ad about a mother who lost custody to her child (mother is illegal, unsure about child, CNN didn't say). I had to explain adoption laws to her.
1) Upon being arrested, illegal can either voluntary return to country with child, or stay and wait for court date. But mother and child get separate court hearings. Many illegals choose option 2. That's why in this case, the mother was in jail for the past 5 years.
2) Whether child is legal or illegal, parent has to sign off. And if child is illegal, country of origin has to sign off also. Many adopting parents hire an adoption attorney for this reason. If child is a US citizen, then CPS gets involved also.
So in the end, it opened my coworkers eye to not believe or dig deeper what really has to happen for a US family to adopt a child from an illegal. They don't just get "taken away".
The other story that popped up 2 days later on the same FB coworkers page was about Mexicans with US Passports getting detained. A google search showed that in the 90's many "midwives" would deliver babies in Mexico, then go to TX and register as US citizen birth. Bush and Obama's admin started to crack down on this midwife babies (thousands), but the ACLU sued and they backed off. So Trumps admin is starting it again. I told her, IDK why only certain passports are being questioned even if they lived here for 30 years. In the end it's the Mexicans mothers fault. Trying to find a illegal way in (loophole). Now the kid (adult) is paying the price. Midwives won't do this scheme for free or out of good will. "Pay me X amount and I'll make sure your newborn is a US citizen".
Then she said, why not focus on current illegals and let all the other ones say ones who have been here 30 years or so stay. Then I asked her, if someone who was supposed to be deported, but wasn't and ran you daughter over with their car, would you still think the same. She said no. I didn't even mention DACA yet. But that's old news already. DACA children don't stay children.
So i'm trying to teach her to question and dig deeper, especially when reading any fake news article (mainly CNN, Yaho, AOL, etc...)
-
To me it sounds like we would be losing out. Because he's right, EU likes EU cars (Benz, BMW, etc..). And more EU cars get shipped here than US cars (Ford, Chevy, etc...) that get shipped over there.
So we would be losing money if we called it even Steven. I'm not an economist so I didn't research it fully. But just the above makes sense in my head.
Same goes with Asian countries probably. When I was in Taiwan, I didn't see 1 US car. Lots of Toyota's. Maybe a few EU cars.
So if my above statement is correct then the fake news would spin a title like "Trump hates free trade".
I understand the idea but it is protectionism and Trump is trying to get an unrealistic deal. Tarrifs aren't meant to control for customer preferences but to protect companies against other groups that can make the products cheaper.
If we want to compete with European car companies in Europe we need to make the cars they want, not suggest that Europe give us a special deal that doesn't benefit them just so our cars can sell more.
It's almost a form of subsidizing industry. I don't know if Trump hates free trade but the rejection of this proposal doesn't seem like he likes it either.
And by the way Trump didn't really go into much detail, so what do you want to do the news to do, speculate? They are reporting what he said. If they left something significant that he said out then feel free to point it out. But I did check multiple articles, it's not like Trump always make sense when he's talking or even remains consistent for that matter. Agree with his decision or not, the bottom line is that he was rejecting true free trade on that particular part.
-
Trump's statement is either intentionally left open-ended by the author to imply the he means to impose tarriffs of his own on European automobiles or Trump really hasn't stated what his intent is. While imposing tarriffs on European cars can certainly be included in the list of things he could have meant by his statement, it is by no means exclusive. He is an experienced negotiator and may be using the opportunity to leverage other aspects of trade where other European protectionist measures are in place like parts manufacturing, jobs, etc. It may become apparent what Trump is shooting in the coming days. Let's see what shakes out.
That is the one angle I was thinking. He didn't state it but it is possible that he meant to reject that offer as part of a bigger picture and just didn't make it clear.
-
and his "research" never shows how wrong he is...
And what research have you done? I listen to the news I read articles and I started to discussion. You bring nothing to the party but trolling so far.
-
One of the issues to be examined is the presence of European car makers in the US. Many have factories here so they can avoid the tariffs. Some on them brought in workers from Poland, Slovenia, and Croatia rather than hire US workers. If we drop the tariffs, European cars made in US plants could more cheaply be shipped to EU countries, further increasing the imbalance in European vs. American brands sold there.
