The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichael Hudson Archive
A Travesty of Protectionism
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_519971380

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Trump’s series of threats this week was a one-two punch. First, he threatened to impose national security tariffs on steel and aluminum, primarily against Canada and Mexico (along with Korea and Japan). Then, he suggested an alternative: He would exempt these countries IF they agree to certain U.S. demands.

But these demands make so little economic sense that they should be viewed as an exercise in what academia used to call power politics. Or in Trump’s world, Us versus Them, a zero-sum game in which he has to show that America wins, they lose.

It won’t work. Trump’s diplomatic ploy with Mexico is to say that he’ll be willing to exempt them from the steel and aluminum tariffs if they agree to (1) build the wall that he promised to make them build, and (2) give other special favors to the United States. He can then go to American voters and say, “See, we won; Mexico lost.”

This is unlikely to elicit a Mexican surrender. Its president already has said that building a wall makes no sense, and cancelled the planned diplomatic visit to Washington last week. Giving in to Trump’s election promise to American voters (or more to the point, indulging in his own ego trip about the wall) would be political suicide. Trump would crow that he made Mexico bow to his bidding.

Matters aren’t much better in Canada. While some Pennsylvania and Ohio steel companies probably will try to make Trump look good by hiring back a few hundred workers if and when the tariffs are announced, Canada and other suppliers employees would have to be laid off. Canadian resentment already has been building up for decades, ever since the auto agreement of the 1960s and ‘70s that favored U.S. suppliers.

But the real economic problem comes from within the United States itself. If new steel workers are hired, they may be laid off in a few months. Most important is the bigger economy-wide picture: The Chamber of Commerce and other groups have calculated that the loss of jobs in steel- and aluminum-using industries will far outnumber the new hiring of steel and aluminum workers.

NPR on Wednesday had a maker of beer kegs explain that if the cost of steel goes up, he can’t afford to match the prices of foreign keg manufacturers who buy their raw materials cheaper – and do NOT have tariffs raised on higher manufactures.

There are many good arguments for protectionism. These arguments are in fact much better than the free-trade patter talk used to indoctrinate college economics students. Of all the branches of today’s mainstream economics, free-trade theory is the most unrealistic. If it were realistic, Britain, the United States and Germany never would have risen to world industrial power. (I review the fallacies of free-trade theory in Trade, Development and Foreign Debt.)

Economic history provides a long and successful pedigree of good arguments for protective tariffs. Britain created its empire by protectionism, stifling manufactures in the United States as long as it pursued free trade. After the Civil War ended, America built up its industry and agriculture by protectionism, as did Germany and France. (I discuss the strategy in America’s Protectionist Takeoff: 1815-1914.)

But as each of these nations became world leaders, they sought to pull up the ladder and prevent other countries from protecting their own industry and agriculture. So they changed to “free trade imperialism.” The aim of industrial leaders is to convince other countries not to regulate or plan their own markets, but to let the United States engineer an asymmetrical trade policy whose aim is to make other countries dependent on its food exports and monopoly exports, while opening their markets to U.S. companies.

Since the 1920s the protectionist economies that came to support free trade have rewritten history to white out how they got rich. The strategy of protectionism has been forgotten. Trump’s so-called protective tariffs against steel and aluminum are the antithesis to every principle of protectionism. That is why they are so self-destructive.

A really nationalistic trade strategy is to buy raw materials cheaply, and sell finished manufactured goods at a high value-added price.

The idea of industrial protectionism, from British free trade in the 19th century to U.S. trade strategy in the 20th century, was to obtain raw materials in the cheapest places – by making other countries compete to supply them – and protect your high-technology manufactures where the major capital investment, profits and monopoly rents are.

Trump is doing the reverse: He’s increasing the cost of steel and aluminum raw materials inputs. This will squeeze the profits of industrial companies using steel and aluminum – without protecting their markets.

In fact, other countries are now able to legally raise their tariffs to protect their highest-technology sectors that might be most threatened by U.S. exports. Harley Davidson motorcycles have been singled out. They also can block U.S. monopoly exports, such as bourbon and Levi blue jeans, or pharmaceuticals. Or, China can block whatever U.S. technology it decides it wants to compete with.

Trump’s tariff threats caused short-term aluminum prices to jump by 40 percent, and steel prices by about 33 percent. This raises the price of these materials to U.S. manufacturers, squeezing their profits. Foreign manufacturers will not have their material prices increased, and so can out-compete with U.S. steel- or aluminum-using rivals. The global oversupply in fact may make the price of steel and aluminum decline in foreign markets. So foreign industry will gain a cost advantage.

On top of that, foreign countries can legally raise tariffs in their own markets – for whatever industries they deem will best gain from this advantage.

Trump’s tariffs will not induce new capital investment in steel or aluminum

America’s logic behind protective tariffs after the Civil War ended the Southern free-trade policies was that tariff protection would create a price umbrella enabling U.S. manufacturers to invest in plant and equipment. Britain already had made these sunk costs, so the United States had to include the cost of capital in its revenue.

That’s how America built up its steel industry, chemical industry and other manufacturing industries.

But no steel or aluminum company is likely to invest more or hire more U.S. labor as a result of higher tariff revenues. These companies may raise their prices, but neither investment nor trickle-down effects are likely.

For one thing, aluminum is made out of electricity, and America is a high-cost producer. Alcan – America’s largest supplier – has a rip-off deal with Iceland, getting electricity almost for nothing.

For steel, it takes a long time to build a modern steel mill. No company will do this without an assured market. Trump’s tariff increases do not guarantee that.

America’s policy of breaking international agreements (we’re the “indispensable nation”)

ORDER IT NOW

Few companies, labor groups or banks in New York City have been willing to trust Mr. Trump in recent years. He should have called his book “The Art of BREAKING THE deal.” That’s how he made his money. He would sign an agreement with suppliers to his hotels or other buildings, and then offer only 80 cents (or less) on the dollar. He’d tell them, in effect: “You want to sue? That will cost you $50,000 to get into court, and then wait three or four years, by which time we’ll have made enough money to pay you on the cheap.”

Bank lenders had as much trouble getting paid as did Trump’s hapless suppliers. He made his fortune this way – so successfully that he seems to believe that he can use the same strategy in international diplomacy, just as he’s threatening to break the Iran agreement.

Will this work? Or are foreign economies coming to view the United States as “not agreement-capable”? In fact, will U.S. companies themselves believe that agreements signed today will still be honored tomorrow?

Trump’s national security ploy to bypass Congressional authority over trade policy

This is not the first time the United States has raised tariffs unilaterally. George W. Bush did it. And my 1979 book, Global Fracture, describes U.S. protectionism in the 1970s against other countries. America did it again and again.

But Trump has introduced some new twists. First of all, former U.S. protectionism had Congressional backing. But Trump has bypassed Congress, no doubt aware that steel-using and aluminum-using industries can mobilize Congressional support against Trump.

So Trump has used the one play available to the Executive Branch: the National Security umbrella. In a great mind-expansion exercise, he claims that it would be a loss of national security to depend on neighboring Canada, Mexico, or allies such as South Korea and Japan for steel and aluminum. If he can convince a kangaroo trade court, this loophole is indeed allowed under WTO rules (GATT Article XXI). The idea was to apply to times of war or other great crisis. But U.S. steel and aluminum production has been steady for over a decade, and there seems to be no military or economic crisis affecting national security.

Suppose Trump gets away with it. Other countries can play this “national security” game. Any economic activity can be deemed national security, because every economy is an overall system, with every given part affecting all the others. So Trump has opened the door for overall asymmetrical jockeying for position. The most likely arena may be high-technology and military-related sectors.

Back in the 1980s this was called “Uncle Sucker” patter talk – acting as if the United States was the exploited party, not the exploiting actor in international trade and investment. Ultimately at issue is how much policy asymmetry the rest of the world is willing to tolerate. Can the United States still push other countries around as it has done for so many years? How far can America push its one-sided agreements before other countries break away?

Each foreign country threatened with loss of steel or aluminum exports has a more high-tech industry that it would like to protect against U.S. competition. The response is likely to be asymmetrical.

And here at home, how long will higher manufacturing industries back Mr. Trump and his policy that makes a travesty of “smart” protectionism?

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: Donald Trump, Free Trade 
Hide 82 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Interesting take–perhaps the first piece I’ve seen on this which opposes the actions on grounds other than demented free trade worship (or Trump derangement syndrome).

    The most damning indictment you’ve made of these tariffs is that they do nothing on “virtual” steel and aluminum imports. Really seems like protectionism needs to be part of an overall national development plan. Perhaps Ross and Navarro are developing such a plan?

    I always thought a logical place to start on protectionism is automobiles. It’s a final product, the US has massive capacity (unlike e.g. aluminum), and the production base is concentrated in the Midwest (important for political reasons). Trump has talked of this before, so perhaps it will happen.

    Some of your stuff is just leftist sour grapes–thinking it’s somehow wrong to use power to give yourself an advantage. In fact this is the whole fucking point of statecraft.

    With respect to Mexico for instance…why not just threaten to destroy Mexico City if they don’t pay for the wall? What are they going to do about it? Similarly, we could adopt comprehensive protection against Mexico while forcing them to accept all our trade goods. In fact this was the basis of US foreign policy in the early 20th century during the period of “Dollar Diplomacy”.

    Obviously we can’t and shouldn’t use such tactics against Europe, China, Germany, Japan, etc. but Mexico? They’re not capable of organizing any kind of effective response against us. Same goes for every other country in Latin America bar maybe Brazil, Argentina, and Chile.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Mexico would probably make overtures to Russia, China, etc. They would threaten to host Russian or Chinese military bases and nuclear missiles right on America's doorstep.
    , @kemerd
    Threatening to destroy Mexico city? That would be killing golden egg laying chicken for nothing. US elites have tremendous wealth resulting from outsourcing their production to Mexico and using Mexican workers to suppress wages in the US. Any such move would force Mexico to stop this.

    Besides, US is still the top dog but not invincible. Unless you mean nuking the country, the Mexicans can also retaliate in kind. And, I am pretty sure they would start to seek a security partner the same day. No need to say, Russians and Chinese would be happy to oblige.

    Third, the US image of the leader of free world would be gone for good along with its influence in Europe, Korea, and Japan in that order. So, bye bye to military bases in those countries. Not that it was true for any moment but such an act would alienate everyone, including Canadians.

    So, a better solution would be perhaps to stop talking about the wall; the people would forget it eventually.
    , @ThatDamnGood

    With respect to Mexico for instance…why not just threaten to destroy Mexico City if they don’t pay for the wall? What are they going to do about it?
     
    This is an American alright!!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Sounds like Hudson also got the Trump Derangement Syndrome. Hard to explain this schizophrenic article otherwise. In one sentence he tells us protectionism is great, in the other he says Trump’s tariff is not real protectionism. Some of the other arguments against the tariff are also weird – he says other nations can retaliate – but isn’t the problem exactly that other nations such as China and Europe have crucial tariffs against the US that result in lopsided trade balances?

    We’ll see how all this develops.

    Read More
    • Agree: Z-man, Tim Howells
    • Replies: @kemerd
    I think you should read the article once more. There is no inconsistency at all. It basically says that protection is indeed good but not necessarily all types of protection and Trump chose the wrong type.
    , @Wally
    Indeed, if "protectionism" & tariffs are so bad then why do so many other countries do exactly that against the US?

    'Free trade' is not free trade if the other side stacks the deck in their favor.

    Hudson says:
    " Other countries can play this “national security” game. Any economic activity can be deemed national security, because every economy is an overall system, with every given part affecting all the others."

    "Can play"? They already do.

    Hudson is a Marxist, simple as that. Hardly an economic expert.

    It's time for the US to stop being suckers, from trade, immigration, to carrying parasite Israel.

    more:
    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/03/on_trade_trump_is_acting_in_the_best_interest_of_the_usa.html
    and:
    How China steals secrets from U.S. companies
    http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/14/news/economy/trump-china-trade-intellectual-property/index.html

    , @Alfa158
    You're right, other countries are the ones in a position to lose in any trade war.
    Hudson also suffers from the disconnection from reality common to leftists. These people are wondrously incurious about anything that might interfere with their beliefs. He talks about other countries retaliating by punishing US exports of Levi jeans and Harley-Davidsons. Has Hudson purchased any Levi's lately? None of them are made in the US. He reminds me of some of his fellow leftists who produced a segment on Cuban baseball prior to relations being loosened up. They were bemoaning the the pitiable fact that the two teams had to share the same set of baseball gloves because of the US not trading with Cuba, apparently not realizing that there are zero baseball gloves produced in the US.
    What is the dollar volume of Harley-Davidson exports to Japan versus Japanese motorcycle exports to the US? Has he bothered looking up those numbers and seeing which country would suffer the most from a trade war? What about technology exports to China? Does he mean all those televisions, computers and mobile phones pouring out of US factories into the Chinese market? Or maybe all the home appliances we ship to Korea? Or is he referring to Airbus airliners? Or the General Electric power turbines that the Chinese require have the technology transferred to China so they can be produced there? Or the Boeing airliner wings that have to be made in China in order to sell planes there? Most of the technology the Chinese are importing is the Intellectual Property they buy steal or finagle, not the products themselves.
    The current trade situation is the opposite of the classical theories. The US, the supposedly advanced country exports raw materials like timber and wheat and imports advanced manufactured products. Countries like China even explicitly ban the US exporting the timber as finished product like lumber or plywood, it has to go as logs. If reality is the opposite of your theory then you might want to consider revising your theory, at least that is how science works.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Protectionist tariffs are logical to allow a country to develop its economy and industrial base or to protect a country from predatory trade, but not to protect and enable an extractionist segment of the population (elites are not the only ones who “extract”).

    The policy of the US bleeding itself to enrich the financial “elites” cannot continue, but Trump’s tariffs may not be the best way (and may not even be used in the manner that some fear).

    People do not talk about it much, but the free trade movement gathered a lot of its strength from a sense in the public that organized labor was “extracting” more than it logical share from the economy. The problem, especially for controlled economies, is that no one has yet been able to define “logical share” to the satisfaction of the bulk of the population.

    The US solution has been (more so in the past) to “pay” more than market rates for labor by making promises against the future that most intelligent people know cannot be fulfilled. Those bills are coming due.

    “If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.” – H. Stein

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    "People do not talk about it much, but the free trade movement gathered a lot of its strength from a sense in the public that organized labor was “extracting” more than it logical share from the economy. The problem, especially for controlled economies, is that no one has yet been able to define “logical share” to the satisfaction of the bulk of the population." [Emphasis mine.]

    Yep, af, agree 100%. In my legacy industrial area, most older folks recall numerous examples of organized labor overreaching, the boasting about wages by some semi-skilled workers that set people's teeth on edge, the routine bleating by union leaders that even extraordinary wage and benefit gains were not yet enough, and outright criminal labor practices.

    The few business leaders I know seem to regard the "logical share" of the economy that labor is entitled to is the minimum wage, or thereabouts. University professors and skilled trades workers at barely $30 thousand a year. Small-unit retail managers that made maybe $20 thousand a year in the 1990s now making about the same, but with a significantly increased work load. Seems to me the "solution" is as bad as the problem, but some local employers are actually able to hire at these very low wages and salaries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Back in the 1980s this was called “Uncle Sucker” patter talk – acting as if the United States was the exploited party, not the exploiting actor in international trade and investment. Ultimately at issue is how much policy asymmetry the rest of the world is willing to tolerate. Can the United States still push other countries around as it has done for so many years? How far can America push its one-sided agreements before other countries break away?

    This gets back to the argument as to whether the use of the US dollar as the keystone unit of international trade was an “exorbitant privilege” or an “exorbitant burden”. To the extent that we used the dollar to enjoy “the good life”, it was a privilege, to the extent we used it to destroy our small businesses and farms, and bloat the population with unassimilable immigrant labor, it will be a burden that destroys our Republic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Using the dollar as a reserve currency was a boon to our elites and a burden for everyone else.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. nickels says:

    Trump is doing the reverse: He’s increasing the cost of steel and aluminum raw materials inputs.

    This was exactly my first thought.
    Its all about making sure value added occurs in your own country.
    Perhaps there is some amount of value added to steel during its processing?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    Value is added in processing of course--you're starting out with iron and ending up with an alloy that is harder and less brittle.

    Of course, many steels are simply commodities. Mild sheet steel, rebar, etc....whatever. These products are still important for the reason Trump states ("without steel you don't have a country!") of course.

    But other steels are sophisticated, high technology products. Take ZDP-189--an incredible powdered steel that's exceptionally hard yet unbrittle used to make machine tools and knives. AND it's stainless, which usually reduces hardness compared to alternatives. Not so with ZDP-189.

    ZDP-189 is made by Hitachi in Japan. I don't believe there is a competing product from outside of Japan at all, though other Japanese firms have competing products.

    America is somewhat competitive in high tech steel alloys, but unfortunately not as competitive as the usual suspects (Japan, South Korea, Europe). Tariffs can definitely help here, but as Hudson notes it needs to be a long-term commitment.

    One option is to try industrial policy on the supply side. South Korea's Heavy-Chemical Industry drive succeeded in rapidly creating modern steel and chemistry sectors and reduced input costs for downstream industries.

    The USA traditionally is hands-off on industrial policy, but we do have some models with World War 2 (Defense Plant Corporation) and the Cold War.
    , @Anonymous
    It's sort of like what the Soviets did. They subsidized lots of steel production, but they had few final goods to put the steel in.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. freebird says:

    This article is nothing but elite globalist rubbish.

    http://inthesetimes.com/article/16895/subsidized_steel_is_ruining_us_industry

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stein
    You mean the article you link to
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. @nickels

    Trump is doing the reverse: He’s increasing the cost of steel and aluminum raw materials inputs.