Free trade isn't just about tariffs. It's also about being able to compete with countries that don't pay workers or provide comparable benefits and retirement packages as US makers. Labor costs and taxes keep US car makers from being able to compete with lower-priced foreign cars.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbsn-on-assignment-foreign-workers-used-to-build-auto-plants-in-us/
Another part of it is that a lot of American car companies are not producing as many cars with the European market in mind. We tend to have larger vehicles with higher gas consumption and Europeans don't seem as interested in those. I know the same is true for Japan, with their higher gas costs and they're much narrower roads American companies just don't have many models that are practical in Japan.
-
I started to discussion.
you started to discussion?
whut?
-
Another part of it is that a lot of American car companies are not producing as many cars with the European market in mind. We tend to have larger vehicles with higher gas consumption and Europeans don't seem as interested in those. I know the same is true for Japan, with their higher gas costs and they're much narrower roads American companies just don't have many models that are practical in Japan.
???
-
It's almost a form of subsidizing industry.
And what do you think other countries are doing in attempts to make their products more “exportable”? That’s what the US is up against.
-
???
Speech to text doesn't always get the right version of the word.
-
And what do you think other countries are doing in attempts to make their products more “exportable”? That’s what the US is up against.
They make products people want.
If Ford/GM/Dodge cannot make cars that Europeans want we should not try to force the EU to give us special preference over European cars.
If both sides agree to no tariffs then that is free trade. That is where demand plays its roll and competition benefits the consumer. If Ford and GM get protection in the form of tariffs that doesn't help the consumer, it doesn't push Ford or GM to produce a better car.
The EU isn't some poor third world nation that can make the same products for pennies on the dollar where our industries can't compete on cost.
-
You bring nothing to the party but trolling so far.
right
you have 39.6% of my post count, yet 20.5% of my total likes
sounds like I bring nothing to the party...
-
right
you have 39.6% of my post count, yet 20.5% of my total likes
sounds like I bring nothing to the party...
That makes you more popular here but it doesn't make you right.
Notice though that I said you bring nothing to the party but trolling SO FAR.
I am waiting and hoping that you will actually make a comment with some substance on this thread.
-
That makes you more popular here but it doesn't make you right.
Notice though that I said you bring nothing to the party but trolling SO FAR.
I am waiting and hoping that you will actually make a comment with some substance on this thread.
sorry, I wasn't the mastur debator you were in high school, so I cannot make valuable commentary like you can
-
That makes you more popular here but it doesn't make you right.
Notice though that I said you bring nothing to the party but trolling SO FAR.
I am waiting and hoping that you will actually make a comment with some substance on this thread.
Pissing off the moderator is always a smart move ....
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
Just saw this news story. In Trump's quest to negotiate better trade deals the European Union offered to eliminate all tarriffs on cars of the US did the same. Trump rejected the offer saying it wasn't good enough because Europeans preferred European cars.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/08/30/trump-rejects-eu-offer-to-eliminate-auto-tariffs.html
When I first learned of the criticisms of NAFTA I discovered one of the biggest objections from conservatives is that it wasn't truly free trade. It still had protectionism with all sorts of tarriffs.
So now we manage to get a proposal that would be truly equal, no tarriffs on either side and Trump is rejecting it? He wants something better for us because of customer preferences? That sounds like protectionism, am I missing something?
I read a Bloomberg report that said that the negotiations with the automobiles is being put off until a report is generated for Trump so he can make a deal that makes sense for us. The rest of the trade agreement is still on.
Just having no tariffs on each side is not always advantageous for us. Since BMW et al build cars here and export them to Europe, we only benefit as far as labor is concerned. All the profits made on the sales of these cars are not taxed as the money never makes it to our shores. As compared to Ford and GM that build cars for Europe, in Europe and the profits stay in Europe and therefore are taxed by Europe. Due to this, fair trade may include tariffs and/or other concessions on the part of the Europeans. If we dropped all tariffs on cars on both sides, Europe would have a huge advantage in the car trade since the only cars we export to Europe are European cars.
As far as I am concerned Trump is a smart cookie as he realizes the true differences in trade between countries. It is complicated and requires a sharp mind. It is obvious that Trump knows this and will negotiate the deal best for us.
I am going to answer another one of your posts that will continue this subject.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/trump-says-eu-offer-for-no-auto-tariffs-is-not-good-enough
-
I understand the idea but it is protectionism and Trump is trying to get an unrealistic deal. Tarrifs aren't meant to control for customer preferences but to protect companies against other groups that can make the products cheaper.
If we want to compete with European car companies in Europe we need to make the cars they want, not suggest that Europe give us a special deal that doesn't benefit them just so our cars can sell more.
It's almost a form of subsidizing industry. I don't know if Trump hates free trade but the rejection of this proposal doesn't seem like he likes it either.
And by the way Trump didn't really go into much detail, so what do you want to do the news to do, speculate? They are reporting what he said. If they left something significant that he said out then feel free to point it out. But I did check multiple articles, it's not like Trump always make sense when he's talking or even remains consistent for that matter. Agree with his decision or not, the bottom line is that he was rejecting true free trade on that particular part.
Tariffs are not necessarily protectionism. They can be used to make one type of trade more even when circumstances dictate a very onedsided trade advantage such as the one the Europeans have with us. Remember my previous post explaining the differences between European car makers making cars here and exporting them to Europe. Thereby the profit from the sales of these cars remains in Europe so we do not benefit from collecting the taxes on those sales. And remember I said that Ford and GM make cars in Europe and the profit from the sales of those cars stays in Europe. So Europe gains a huge tax advantage over us in regards to car sales. See how complicated this is?
I don’t know where you get the idea that American car companies do not make cars that Europeans do not want to buy? We do. And have for many decades. As a matter of fact Ford was really huge in Europe at one time back in the day. Since the Europeans DO NOT buy American cars made in America we are at a disadvantage in trade between us. However, this does not mean that Europeans do not buy American cars. They buy American cars made in Europe. Just so you know that by brand Ford of Europe is #3 selling over 1M cars last year and Opel/Vauxhall (GM) is in the #4 spot with just under a 1M cars sold in Europe last year. That’s a lot of cars considering you didn’t think we made cars that Europeans don’t want to buy.
https://www.best-selling-cars.com/europe/2017-full-year-europe-best-selling-car-manufacturers-and-brands/
Free and fair trade is a great concept but the one thing about Trump is that he won’t allow us to be taken advantage of. If there is anyone who ever doubted Trump and his ability to understand and negotiate such complicated deals only for the best of America then it is due solely due to their blind hatred. Trump is doing something no other president has done. And that is to not sell our economy to the highest bidder for his own gain. JMHO
-
Im not familiar at all with tarrifs, nor will i spend more time researching it. I will trust Trump and the plan. So far his intentions are for the american people.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
-
Just to add to my long winded posts.
There other things that can be negotiated while keeping tariffs at zero on each side of the trade equation. Lot’s of concessions can be agreed upon. Similar in effect of the deal with Mexico where they agreed to pay their auto workers a minimum of $16/hour in order to make things a little more equal on both sides of the trade equation. While I am no expert and do not know what other concessions can be agreed upon, I am sure what ever our administration comes up with will be good for us.
-
Just to add to my long winded posts.
There other things that can be negotiated while keeping tariffs at zero on each side of the trade equation. Lot’s of concessions can be agreed upon. Similar in effect of the deal with Mexico where they agreed to pay their auto workers a minimum of $16/hour in order to make things a little more equal on both sides of the trade equation. While I am no expert and do not know what other concessions can be agreed upon, I am sure what ever our administration comes up with will be good for us.
Another would be to hire US workers and pay competitive US wages at plants located in the US. Bringing in foreign laborers who are willing to take less for a shot at living here hurts US manufacturers.
-
Another would be to hire US workers and pay competitive US wages at plants located in the US. Bringing in foreign laborers who are willing to take less for a shot at living here hurts US manufacturers.
Exactly. The concessions agreed upon on both sides can get rather creative. It just takes some sharp people to come up with those creative concessions and then make the other side believe they are getting a good deal. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Maybe I should read “The Art of the Deal”?
-
Exactly. The concessions agreed upon on both sides can get rather creative. It just takes some sharp people to come up with those creative concessions and then make the other side believe they are getting a good deal. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Maybe I should read “The Art of the Deal”?