     

    This was exactly my first thought.
    Its all about making sure value added occurs in your own country.
    Perhaps there is some amount of value added to steel during its processing?

    Value is added in processing of course–you’re starting out with iron and ending up with an alloy that is harder and less brittle.

    Of course, many steels are simply commodities. Mild sheet steel, rebar, etc….whatever. These products are still important for the reason Trump states (“without steel you don’t have a country!”) of course.

    But other steels are sophisticated, high technology products. Take ZDP-189–an incredible powdered steel that’s exceptionally hard yet unbrittle used to make machine tools and knives. AND it’s stainless, which usually reduces hardness compared to alternatives. Not so with ZDP-189.

    ZDP-189 is made by Hitachi in Japan. I don’t believe there is a competing product from outside of Japan at all, though other Japanese firms have competing products.

    America is somewhat competitive in high tech steel alloys, but unfortunately not as competitive as the usual suspects (Japan, South Korea, Europe). Tariffs can definitely help here, but as Hudson notes it needs to be a long-term commitment.

    One option is to try industrial policy on the supply side. South Korea’s Heavy-Chemical Industry drive succeeded in rapidly creating modern steel and chemistry sectors and reduced input costs for downstream industries.

    The USA traditionally is hands-off on industrial policy, but we do have some models with World War 2 (Defense Plant Corporation) and the Cold War.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I don't think you read the article. These tariffs could theoretically help shield our domestic industries if done right, but it will cripple our export sectors.

    How are we supposed to force our domestic suppliers into investing into modern steel mills and R&D when they could just invest in stock buy backs?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Renoman says:

    Just once I’d like to meet a rich economist. Whenever someone tries to tell me about money I ask them if they are rich, 98% say no. I don’t want to talk to those guys. Trump is rich, he may be an arse but he’s a rich arse, I’d like to let him steer the boat for a while, the people doing it for the last 30 years have made very few people rich and that is the big problem. Time to tack boys we’re getting headed like mad over here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    Richard Thaler, the most recent Bank of Sweden Prize winner (note: it's not a Nobel Prize), is rich.

    He puts his money where his mouth is and applies his ideas to asset management: https://www.fullerthaler.com/

    But in general you're right--most economists are not rich.

    Paul Krugman's stock market call after Trump's victory was particularly embarrassing.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @Renoman
    Just once I'd like to meet a rich economist. Whenever someone tries to tell me about money I ask them if they are rich, 98% say no. I don't want to talk to those guys. Trump is rich, he may be an arse but he's a rich arse, I'd like to let him steer the boat for a while, the people doing it for the last 30 years have made very few people rich and that is the big problem. Time to tack boys we're getting headed like mad over here.

    Richard Thaler, the most recent Bank of Sweden Prize winner (note: it’s not a Nobel Prize), is rich.

    He puts his money where his mouth is and applies his ideas to asset management: https://www.fullerthaler.com/

    But in general you’re right–most economists are not rich.

    Paul Krugman’s stock market call after Trump’s victory was particularly embarrassing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    Interesting take--perhaps the first piece I've seen on this which opposes the actions on grounds other than demented free trade worship (or Trump derangement syndrome).

    The most damning indictment you've made of these tariffs is that they do nothing on "virtual" steel and aluminum imports. Really seems like protectionism needs to be part of an overall national development plan. Perhaps Ross and Navarro are developing such a plan?

    I always thought a logical place to start on protectionism is automobiles. It's a final product, the US has massive capacity (unlike e.g. aluminum), and the production base is concentrated in the Midwest (important for political reasons). Trump has talked of this before, so perhaps it will happen.

    Some of your stuff is just leftist sour grapes--thinking it's somehow wrong to use power to give yourself an advantage. In fact this is the whole fucking point of statecraft.

    With respect to Mexico for instance...why not just threaten to destroy Mexico City if they don't pay for the wall? What are they going to do about it? Similarly, we could adopt comprehensive protection against Mexico while forcing them to accept all our trade goods. In fact this was the basis of US foreign policy in the early 20th century during the period of "Dollar Diplomacy".

    Obviously we can't and shouldn't use such tactics against Europe, China, Germany, Japan, etc. but Mexico? They're not capable of organizing any kind of effective response against us. Same goes for every other country in Latin America bar maybe Brazil, Argentina, and Chile.

    Mexico would probably make overtures to Russia, China, etc. They would threaten to host Russian or Chinese military bases and nuclear missiles right on America’s doorstep.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    Geography means that we can stop that, and neither Russia nor China can do anything about it.

    And over time we could develop working agreements with China (and other industrial countries) to discuss how inferior nations should be handled.

    There's no reason whatsoever brown and black countries (India and Iran exempted) should be allowed to manage their own trade policies.

    And prior to 1914, the world really did work this way. Weak states had "unequal treaties" imposed on them. China even had a Briton heading up its customs office.

    Latin America and the Caribbean clearly in the American sphere influence, though I don't believe it's worth trying to impose upon Brazil or the Southern Cone. Perhaps cut a deal with these countries to allow their trade goods in tariff free throughout the Americas south of the Rio Grande as well.

    And of course it goes without saying that Canada should be annexed, with Quebec made an independent protectorate.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @nickels

    Trump is doing the reverse: He’s increasing the cost of steel and aluminum raw materials inputs.

     

    This was exactly my first thought.
    Its all about making sure value added occurs in your own country.
    Perhaps there is some amount of value added to steel during its processing?

    It’s sort of like what the Soviets did. They subsidized lots of steel production, but they had few final goods to put the steel in.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Anonymous
    Mexico would probably make overtures to Russia, China, etc. They would threaten to host Russian or Chinese military bases and nuclear missiles right on America's doorstep.

    Geography means that we can stop that, and neither Russia nor China can do anything about it.

    And over time we could develop working agreements with China (and other industrial countries) to discuss how inferior nations should be handled.

    There’s no reason whatsoever brown and black countries (India and Iran exempted) should be allowed to manage their own trade policies.

    And prior to 1914, the world really did work this way. Weak states had “unequal treaties” imposed on them. China even had a Briton heading up its customs office.

    Latin America and the Caribbean clearly in the American sphere influence, though I don’t believe it’s worth trying to impose upon Brazil or the Southern Cone. Perhaps cut a deal with these countries to allow their trade goods in tariff free throughout the Americas south of the Rio Grande as well.

    And of course it goes without saying that Canada should be annexed, with Quebec made an independent protectorate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    So we are going to annex Canada and a bunch of other nonsense? You should find an easier thread to hop onto.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    There’s no reason whatsoever brown and black countries (India and Iran exempted) should be allowed to manage their own trade policies...

    Latin America and the Caribbean clearly in the American sphere influence...

     

    Lothrop Stoddard lives!

    https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348801220l/672061.jpg

    And of course it goes without saying that Canada should be annexed...
     
    "Goes without saying", indeed-- you're the first one who's said it in decades.

    Problem is, there are two very large constituencies that would oppose such a deal. One of them is Canadians. The other, Americans.

    Maybe Canada can annex Greenland and Iceland? There was some talk in recent years of them taking in some small Anglophone Caribbean island nation.
    , @jacques sheete

    And over time we could develop working agreements with China (and other industrial countries) to discuss how inferior nations should be handled.
     
    We have yet to figure out how to handle the morally and financially inferior nation, the one with the most colossal public debt ever known to man, and the most inferior, stupid, grifting leadership (Hillary and the line up of simpleton loser Republikkan goons as potential leaders? You kidding me?) in history, the good 'ol US of A.

    Maybe China could help us out of our atavistic stupidity, but I doubt it; it's a corrupt cesspool beyond redemption. Trump himself admitted publicly that America was no longer great, and that the swamp needed to be drained.

    If Mr. Showtime thinks he can stem the slide to oblivion, he's as bad as the rest. I will, however, applaud him to eternity for making monkeys out of the rest and pissing them off as well. I wish him godspeed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    We weren’t able to prevent Cuba from hosting Soviet missiles.

    In the 1910s, Germany funded and armed Mexico and tried to incite a war between Mexico and the US. Germany also proposed a military alliance with Mexico against the US and offered the American Southwest to Mexico in return.

    Powerful states do not “handle” weaker states in concert. Powerful states contend against each other in concert with various weaker states. Prior to 1914, powerful states contended against each other by going around the world and incorporating weaker states into their empires.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson


    We weren’t able to prevent Cuba from hosting Soviet missiles.
     
    In fact we were.


    In the 1910s, Germany funded and armed Mexico and tried to incite a war between Mexico and the US. Germany also proposed a military alliance with Mexico against the US and offered the American Southwest to Mexico in return.
     
    And how did that turn out?