When both sides walk away wishing they'd gotten more, you know the deal was fair. We've been living with deals that play on our guilt of being a wealthy nation compared to many others. We pretend a bad deal for the US will result in "good will" toward us in the future. In reality, it makes us look stupid and weak. It's an invitation to others to take advantage of our weakness.
-
They make products people want.
If Ford/GM/Dodge cannot make cars that Europeans want we should not try to force the EU to give us special preference over European cars.
If both sides agree to no tariffs then that is free trade. That is where demand plays its roll and competition benefits the consumer. If Ford and GM get protection in the form of tariffs that doesn't help the consumer, it doesn't push Ford or GM to produce a better car.
The EU isn't some poor third world nation that can make the same products for pennies on the dollar where our industries can't compete on cost.
You missed the point and deflecting, again. The issue of government subsidy is that it gives their companies an advantageous position to challenge products made in foreign markets where the governments don’t subsidize.
And I was referring to my example of the LG and other Korean washing machines where subsidies made it near to impossible for US companies to compete. Not pertaining to the car market.
-
Exactly. The concessions agreed upon on both sides can get rather creative. It just takes some sharp people to come up with those creative concessions and then make the other side believe they are getting a good deal. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Maybe I should read “The Art of the Deal”?
Or even better negotiator where you have the other side proposing deals that are actually to your advantage because of initial stances taken in negotiations. Many of which are often shit on by the MSM and seeming causing irrational fear in liberals.
-
Or even better negotiator where you have the other side proposing deals that are actually to your advantage because of initial stances taken in negotiations. Many of which are often shit on by the MSM and seeming causing irrational fear in liberals.
Not used to all this winning. :rofl: :shake: :rofl:
It’s nice to see that American exceptionalism is not dead, yet. We have good people in our government that we don’t know exist. I think Pompeo is one of those exceptional people who only want to work with exceptional people. I think I have finally come to the conclusion that we will win in all these trade deals. It is now a matter of time and the people working behind the scenes. It will happen.
This is a bigger deal for our country than most understand. Reducing the trade deficit is a YUGE deal. Other than currency fluctuations we have not had major trade deficit swings in a very long time. I have not seen the financial markets so positive about our financial future in a VERY LONG TIME.
-
Not used to all this winning. :rofl: :shake: :rofl:
It’s nice to see that American exceptionalism is not dead, yet. We have good people in our government that we don’t know exist. I think Pompeo is one of those exceptional people who only want to work with exceptional people. I think I have finally come to the conclusion that we will win in all these trade deals. It is now a matter of time and the people working behind the scenes. It will happen.
This is a bigger deal for our country than most understand. Reducing the trade deficit is a YUGE deal. Other than currency fluctuations we have not had major trade deficit swings in a very long time. I have not seen the financial markets so positive about our financial future in a VERY LONG TIME.
YUGE ya say, eh?
I think this nation has gotten used to taking the short end of deals in the name of partnering with our “allies” that folks forgot what it is to be in a position to prosper. And the whole nation, not just the -%.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/GOy5lss.jpg)
-
Pissing off the moderator is always a smart move ....
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Moderators shouldn't troll if they can't take the criticism.
-
Moderators shouldn't troll if they can't take the criticism.
Moderators are expected to troll. It's their duty.
You, on the other hand, get paid to do it.
-
Moderators shouldn't troll if they can't take the criticism.
oh, you were being critical?
I didn't notice, I was too busy being popular
-
Tariffs are not necessarily protectionism. They can be used to make one type of trade more even when circumstances dictate a very onedsided trade advantage such as the one the Europeans have with us. Remember my previous post explaining the differences between European car makers making cars here and exporting them to Europe. Thereby the profit from the sales of these cars remains in Europe so we do not benefit from collecting the taxes on those sales. And remember I said that Ford and GM make cars in Europe and the profit from the sales of those cars stays in Europe. So Europe gains a huge tax advantage over us in regards to car sales. See how complicated this is?