    Powerful states do not “handle” weaker states in concert. Powerful states contend against each other in concert with various weaker states. Prior to 1914, powerful states contended against each other by going around the world and incorporating weaker states into their empires.
     
    On this you're on the money.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Anonymous
    We weren't able to prevent Cuba from hosting Soviet missiles.

    In the 1910s, Germany funded and armed Mexico and tried to incite a war between Mexico and the US. Germany also proposed a military alliance with Mexico against the US and offered the American Southwest to Mexico in return.

    Powerful states do not "handle" weaker states in concert. Powerful states contend against each other in concert with various weaker states. Prior to 1914, powerful states contended against each other by going around the world and incorporating weaker states into their empires.

    We weren’t able to prevent Cuba from hosting Soviet missiles.

    In fact we were.

    In the 1910s, Germany funded and armed Mexico and tried to incite a war between Mexico and the US. Germany also proposed a military alliance with Mexico against the US and offered the American Southwest to Mexico in return.

    And how did that turn out?

    Powerful states do not “handle” weaker states in concert. Powerful states contend against each other in concert with various weaker states. Prior to 1914, powerful states contended against each other by going around the world and incorporating weaker states into their empires.

    On this you’re on the money.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Thank you Donald T for this magnificent gesture against Brexit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. For steel, it takes a long time to build a modern steel mill. No company will do this without an assured market. Trump’s tariff increases do not guarantee that.

     
    The American steel industry opted to drop out of the world market back in the 60′s when it refused to invest in the next generation of steel making equipment that other countries were doing. Two,almost brand new steel plants, on the Delaware river in Penna. were just about abandoned and thousands lost jobs due to this decision. American steel has not been competitively priced for fifty years.
    Trump should look up the history of our own failure to invest and compete for a clearer picture of why things are as they are today.

    https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/12/07/now-as-then-glitter-

    astounds-the-primitive-soul/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. I looked up the per-capita steel production figures, and the top dogs include the absolute industrial behemoths of the planet: Korea (#1 shipbuilder!), Taiwan, Czech Republic, Japan, China, Germany (European powerhouse), and then the US.

    https://qz.com/214223/south-korea-consumes-more-steel-per-capita-than-china-and-japan-combined/

    Trump is right – steel is special – steel is the building block of the modern world. Steel means skyscrapers, tanks, trains, automobiles.

    As Hudson said, calculated protectionism and tariffs have a history of success.

    So I’m 100% on board with Trump on this one. This is one of his greater achievements. This is one of the vindications of the crowd that said that Trump’s economics were superior to Hillary’s. (In addition to his cultural and foreign policies.)

    It’s a good day for America and the world. Limited strategic tariffs are healthy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. kemerd says:
    @jimbojones
    Sounds like Hudson also got the Trump Derangement Syndrome. Hard to explain this schizophrenic article otherwise. In one sentence he tells us protectionism is great, in the other he says Trump's tariff is not real protectionism. Some of the other arguments against the tariff are also weird - he says other nations can retaliate - but isn't the problem exactly that other nations such as China and Europe have crucial tariffs against the US that result in lopsided trade balances?

    We'll see how all this develops.

    I think you should read the article once more. There is no inconsistency at all. It basically says that protection is indeed good but not necessarily all types of protection and Trump chose the wrong type.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jimbojones
    That's my point - how come steel protectionism is bad other than because Trump chose it?

    The argument presented against steel protectionism does not hold water, given that the current great industrial powers of the world - Japan, Korea, China and Germany, are all steel-producing powerhouses. Steel is not a raw material as such. Steel is the building block of an industrial economy.

    The American steel tariffs of the late 19th century are a textbook example of how tariffs are supposed to work.

    Hudson is not stupid. The only reasonable explanation for his schizophrenic arguments I can think of is the Trump Derangement Syndrome. The same syndrome befell poor Webster Tarpley back in 2016. Wonder what he's saying now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. kemerd says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    Interesting take--perhaps the first piece I've seen on this which opposes the actions on grounds other than demented free trade worship (or Trump derangement syndrome).

    The most damning indictment you've made of these tariffs is that they do nothing on "virtual" steel and aluminum imports. Really seems like protectionism needs to be part of an overall national development plan. Perhaps Ross and Navarro are developing such a plan?

    I always thought a logical place to start on protectionism is automobiles. It's a final product, the US has massive capacity (unlike e.g. aluminum), and the production base is concentrated in the Midwest (important for political reasons). Trump has talked of this before, so perhaps it will happen.

    Some of your stuff is just leftist sour grapes--thinking it's somehow wrong to use power to give yourself an advantage. In fact this is the whole fucking point of statecraft.

    With respect to Mexico for instance...why not just threaten to destroy Mexico City if they don't pay for the wall? What are they going to do about it? Similarly, we could adopt comprehensive protection against Mexico while forcing them to accept all our trade goods. In fact this was the basis of US foreign policy in the early 20th century during the period of "Dollar Diplomacy".

    Obviously we can't and shouldn't use such tactics against Europe, China, Germany, Japan, etc. but Mexico? They're not capable of organizing any kind of effective response against us. Same goes for every other country in Latin America bar maybe Brazil, Argentina, and Chile.

    Threatening to destroy Mexico city? That would be killing golden egg laying chicken for nothing. US elites have tremendous wealth resulting from outsourcing their production to Mexico and using Mexican workers to suppress wages in the US. Any such move would force Mexico to stop this.

    Besides, US is still the top dog but not invincible. Unless you mean nuking the country, the Mexicans can also retaliate in kind. And, I am pretty sure they would start to seek a security partner the same day. No need to say, Russians and Chinese would be happy to oblige.

    Third, the US image of the leader of free world would be gone for good along with its influence in Europe, Korea, and Japan in that order. So, bye bye to military bases in those countries. Not that it was true for any moment but such an act would alienate everyone, including Canadians.

    So, a better solution would be perhaps to stop talking about the wall; the people would forget it eventually.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lars Porsena

    No need to say, Russians and Chinese would be happy to oblige.
     
    Neither one would make it across the pacific without interdiction.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Towel Ban says:

    Steel and aluminum aren’t raw materials, iron ore and Bauxite are the raw materials that go into those final products. Steel and aluminum are ultimately manufactured goods and therefore the Steel Mills and aluminum smelting plants, which are industrial plants, need to be protected.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @another fred

    Back in the 1980s this was called “Uncle Sucker” patter talk – acting as if the United States was the exploited party, not the exploiting actor in international trade and investment. Ultimately at issue is how much policy asymmetry the rest of the world is willing to tolerate. Can the United States still push other countries around as it has done for so many years? How far can America push its one-sided agreements before other countries break away?
     
    This gets back to the argument as to whether the use of the US dollar as the keystone unit of international trade was an "exorbitant privilege" or an "exorbitant burden". To the extent that we used the dollar to enjoy "the good life", it was a privilege, to the extent we used it to destroy our small businesses and farms, and bloat the population with unassimilable immigrant labor, it will be a burden that destroys our Republic.

    Using the dollar as a reserve currency was a boon to our elites and a burden for everyone else.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    Value is added in processing of course--you're starting out with iron and ending up with an alloy that is harder and less brittle.

    Of course, many steels are simply commodities. Mild sheet steel, rebar, etc....whatever. These products are still important for the reason Trump states ("without steel you don't have a country!") of course.

    But other steels are sophisticated, high technology products. Take ZDP-189--an incredible powdered steel that's exceptionally hard yet unbrittle used to make machine tools and knives. AND it's stainless, which usually reduces hardness compared to alternatives. Not so with ZDP-189.

    ZDP-189 is made by Hitachi in Japan. I don't believe there is a competing product from outside of Japan at all, though other Japanese firms have competing products.

    America is somewhat competitive in high tech steel alloys, but unfortunately not as competitive as the usual suspects (Japan, South Korea, Europe). Tariffs can definitely help here, but as Hudson notes it needs to be a long-term commitment.

    One option is to try industrial policy on the supply side. South Korea's Heavy-Chemical Industry drive succeeded in rapidly creating modern steel and chemistry sectors and reduced input costs for downstream industries.

    The USA traditionally is hands-off on industrial policy, but we do have some models with World War 2 (Defense Plant Corporation) and the Cold War.

    I don’t think you read the article. These tariffs could theoretically help shield our domestic industries if done right, but it will cripple our export sectors.

    How are we supposed to force our domestic suppliers into investing into modern steel mills and R&D when they could just invest in stock buy backs?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    Geography means that we can stop that, and neither Russia nor China can do anything about it.

    And over time we could develop working agreements with China (and other industrial countries) to discuss how inferior nations should be handled.

    There's no reason whatsoever brown and black countries (India and Iran exempted) should be allowed to manage their own trade policies.

    And prior to 1914, the world really did work this way. Weak states had "unequal treaties" imposed on them. China even had a Briton heading up its customs office.

    Latin America and the Caribbean clearly in the American sphere influence, though I don't believe it's worth trying to impose upon Brazil or the Southern Cone. Perhaps cut a deal with these countries to allow their trade goods in tariff free throughout the Americas south of the Rio Grande as well.

    And of course it goes without saying that Canada should be annexed, with Quebec made an independent protectorate.

    So we are going to annex Canada and a bunch of other nonsense? You should find an easier thread to hop onto.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Wally says:
    @jimbojones
    Sounds like Hudson also got the Trump Derangement Syndrome. Hard to explain this schizophrenic article otherwise. In one sentence he tells us protectionism is great, in the other he says Trump's tariff is not real protectionism. Some of the other arguments against the tariff are also weird - he says other nations can retaliate - but isn't the problem exactly that other nations such as China and Europe have crucial tariffs against the US that result in lopsided trade balances?

    We'll see how all this develops.

    Indeed, if “protectionism” & tariffs are so bad then why do so many other countries do exactly that against the US?

    ‘Free trade’ is not free trade if the other side stacks the deck in their favor.

    Hudson says:
    ” Other countries can play this “national security” game. Any economic activity can be deemed national security, because every economy is an overall system, with every given part affecting all the others.”

    “Can play”? They already do.

    Hudson is a Marxist, simple as that. Hardly an economic expert.

    It’s time for the US to stop being suckers, from trade, immigration, to carrying parasite Israel.

    more:

    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/03/on_trade_trump_is_acting_in_the_best_interest_of_the_usa.html

    and:
    How China steals secrets from U.S. companies

    http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/14/news/economy/trump-china-trade-intellectual-property/index.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. WHAT says:

    Israeli wall somehow works though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. @Thorfinnsson
    Interesting take--perhaps the first piece I've seen on this which opposes the actions on grounds other than demented free trade worship (or Trump derangement syndrome).

    The most damning indictment you've made of these tariffs is that they do nothing on "virtual" steel and aluminum imports. Really seems like protectionism needs to be part of an overall national development plan. Perhaps Ross and Navarro are developing such a plan?

    I always thought a logical place to start on protectionism is automobiles. It's a final product, the US has massive capacity (unlike e.g. aluminum), and the production base is concentrated in the Midwest (important for political reasons). Trump has talked of this before, so perhaps it will happen.

    Some of your stuff is just leftist sour grapes--thinking it's somehow wrong to use power to give yourself an advantage. In fact this is the whole fucking point of statecraft.

    With respect to Mexico for instance...why not just threaten to destroy Mexico City if they don't pay for the wall? What are they going to do about it? Similarly, we could adopt comprehensive protection against Mexico while forcing them to accept all our trade goods. In fact this was the basis of US foreign policy in the early 20th century during the period of "Dollar Diplomacy".

    Obviously we can't and shouldn't use such tactics against Europe, China, Germany, Japan, etc. but Mexico? They're not capable of organizing any kind of effective response against us. Same goes for every other country in Latin America bar maybe Brazil, Argentina, and Chile.

    With respect to Mexico for instance…why not just threaten to destroy Mexico City if they don’t pay for the wall? What are they going to do about it?

    This is an American alright!!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. JackOH says:
    @another fred
    Protectionist tariffs are logical to allow a country to develop its economy and industrial base or to protect a country from predatory trade, but not to protect and enable an extractionist segment of the population (elites are not the only ones who "extract").

    The policy of the US bleeding itself to enrich the financial "elites" cannot continue, but Trump's tariffs may not be the best way (and may not even be used in the manner that some fear).

    People do not talk about it much, but the free trade movement gathered a lot of its strength from a sense in the public that organized labor was "extracting" more than it logical share from the economy. The problem, especially for controlled economies, is that no one has yet been able to define "logical share" to the satisfaction of the bulk of the population.

    The US solution has been (more so in the past) to "pay" more than market rates for labor by making promises against the future that most intelligent people know cannot be fulfilled. Those bills are coming due.

    "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop." - H. Stein

    “People do not talk about it much, but the free trade movement gathered a lot of its strength from a sense in the public that organized labor was “extracting” more than it logical share from the economy. The problem, especially for controlled economies, is that no one has yet been able to define “logical share” to the satisfaction of the bulk of the population.” [Emphasis mine.]

    Yep, af, agree 100%. In my legacy industrial area, most older folks recall numerous examples of organized labor overreaching, the boasting about wages by some semi-skilled workers that set people’s teeth on edge, the routine bleating by union leaders that even extraordinary wage and benefit gains were not yet enough, and outright criminal labor practices.

    The few business leaders I know seem to regard the “logical share” of the economy that labor is entitled to is the minimum wage, or thereabouts. University professors and skilled trades workers at barely $30 thousand a year. Small-unit retail managers that made maybe $20 thousand a year in the 1990s now making about the same, but with a significantly increased work load. Seems to me the “solution” is as bad as the problem, but some local employers are actually able to hire at these very low wages and salaries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Watson says:

    Even the AFL-CIO gave a statement strongly in favor of Trump’s tariffs. Imagine that, a liberal-dominated institution strongly favoring a Trump policy:

    “”For years, we have called attention to the predatory practices of some steel exporting countries. Such practices hurt working people and cheat companies that produce in the U.S. We applaud the administration’s efforts today to fix this problem.”

    Some steel exporting countries.

    Context: China produces 53% of the world’s aluminum and 49% of the world’s steel. (There was a time when most of the world’s aluminum came from Rhodesia, before that nation was destroyed.) Is half the world’s steel located in China? Of course not, it’s spread across the world. But their government finances the mining so they can dump prices in order to bankrupt Western steel producers. And they cut costs to a level where they every year have mines caving in and killing people.

    The AFL-CIO knows this. Everyone knows this. Politicians who pretend not to know are simply traitors, and that’s not an exaggeration.

    There’s a nationalist issue here aside from saving business for economic reasons. And that’s this: Control of production = control of policy. Example: Nations are afraid of officially recognizing that Taiwan is a country because they don’t want to lose trade with China.

    China knows that production is power, so they demand that those who export to China have to build factories … in China. Where they are easily controlled in future confrontations. (And also give jobs to Chinese.) How about we demand the same? “No, that would be a blow against free trade! Except when China does it!”

    For liberals and cuckservatives who want to oppose Trump, this tariff policy would be a very foolish hill to die on. It’s much like the Black players who refuse to stand for the flag: Trump identified an issue where he can win easily.

    ***

    Prediction: Come the mid-term elections, no Democrat will be talking about this. Not one of them will stand before voters and say he wants to abolish the anti-dumping tariffs. And no Republican either, and that is a big change.

    The voters will have seen how happy steel workers are. United Steelworks has been asking for these anti-dumping tariffs for thirty years – they asked the Democrats, “their” party, but the Dems did nothing. Entire towns were devastated. People will see factories re-opened, workers smiling.

    And steel, metal, is a special industry. People are proud to have it back. You could make entire election videos only showing steel being poured in re-opened factories.

    The president of United Steelworks says the dumping wasn’t done by China alone, but by South Korea, India, Russia and Vietnam. They could do it, favor their own industries with government assistance, because Washington did nothing to respond.

    I hope someone asks George Bush about this. Preferably the next time he grumbles about Trump. He had eight years to do this, and it would have brought jobs for the country and voters for the GOP. And he did nothing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. free trade makes sense when you have huge economy output.

    protectionism makes sense when a country is building it’s economy.

    I think trump thinks usa needs to rebuild it’s economy = protectionism.

    usa is #2 in ppp. #1 in gdp.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. Carymar says:

    Free trade is a myth. It’s very hard to get actual data on what few barriers we have now and what much larger barriers our “trading partners” have against our goods being sold in their country. This “free trade is the only way” mantra is the narrative we have heard for 60 years that few even question. We need some trusted research to tell us what effects tariffs would have since there would be a trade-off between higher prices (possibly) and a better wage ( now stagnant) for our workers. I know it’s not simple, but what we are doing now is not working very well as can be seen in the wealth gap. How about a Mirror policy where our tarrifs mirror what tarrifs we face when trading with eg. China?
    Cary

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. Joe Hide says:

    To Michael Hudson,
    You don’t understand the Big Game. You are writing about little games that are the tactics as though they are of prime importance and strategic, and missing the importance of the long term, multi-decade Main Strategies. Oh well, generally I like Your writing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. Alfa158 says:
    @jimbojones
    Sounds like Hudson also got the Trump Derangement Syndrome. Hard to explain this schizophrenic article otherwise. In one sentence he tells us protectionism is great, in the other he says Trump's tariff is not real protectionism. Some of the other arguments against the tariff are also weird - he says other nations can retaliate - but isn't the problem exactly that other nations such as China and Europe have crucial tariffs against the US that result in lopsided trade balances?

    We'll see how all this develops.