I don’t know where you get the idea that American car companies do not make cars that Europeans do not want to buy? We do. And have for many decades. As a matter of fact Ford was really huge in Europe at one time back in the day. Since the Europeans DO NOT buy American cars made in America we are at a disadvantage in trade between us. However, this does not mean that Europeans do not buy American cars. They buy American cars made in Europe. Just so you know that by brand Ford of Europe is #3 selling over 1M cars last year and Opel/Vauxhall (GM) is in the #4 spot with just under a 1M cars sold in Europe last year. That’s a lot of cars considering you didn’t think we made cars that Europeans don’t want to buy.
https://www.best-selling-cars.com/europe/2017-full-year-europe-best-selling-car-manufacturers-and-brands/
Free and fair trade is a great concept but the one thing about Trump is that he won’t allow us to be taken advantage of. If there is anyone who ever doubted Trump and his ability to understand and negotiate such complicated deals only for the best of America then it is due solely due to their blind hatred. Trump is doing something no other president has done. And that is to not sell our economy to the highest bidder for his own gain. JMHO
I just hope that Trump isn't so stubborn and getting a good deal for us that he doesn't shut down an actual reasonable
Yes I know that Ford owns a number of Brands including some European car companies and I did not say that they have no cars successful in Europe, I was explaining that our car companies generally don't make as many cars the Europeans want. I know the Ford focus is popular there though.
I am having trouble seeing how BMW making their cars over here is bad for us in trade. They build factories here and hire people here so all of that Manufacturing cost benefits our country. The alternative would be to Simply build their cars in their country which they sell in their country and we would get none of that. I keep seeing BMW mentioned but not that many European car companies have factories here. If BMW spends money to make cars here for sale in another country, why should we get to tax those sales? That would mean China should get to put tariffs for all the things American companies make in China and have shipped to America to sell. I think the risk of trying to get tariffs that benefit us better then them is that BMW another car companies might just decide not to build cars in America at all and we would lose out then
I don't think tariffs should be used to manipulate demand though and that is what Trump seems to be doing to me.
-
You missed the point and deflecting, again. The issue of government subsidy is that it gives their companies an advantageous position to challenge products made in foreign markets where the governments don’t subsidize.
And I was referring to my example of the LG and other Korean washing machines where subsidies made it near to impossible for US companies to compete. Not pertaining to the car market.
In you Korea example yes there are subsidies so that isn't free trade. I am talking truly free trade where there are no subsidies.
-
I just hope that Trump isn't so stubborn and getting a good deal for us that he doesn't shut down an actual reasonable
Yes I know that Ford owns a number of Brands including some European car companies and I did not say that they have no cars successful in Europe, I was explaining that our car companies generally don't make as many cars the Europeans want. I know the Ford focus is popular there though.
I am having trouble seeing how BMW making their cars over here is bad for us in trade. They build factories here and hire people here so all of that Manufacturing cost benefits our country. The alternative would be to Simply build their cars in their country which they sell in their country and we would get none of that. I keep seeing BMW mentioned but not that many European car companies have factories here. If BMW spends money to make cars here for sale in another country, why should we get to tax those sales? That would mean China should get to put tariffs for all the things American companies make in China and have shipped to America to sell. I think the risk of trying to get tariffs that benefit us better then them is that BMW another car companies might just decide not to build cars in America at all and we would lose out then
I don't think tariffs should be used to manipulate demand though and that is what Trump seems to be doing to me.
Look, I have been down this rabbit hole with you too many times. I am not going to down this road again with you. It is not worth the frustration. Once you get something in your head it makes no difference what reality is, you just keep pushing your ignorance.
I have explained the way things work quite plainly and simplistically. Since you admittedly do not understand how things work, I suggest you use Google to figure it out before you continue. Good luck.
-
Look, I have been down this rabbit hole with you too many times. I am not going to down this road again with you. It is not worth the frustration. Once you get something in your head it makes no difference what reality is, you just keep pushing your ignorance.
I have explained the way things work quite plainly and simplistically. Since you admittedly do not understand how things work, I suggest you use Google to figure it out before you continue. Good luck.
Nonsense. I am trying to understand it with an open mind but your explanation has holes in it and that is the reason for my comments. I am not saying you are completely wrong but some of what you say is not jiving and I am trying to reason through it with you.
Edit: let me back this up a little bit as we went kind of off track. The point of the thread was not to argue whether or not it was a good deal or the BMW plant and customer preferences justify tarrifs. The point was that Trump was rejecting a free trade offer. If you don't believe in free trade then so be it but Trump can't claim he is for free trade if he is rejecting it.
-
EEF, the US does make cars that are popular in EU.
http://europe.autonews.com/article/20180220/ANE/180219831/tesla-model-s-outsells-german-luxury-flagships-in-europe
As for Japan, I don't think you can really say "Japanese auto companies" and "no government subsidies" in the same sentence. *cough* Zaibatsu *cough*
-
EEF, the US does make cars that are popular in EU.
http://europe.autonews.com/article/20180220/ANE/180219831/tesla-model-s-outsells-german-luxury-flagships-in-europe
As for Japan, I don't think you can really say "Japanese auto companies" and "no government subsidies" in the same sentence. *cough* Zaibatsu *cough*
I never said that we don't have any popular car options, only that a lot of the cars produced are not the type Europeans want.
-
That's because American cars were made for Americans, who have the buying power to buy them.
The American full sized trucks are getting some strong competition from Japan's Toyota and Nissan compact trucks though.
Old categories: US muscle cars vs Asian tuners vs European exotics
New category: Electrics
-
In you Korea example yes there are subsidies so that isn't free trade. I am talking truly free trade where there are no subsidies.
Uhh, well that is what the US market has to deal with, companies in other countries receiving subsidies. That's the point. . .
Well, you can have your vision of what "free trade" is. That's not how the real world market works. I guess in an truly ideal world, it could happen, but that's not the reality of life. You seem to be stuck on some ideal that you have in your mind and can't see beyond that.
-
That's because American cars were made for Americans, who have the buying power to buy them.
The American full sized trucks are getting some strong competition from Japan's Toyota and Nissan compact trucks though.
Old categories: US muscle cars vs Asian tuners vs European exotics
New category: Electrics
Yup. Ford, Chebby, etc make cars for the US market. Of course it would be great if there was a greater demand for US produced cars in Europe, but you have to always remember your core customer base.
-
You seem to be stuck on some ideal that you have in your mind and can't see beyond that.
That is exactly why I decided to not go any farther with him in this conversation. He doesn’t seem to realize that once he gets something stuck in his mind there is no talking to him rationally. I finally figured out the signs that he is stuck on something and no amount of trying to talk to him will get either of us any where. And he told me that my not wanting to go through all of that BS with him, “nonsense”.
-
That is exactly why I decided to not go any farther with him in this conversation. He doesn’t seem to realize that once he gets something stuck in his mind there is no talking to him rationally. I finally figured out the signs that he is stuck on something and no amount of trying to talk to him will get either of us any where. And he told me that my not wanting to go through all of that BS with him, “nonsense”.
Yeah. I see it too. Just pointing out some things that I’ve noticed and hope he gets. Like I said before, he reminds me a lot of one of my best friends. Argues and argues and argues. Once you start getting the better of him, deflect and goes off on some tangent, which he does a lot. I too have told myself ignore him and he’ll get bored and go away. Just he posts stuff that are just so :rolleyes: worth that I find myself responding.
-
Yup. Ford, Chebby, etc make cars for the US market. Of course it would be great if there was a greater demand for US produced cars in Europe, but you have to always remember your core customer base.
This is exactly why Ford and GM has design studios in those countries they want to sell cars in such as the countries in Europe. American cars are designed by Americans while the cars marketed in Europe are designed over there. Though a lot of that has been changing over the years as Ford has been selling some models designed for the European market here with some changes. And GM has been marketing some Korean cars here and in Europe.
-
Yeah. I see it too. Just pointing out some things that I’ve noticed and hope he gets. Like I said before, he reminds me a lot of one of my best friends. Argues and argues and argues. Once you start getting the better of him, deflect and goes off on some tangent, which he does a lot. I too have told myself ignore him and he’ll get bored and go away. Just he posts stuff that are just so :rolleyes: worth that I find myself responding.
I agree. In the case of this thread he asked some legit questions and I was happy to answer them for him. And I would have been happy to continue but as soon as I saw the telltale sign I knew it was time to stop.
-
I agree. In the case of this thread he asked some legit questions and I was happy to answer them for him. And I would have been happy to continue but as soon as I saw the telltale sign I knew it was time to stop.