    You’re right, other countries are the ones in a position to lose in any trade war.
    Hudson also suffers from the disconnection from reality common to leftists. These people are wondrously incurious about anything that might interfere with their beliefs. He talks about other countries retaliating by punishing US exports of Levi jeans and Harley-Davidsons. Has Hudson purchased any Levi’s lately? None of them are made in the US. He reminds me of some of his fellow leftists who produced a segment on Cuban baseball prior to relations being loosened up. They were bemoaning the the pitiable fact that the two teams had to share the same set of baseball gloves because of the US not trading with Cuba, apparently not realizing that there are zero baseball gloves produced in the US.
    What is the dollar volume of Harley-Davidson exports to Japan versus Japanese motorcycle exports to the US? Has he bothered looking up those numbers and seeing which country would suffer the most from a trade war? What about technology exports to China? Does he mean all those televisions, computers and mobile phones pouring out of US factories into the Chinese market? Or maybe all the home appliances we ship to Korea? Or is he referring to Airbus airliners? Or the General Electric power turbines that the Chinese require have the technology transferred to China so they can be produced there? Or the Boeing airliner wings that have to be made in China in order to sell planes there? Most of the technology the Chinese are importing is the Intellectual Property they buy steal or finagle, not the products themselves.
    The current trade situation is the opposite of the classical theories. The US, the supposedly advanced country exports raw materials like timber and wheat and imports advanced manufactured products. Countries like China even explicitly ban the US exporting the timber as finished product like lumber or plywood, it has to go as logs. If reality is the opposite of your theory then you might want to consider revising your theory, at least that is how science works.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    If reality is the opposite of your theory then you might want to consider revising your theory,
     
    good points all

    only his reality is not based on theory, rather, (like all leftists) it's based on ideology.

    he's motivated by a deep-seated desire to see the American middle class die.

    that he's worried about the fortunes of

    (((US exports of Levi jeans and Harley-Davidsons))) or bourbon ((Seagram))

    may give us all a glimmer into why

    became an active Trotskyist trade unionist

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hudson_(economist)
    , @Philip Owen
    Boeing making WINGS in China? That is suicide. Any other partitions airframe, Yes but not the wings, landing gear or engines. Those make a plane. Better not to sell the machines than handover the wings.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. gwynedd1 says:

    Free trade does not belong in a conversation about China. They engage in merchantalism. They have also leveraged their human capital in an interesting way. I guess they figured they can spend them via poor health. By not having to worry about externalities , they are competitive indeed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. Rurik says:

    Tariffs are a way for the federal government to fund itself at the direct expense of foreign governments and foreign corporations, and to the direct benefit of the American people.

    Which is opposite to how our government has been set up of late, where everything is calculated to benefit foreign governments and corporations at the direct expense of the American citizen.

    The screeching that you’re hearing over the tariff debate are all those interests, foreign ((and domestic)) that like the situation the way it is, where the American working and middle classes are being eviscerated to the direct benefit of foreign governments, people and corporations.

    In its most benign form, this is simply corporate greed and foreign government hegemony on the part multinationals and healthy, nationalistic governments. It makes sense for them to want to peddle their products in the world’s largest market on the cheap, and on the backs of the American worker, for whom they may harbor no malice, but it’s just business.

    But there is also a more sinister motivation, and that is due to the several billion people on the planet who hate the American people’s guts with a netherworld passion, and love nothing more than to see them languish and die off.

    Look at how the people of Libya or Iraq or Iran must feel about the American people?!

    Look at how the people of Lebanon or Jordan or Egypt, for instance must feel about America- and by extension her citizens. America has berated and scolded and moralized at the rest of the world’s governments for their human rights abuses, (as it runs a torture camp, and drones weddings)

    America demands others practice democracy or else, so long as they always elect people who zio-America likes. Egypt was fine under the zio-quisling and super-corrupt Mubarak as far as hypocrite America was concerned, and when Egypt finally practices holy democracy, and elects a leader, and then it turns out that ZUSA doesn’t approve, so it jails the leader and installs another zio-puppet.

    Look at Ukraine, and their “democratically held elections” to replace the pro-Russian government there. “Yatz is our guy”.

    from top to bottom the ZUSA has been a diabolical thug and bully on the world’s stage. Mass-murdering at will. Destroying entire nations as it cackles its giddy gloating for savagely lynching a better leader than all the presidents of recent memory.

    So, there are literally billions of people who, for no other reason than an (understandable) hatred for the ZUSA- and everything it stands for, to want it to die! And to help it die, they want it crushed economically by China and everyone else, and by waging a trade war with the ZUS, where they don’t fight back, is one powerful way to kill the ZUSA once and for all.

    It was pointed out recently by some commenter here that the reason illegal aliens ER bills (EBT cards, section 8 housing, etc…) are paid by the tax-slave/health insurance customer, is because when those things are paid by the tax-slave, that means they don’t have to be paid by the employer, and so the employer can pay less wages and benefits. It’s a way of bolstering the fortunes of the 1% donor class, and passing the buck down to the tax-paying wage earner in the ZUS.

    And this has been the trend for decades now- ‘fuck over the working and middle class to benefit the immigrants, (who work for slave wages) and the corporate executives’, (whose income have reached unprecedented heights vis-a-vis the dying middle class).

    The corporate executives love this way of doing business because they get fantastically wealthy off the loss of the American middle class, the immigrants love it because they came from shitholes, the ZUS ((fecal government)) loves it because they hate (white) America’s guts more than even the people of Donbas or Iran do, and billions of people all over the planet like the idea because they also hate what America has done or is doing to their nations and lands, and stupidly blame the American people, rather than the demons running the ZUS American government. Who are the enemy of all people everywhere, (except Israel ; )

    So there you have it. Protectionism is good for the middle and working classes of America, but not for the corporations and the rest of the world. And since no one has given a rip about the American working and middle class for a very, very long time – (indeed, quite the contrary), now that there’s finally a man in the White House who at least pretends to care about the ‘forgotten man’, there is bound to be a lot of screeching going on.

    ‘how dare you protect the American middle class!!!!’ “They’re racists and war criminals!!!! They deserve to starve and die!!!!! We want to crush them under a Chinese and developing world of karmic justice for all the humiliations we suffered for hundreds of years!!!!! ‘Down with the American middle class!!!! Down with America!!!!!

    I get it. I really do.

    But what people don’t understand is that all the atrocities and enormities that the ZUS government have perpetrated all over the planet, are not the act of the American steel worker.

    they did not decide to bomb Iran

    he did not destroy Libya

    rather these people (the American working and middle class) have been systematically crushed under the same boot of corporate greed and Zionist hatred that so many other have suffered as well.

    And to see a president in the White House, who, for the first time in my lifetime- at least pretends! to care about them, is astonishing beyond belief, (if true)

    Imagine if he also feels that we don’t need anymore to destroy all of Israel’s enemies (the entire planet). Imagine if he also feels differently about an eternal occupation of Afghanistan for the purposes of destroying hundreds of millions of lives with opioids?

    Imagine if, by changing direction on the destruction of the American middle class, that he’s also committed to ending the destruction of other nations and ways of life, and just imagine…

    that for the first time in all of our lifetimes, that we have a man in the White House who isn’t a stooge of the forces of evil. Imagine that for the first time (in all of our lifetimes), that we have a man in the White House who isn’t willing to serve the Fiend. Who won’t try to harm the American working class, but who won’t also try to harm S. America or the Middle East or Russia.

    I know, I know.. It’s preposterous. ‘If he’s in the White House, then he must be a sack of shit serving the ((Beast))’. But I cling to hope still, (since we still haven’t gone to war with Iran or Russia), that this guy is possibly different. Because if he cares about the American middle class (who they’ve been trying to destroy for decades if not longer), then perhaps he may care about your people as well, at least enough not to send young American boys and girls over to your lands to die while killing your people.

    Perhaps through some miracle, there is today- a man in the White House with his soul intact.

    Read More
    • Agree: anarchyst
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. Rurik says:

    oops

    they did not decide to bomb Iran

    I meant ‘they did not decide to bomb Iraq’

    sorry, didn’t edit in time

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. Don’t forget that the original EU model was a large internal market protected by a high tariff wall. That worked very well until the free trade ideology of the 1980s was rammed down the throats of Europe’s reluctant leaders by the US, using Thatcher as a trojan horse. Thus, the more the US backs away from free trade, the better it is for the EU.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    The EU average tarriff on industrial goods is 1.8%. Practically Free Trade.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I think before judging Trump we need to know what he hopes to accomplish by imposing tariffs. Benefits do exist but they are not without risk.

    I don’t think this is a “Trumpian gamble” as some have liked to frame it.

    In regards to Mexico, I consider it a worthless country. Mexico and Mexicans should rejoice and drop to their knees thanking Most High for having us as a neighbor. They benefit tremendously. We gain nothing. Seriously. What is Mexico good for? Vacation, Corona, tequila, and tacos?