He freely admits he doesn't understand the subject matter, but won't do the work to learn. He wants to play hypothetical mind games, in hopes he can hook someone into playing with him.
If he used that game to become more educated on international trade and markets, maybe the effort would be worth it. But if he can't get motivated enough to learn on his own, nothing we say is going to derail his argumentative trolling.
-
I am no where near educated on these issues, but I at least try to understand the basics so that I can 1) determine if someone is shoveling the BS (aka talking out of their a$$) and 2) evaluate proposals by the Trump administration as well as any other proposals. I try to research from multiple sources to try and see if different perspectives can help understand from an unbiased perspective. I've even found coverage by CNN insightful as I am aware of their bias going in and can ask myself questions to look up facts on other sources. Like mentioned previously, this stuff is SUPER complex and many times the effectiveness of a policy is not fully realized until many years after going into effect and the market adjusts/compensates.
-
I am no where near educated on these issues, but I at least try to understand the basics so that I can 1) determine if someone is shoveling the BS (aka talking out of their a$$) and 2) evaluate proposals by the Trump administration as well as any other proposals. I try to research from multiple sources to try and see if different perspectives can help understand from an unbiased perspective. I've even found coverage by CNN insightful as I am aware of their bias going in and can ask myself questions to look up facts on other sources. Like mentioned previously, this stuff is SUPER complex and many times the effectiveness of a policy is not fully realized until many years after going into effect and the market adjusts/compensates.
Knowing what you don't know is the first step toward understanding, not just learning the facts.
EEF, on the other hand, wants to pretend "if we build it, they will come." Ford could build the fastest, cheapest, most fuel-efficient car ever, and it would still not be allowed in many markets. It would devastate the local auto companies. That's something their government can't allow. Protectionist policies are not a US invention.
Nope. If that were true, the US auto makers would rule the planet. Instead, Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Acura and Nissan/Infinity have been selling like hotcakes for years in the US, even with high US tariffs and limits on the number of units imported.
Markets are all different in terms of cost, infrastructure for distribution, transportation options to ship vehicles in/out, and competition with both public and private products. Our auto makers are basically controlled by the unions, who in turn control certain politicians, who in turn control certain aspects of trade law and treaties/agreements.
-
I am no where near educated on these issues, but I at least try to understand the basics so that I can 1) determine if someone is shoveling the BS (aka talking out of their a$$) and 2) evaluate proposals by the Trump administration as well as any other proposals. I try to research from multiple sources to try and see if different perspectives can help understand from an unbiased perspective. I've even found coverage by CNN insightful as I am aware of their bias going in and can ask myself questions to look up facts on other sources. Like mentioned previously, this stuff is SUPER complex and many times the effectiveness of a policy is not fully realized until many years after going into effect and the market adjusts/compensates.
I think the really hard thing for the average news consumer is that you can find two economic experts who will look at a set of facts and give two very different accounts of what they mean. The liberals will believe the one that validates their side and the conservatives will believe the one that validates theirs. Then they will point fingers about how the other side is biased and act as if their expert disproves the other. Any person really trying to digest and understand the situation is left with trying to decipher which one is right and then being called a Trump supporter or gullible liberal for not immediately choosing a side.
Many other topics are easier to digest but things like foreign trade, as you point out, are not.
-
EEF, on the other hand, wants to pretend "if we build it, they will come." Ford could build the fastest, cheapest, most fuel-efficient car ever, and it would still not be allowed in many markets. It would devastate the local auto companies. That's something their government can't allow. Protectionist policies are not a US invention.
I never said that. Please don't mischaracterize my statements.
-
Uhh, well that is what the US market has to deal with, companies in other countries receiving subsidies. That's the point. . .
Well, you can have your vision of what "free trade" is. That's not how the real world market works. I guess in an truly ideal world, it could happen, but that's not the reality of life. You seem to be stuck on some ideal that you have in your mind and can't see beyond that.
Like I said, what Trump is doing isn't free trade. Trump said he wanted free trade and he is doing the opposite.
I never said I was a hard liner on free trade though. Whether it is a good idea or not and whether it is realistic or not is a separate and reasonable discussion though.
I understand the logic being put forth to justify rejecting a free trade offer for cars, I just don't agree with it. I think we will have to agree to disagree there unless we want to have a battle of the experts.