    We should go way beyond tariffs with Mexico. Complete surrender should be our goal. Leverage them into submission.

    Drugs are pouring into our country from Mexico. It’s awful and needs to be stopped. How we stop it is subject to debate but preferably fast, painful and brutally would be best. Mexico is a serious threat to our national health. It needs to be dealt with immediately. The wall is just a first step. Massive security apparatus, a shoot to kill policy for anyone attempting by tunnel or boat or whatever trying to breach our borders. Maybe drop a few bombs too.

    How about for every drug dealer we catch from Mexico we drop a bomb on the country? Same thing for Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. Cuba. Let those so attached to their original countries feel the consequence for degrading ours.

    This is power politics. This is America first.

    Read More
    • Troll: Rurik
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. Rurik says:

    The Chamber of Commerce and other groups have calculated

    LOL!

    the Chamber of Commerce (and The Economist and George Will) and all the other rotten, anti-’American-worker’ liars and enemies can eat the steel worker’s shit.

    NPR on Wednesday..

    you gotta be fucking kidding me
    that’s all you have to read

    eat (American working class) shit Michael Hudson

    the Chamber of Commerce and NPR are and have been the outspoken enemies of the American worker for decades. And you have the rancid nads to use them as if they had credibility in this debate?!

    the only question for assholes like this is…

    are they stupid or corrupt?

    is this guy a paid shill, lying for shekels?

    or is he dumb as a box of rocks?

    sadly, it’s the former.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. Rurik says:
    @Alfa158
    You're right, other countries are the ones in a position to lose in any trade war.
    Hudson also suffers from the disconnection from reality common to leftists. These people are wondrously incurious about anything that might interfere with their beliefs. He talks about other countries retaliating by punishing US exports of Levi jeans and Harley-Davidsons. Has Hudson purchased any Levi's lately? None of them are made in the US. He reminds me of some of his fellow leftists who produced a segment on Cuban baseball prior to relations being loosened up. They were bemoaning the the pitiable fact that the two teams had to share the same set of baseball gloves because of the US not trading with Cuba, apparently not realizing that there are zero baseball gloves produced in the US.
    What is the dollar volume of Harley-Davidson exports to Japan versus Japanese motorcycle exports to the US? Has he bothered looking up those numbers and seeing which country would suffer the most from a trade war? What about technology exports to China? Does he mean all those televisions, computers and mobile phones pouring out of US factories into the Chinese market? Or maybe all the home appliances we ship to Korea? Or is he referring to Airbus airliners? Or the General Electric power turbines that the Chinese require have the technology transferred to China so they can be produced there? Or the Boeing airliner wings that have to be made in China in order to sell planes there? Most of the technology the Chinese are importing is the Intellectual Property they buy steal or finagle, not the products themselves.
    The current trade situation is the opposite of the classical theories. The US, the supposedly advanced country exports raw materials like timber and wheat and imports advanced manufactured products. Countries like China even explicitly ban the US exporting the timber as finished product like lumber or plywood, it has to go as logs. If reality is the opposite of your theory then you might want to consider revising your theory, at least that is how science works.

    If reality is the opposite of your theory then you might want to consider revising your theory,

    good points all

    only his reality is not based on theory, rather, (like all leftists) it’s based on ideology.

    he’s motivated by a deep-seated desire to see the American middle class die.

    that he’s worried about the fortunes of

    (((US exports of Levi jeans and Harley-Davidsons))) or bourbon ((Seagram))

    may give us all a glimmer into why

    became an active Trotskyist trade unionist

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hudson_(economist)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
    In order to enforce the tariffs, money must be confiscated from the middle and working class stiffs.

    Let us look at the middle class / working class stiffs of one American company, American Keg, of Pottstown Pennsylvania. The company has 20 employees and it operates a factory in Pennsylvania. The company claims that it is the last American manufacturer of steel beer kegs. In fact, on the face page of its website, the company boasts:

    American Keg Company is the ONLY steel beer keg manufacturer in the United States of America. Our American craftsmen manufacture the highest quality 1/2 BBL and 1/6 BBL kegs, with pride, for the American Craft Brewer, Cider Maker, and Vintner from domestically sourced 304 stainless steel.

    Although it imports kegs from China and other countries, it has devoted itself to manufacturing its own kegs right here in the good ole Zio-USA. The company asserts that the steel tariff will hurt it because it purchases raw steel from US manufacturers while it purchases the finished product from the Chi-coms. There is no tariff on finished beer kegs. Trump's tariff is on raw steel.

    Nobody, not even the most rabid of Trump cheerleaders, would deny that there are far many more times the number of jobs in steel consuming industries than there are in the steel manufacturing industry. This morning, I read that for every job in the steel making industry, there are 46 in the steel consuming industries.

    Let us not forget the GWB steel tariff disaster of 2002. How many hundreds of thousands of jobs lost does it take before we realize that tariffs are not the answer? Why should American consumers and businesses, inclusive of which are millions of middle and working class folks, subsidize big steel?

    Human nature dictates that we compete, not whine for more communist, Fabian, Hamiltonian (so glad he got offed by Burr), Lincolnesque, Maoist, progressive, Rooseveltian, and socialist measures.





    Once again, why should any person who is on the alt-right / dissident right / paleo-conservative / paleo-libertarian / preservation and protection of western civilization spectrum repose any confidence, faith, and trust in the very same entity that sees fit to nation build, erect empire, and genuflect to Zionist design?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Hudson repeats the tale of Trump’s failure to pay up with the banksters. Oh those poor bank lenders. The thing with propaganda and story telling is that it really makes no sense at all and isn’t how things happened but it sure sounds reasonable and is simple enough to understand: Trump reneged on his promises. Simple enough to understand by the bill paying slaves across America anyway, but Trump belongs to the Ruling Class. If he didn’t, the rulers never would have selected him as president.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Harley-Davidison is America’s highest technology? I thought Faceplant, Schlitter, Coggle and Amapentazon were higher. Exceptional, protectionist and insidiously patriotic. Get high!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. @Rurik

    If reality is the opposite of your theory then you might want to consider revising your theory,
     
    good points all

    only his reality is not based on theory, rather, (like all leftists) it's based on ideology.

    he's motivated by a deep-seated desire to see the American middle class die.

    that he's worried about the fortunes of

    (((US exports of Levi jeans and Harley-Davidsons))) or bourbon ((Seagram))

    may give us all a glimmer into why

    became an active Trotskyist trade unionist

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hudson_(economist)

    In order to enforce the tariffs, money must be confiscated from the middle and working class stiffs.

    Let us look at the middle class / working class stiffs of one American company, American Keg, of Pottstown Pennsylvania. The company has 20 employees and it operates a factory in Pennsylvania. The company claims that it is the last American manufacturer of steel beer kegs. In fact, on the face page of its website, the company boasts:

    American Keg Company is the ONLY steel beer keg manufacturer in the United States of America. Our American craftsmen manufacture the highest quality 1/2 BBL and 1/6 BBL kegs, with pride, for the American Craft Brewer, Cider Maker, and Vintner from domestically sourced 304 stainless steel.

    Although it imports kegs from China and other countries, it has devoted itself to manufacturing its own kegs right here in the good ole Zio-USA. The company asserts that the steel tariff will hurt it because it purchases raw steel from US manufacturers while it purchases the finished product from the Chi-coms. There is no tariff on finished beer kegs. Trump’s tariff is on raw steel.

    Nobody, not even the most rabid of Trump cheerleaders, would deny that there are far many more times the number of jobs in steel consuming industries than there are in the steel manufacturing industry. This morning, I read that for every job in the steel making industry, there are 46 in the steel consuming industries.

    Let us not forget the GWB steel tariff disaster of 2002. How many hundreds of thousands of jobs lost does it take before we realize that tariffs are not the answer? Why should American consumers and businesses, inclusive of which are millions of middle and working class folks, subsidize big steel?

    Human nature dictates that we compete, not whine for more communist, Fabian, Hamiltonian (so glad he got offed by Burr), Lincolnesque, Maoist, progressive, Rooseveltian, and socialist measures.

    Once again, why should any person who is on the alt-right / dissident right / paleo-conservative / paleo-libertarian / preservation and protection of western civilization spectrum repose any confidence, faith, and trust in the very same entity that sees fit to nation build, erect empire, and genuflect to Zionist design?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Because they want to see hedge fundies, private equity and defense contractors swindle every penny from the slaves. Every slave moron shouts communism to protect master. Sad.
    , @Rurik

    In order to enforce the tariffs, money must be confiscated from the middle and working class stiffs.
     
    bullshit

    they may pay a little more for their imports, but that is a price the working class stiffs would be happy to pay in order to have a job.


    Nobody, not even the most rabid of Trump cheerleaders, would deny that there are far many more times the number of jobs in steel consuming industries than there are in the steel manufacturing industry.
     
    yea, so what?

    if you're an American corporation that uses steel or aluminum for production, why would you buy your steel from China at a discount when you can pay a little more for American steel? Unless you're blinded by greed and so short-sighted that you can't see or understand the long-term implications?