-
1) Knowing what you don't know is the first step toward understanding, not just learning the facts.
EEF, on the other hand, wants to pretend "if we build it, they will come." Ford could build the fastest, cheapest, most fuel-efficient car ever, and it would still not be allowed in many markets. It would devastate the local auto companies. That's something their government can't allow. Protectionist policies are not a US invention.
Nope. If that were true, the US auto makers would rule the planet. Instead, Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Acura and Nissan/Infinity have been selling like hotcakes for years in the US, even with high US tariffs and limits on the number of units imported.
2) Markets are all different in terms of cost, infrastructure for distribution, transportation options to ship vehicles in/out, and competition with both public and private products. Our auto makers are basically controlled by the unions, who in turn control certain politicians, who in turn control certain aspects of trade law and treaties/agreements.
1) Yup. That's something I say often. You (anyone really, including me) don't know what you don't know. That's particularly true for this subject as well as firearms as well. Folks who are new to stuff start learning and are absolutely sure they have things right based one what X said or what Y thought. So many folks don't take the time to think for themselves. Yeah, it's tough to get to the signal through the abundance of noise, but such is life.
2) Those are also the legal aspects of trade to consider. Again, I'm not an expert, but there are so many thing that affect the market. I would say unions are on the fringes of being legal in that regard. Just my impression. . . not fact.
-
I never said that. Please don't mischaracterize my statements.
So, when you said:
I never said that we don't have any popular car options, only that a lot of the cars produced are not the type Europeans want.
... you didn't mean [ if we produce the type Europeans want, we'd be more competitive ] ?
If not, then tell me where I misstated what you said. If that's not what you meant, then you need to learn to express yourself more directly. When you say, "The reason X is unsuccessful is Y", it logically implies "If we alter Y, we have a better chance of succeeding at X."
-
Like I said, what Trump is doing isn't free trade. Trump said he wanted free trade and he is doing the opposite.
I never said I was a hard liner on free trade though. Whether it is a good idea or not and whether it is realistic or not is a separate and reasonable discussion though.
I understand the logic being put forth to justify rejecting a free trade offer for cars, I just don't agree with it. I think we will have to agree to disagree there unless we want to have a battle of the experts.
I've said it 1000 times, and I'll say it again:
Trump supporters are less concerned with what Trump says than what he does.
Trump haters are less concerned with what Trump does than what he says.
You're going off on what Trump said. You want to argue about what free trade really means when you don't really know the definitions.
We know which group you're in. Don't even try to deny it.
-
I've said it 1000 times, and I'll say it again:
Trump supporters are less concerned with what Trump says than what he does.
Trump haters are less concerned with what Trump does than what he says.
You're going off on what Trump said. You want to argue about what free trade really means when you don't really know the definitions.
We know which group you're in. Don't even try to deny it.
Ok, I am sorry, I didn't realize that you were chosen as the representative for what Trump supporters think.
What Trump says matters, his job is basically to talk and occasionally sign a document. You can pretend that when he lies, threatens, and says various other stupid things, that it doesn't matter but it does. It matters when our allies don't know whether to trust our president, it matters when Trump says things that make the greatest nation in the world look like it is being led by a buffoon.
I will leave it there because obviously we are going to have to agree to disagree.
I am in the group of conservatives who choose conservative values instead of blowing whichever way Trump blows.
-
So, when you said:
... you didn't mean [ if we produce the type Europeans want, we'd be more competitive ] ?
If not, then tell me where I misstated what you said. If that's not what you meant, then you need to learn to express yourself more directly. When you say, "The reason X is unsuccessful is Y", it logically implies "If we alter Y, we have a better chance of succeeding at X."
I don't need to say anything. You quote me and it shows how I didn't say what you are suggesting I said.
I don't know how in your mind pointing out that a lot of our models are not what Europeans want is somehow saying "if we build it they will come"
-
I don't need to say anything. You quote me and it shows how I didn't say what you are suggesting I said.
I don't know how in your mind pointing out that a lot of our models are not what Europeans want is somehow saying "if we build it they will come"
I forgot. The mind of a Liberal isn't logical.
Enough said.
-
I forgot. The mind of a Liberal isn't logical.
Enough said.
I'll take your dodge as a concession.
Thanks