    Whenever I can, I go to local, 'Mom and Pop' shops, grocery or hardware stores, and always seek to patronize the small, non-corporate greedy mega-corporations,whenever can. Sure I pay a little more, but the long term reasons and motivations for doing so allow me to sleep like a baby at night.


    Why should American consumers and businesses, inclusive of which are millions of middle and working class folks, subsidize big steel?
     
    for the same reason we should want our Navy fighter jets or nuclear submarines built here in the US, rather than China, where I'm sure it'd be cheaper.

    Human nature dictates that we compete, not whine...
     
    how would you like to compete with a Chinaman (no offense intended) for your manufacturing job, eh?

    in China they make about $2 an hour in manufacturing. (at least according to a quick search)

    now with your 'compete' theory, what that means is 'in and out'sourcing until Americans are at parity with the Chinese. This is good for the Chinese, and good for the greedy corporations, and good for all the billions of people who hate America and American's guts with a netherworld passion, but it is not good for the working class American, who will, (and has) seen his wages founder, and will continue to do so as long as 'free trade' plagues him and his family.

    To the Champaign toasts of the Chinese and 1%


    Once again, why should any person who is on the alt-right / dissident right / paleo-conservative / paleo-libertarian / preservation and protection of western civilization spectrum repose any confidence, faith, and trust in the very same entity that sees fit to nation build, erect empire, and genuflect to Zionist design?
     
    because what is the alternative?

    when Germany's government, such as it was at the end of WWI, signed away the German people into slavery, it did so because the only other alternative was mass-starvation, until every German man, woman and child was dead.

    I'd rather have Donald Trump signing trade agreements on behalf of the ZUS over Xi Jinping.

    I'd rather have Donald Trump signing trade agreements on behalf of the US citizen over Enrique Peña Nieto.

    If not Donald Trump, then who would you trust as an alternative to represent the American worker and economy? Kim Jong-un?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Liberty Mike
    In order to enforce the tariffs, money must be confiscated from the middle and working class stiffs.

    Let us look at the middle class / working class stiffs of one American company, American Keg, of Pottstown Pennsylvania. The company has 20 employees and it operates a factory in Pennsylvania. The company claims that it is the last American manufacturer of steel beer kegs. In fact, on the face page of its website, the company boasts:

    American Keg Company is the ONLY steel beer keg manufacturer in the United States of America. Our American craftsmen manufacture the highest quality 1/2 BBL and 1/6 BBL kegs, with pride, for the American Craft Brewer, Cider Maker, and Vintner from domestically sourced 304 stainless steel.

    Although it imports kegs from China and other countries, it has devoted itself to manufacturing its own kegs right here in the good ole Zio-USA. The company asserts that the steel tariff will hurt it because it purchases raw steel from US manufacturers while it purchases the finished product from the Chi-coms. There is no tariff on finished beer kegs. Trump's tariff is on raw steel.

    Nobody, not even the most rabid of Trump cheerleaders, would deny that there are far many more times the number of jobs in steel consuming industries than there are in the steel manufacturing industry. This morning, I read that for every job in the steel making industry, there are 46 in the steel consuming industries.

    Let us not forget the GWB steel tariff disaster of 2002. How many hundreds of thousands of jobs lost does it take before we realize that tariffs are not the answer? Why should American consumers and businesses, inclusive of which are millions of middle and working class folks, subsidize big steel?

    Human nature dictates that we compete, not whine for more communist, Fabian, Hamiltonian (so glad he got offed by Burr), Lincolnesque, Maoist, progressive, Rooseveltian, and socialist measures.





    Once again, why should any person who is on the alt-right / dissident right / paleo-conservative / paleo-libertarian / preservation and protection of western civilization spectrum repose any confidence, faith, and trust in the very same entity that sees fit to nation build, erect empire, and genuflect to Zionist design?

    Because they want to see hedge fundies, private equity and defense contractors swindle every penny from the slaves. Every slave moron shouts communism to protect master. Sad.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
    What part of subsidizing steel manufacturers is the slave shouting communism don't you get?

    Compete. Compete. Compete. Don't whine to bid daddy government for protection.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. anarchyst says:

    We have never had “free trade”. Foreign governments place trade restrictions on U S products while freely shipping us their products. The “Value Added Taxes” that many countries impose are a way for foreign governments to “protect” their industries. Most people are unaware that “value added taxes” are rebated upon export, while imports are slapped with the “value added tax”.
    Another way is government regulation on imports. When a Japanese auto company wishes to sell cars in the USA, they submit each model for testing in a U S laboratory which certifies each respective model as meeting U S safety and emissions requirements. They are then free to import as many cars as they want. If an American car company wishes to import cars into Japan, EACH INDIVIDUAL CAR has to be “tested”. Japan does not have a “certification system” (only applies to imported vehicles) and requires each car rolling off the ship to be individually “inspected”. This is the method Japan uses to keep out imports.
    For an economy to truly prosper, consumers (employees, workers) have to be part of the equation. What good are “cheap goods” when you have outsourced (offshored) your manufacturing capabilities? What is the difference between making 5 million dollars and keeping your USA-based workforce employed (and able to purchase your goods) and offshoring (and getting rid of your US workers) for another mere million in “profits”? Message to all you wall street types and banksters. UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS DO NOT MAKE GOOD CONSUMERS.
    Wall street types praise Wal-Mart for “keeping wages low and corporate profits high” while criticizing companies such as Costco for paying their employees decent wages (and still prospering handsomely).
    The same thing happened in the last century when Henry Ford paid his employees $5.00 per day (when the average wage was $1.50 per day). Of course, the same wall street and banksters howled that Henry Ford would destroy capitalism by paying his workers a decent wage. The OPPOSITE happened. Henry Ford CREATED a good portion of the “middle class” (of which the wall street types and banksters are presently destroying). Henry Ford (among others) KNEW who was behind wall street and the banksters, published his findings and was roundly (and unjustly) criticized for speaking the TRUTH. Radio priest Father Coughlin had the same message and was muzzled by the Catholic Church…WHY??
    We are at a “race to the bottom”. . .
    Business “schools”, wall street, banksters and politicians–there are many more of us than there are of you . . .
    As an aside, President Trump has the right idea. “Tit for tat” reciprocity is the only way to insure truly “free” and “fair” trade. “Tit for tat” trade policies keep everyone honest…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    What is the difference between making 5 million dollars and keeping your USA-based workforce employed (and able to purchase your goods) and offshoring (and getting rid of your US workers) for another mere million in “profits”?
     
    the difference is a million dollars!

    to a (globalist, internationalist) man or woman who couldn't give a flying fuck about the American worker, unless to despise them.

    Message to all you wall street types and banksters. UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS DO NOT MAKE GOOD CONSUMERS.
     
    the Wall Street types don't care either. They too despise fly-over, Red State America.

    No one has more contempt for Heritage America and the unemployed Americans than the rats at Goldman Sachs.

    Henry Ford CREATED a good portion of the “middle class” (of which the wall street types and banksters are presently destroying).
     
    and that's why ((they)) hate Henry Ford's guts

    and despise heroic men like Father Coughlin and others. Because Henry Ford and Father Coughlin were the best of the best. Honorable, intelligent, patriotic, heroic. And worst of all loved America and the American people.

    those demanding free trade, like Gary Cohn, despise with all their black hearts- Red State America, and want it stomped on economically and driven into abject despair. Ultimately replaced with a less 'white, Christian, gun-loving, freedom demanding, "racist" slave population.

    So why would someone like that want to protect American jobs?
    , @Anonymous
    Ford hired thugs and secret police to put the beat down on his workers. He was behind the times with his propaganda film work or he might have been able to avoid the violence he directed at his employees, breaking their will more peacefully the way the Nazis pulled their soldiers together for the work ahead.

    The press never reported the organized violence Ford used to control his empire. But by 1941 and the reaping of the war windfall he called off his Pinkerton goons and the workers were able to strike a deal. Most people who worked in their factories wouldn't be expected to live to their late 50s anyway dropping dead from years of exposure to toxicity. By the 1970s they were all dead anyway. The Ford Foundation, or CIA for short, managed perceptions, buried bodies and hid the core. An obsolete behemoth spasming in near bankruptcy.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. @Anonymous
    Because they want to see hedge fundies, private equity and defense contractors swindle every penny from the slaves. Every slave moron shouts communism to protect master. Sad.

    What part of subsidizing steel manufacturers is the slave shouting communism don’t you get?

    Compete. Compete. Compete. Don’t whine to bid daddy government for protection.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Hard to argue with a zombie. The filthy rich have relied on protectionism through every generation. High income professionals have their positions protected, it's free trade for everyone else. The poors are taxed shitless for their upward transfers, rich scum have no such need to compete.

    There is hope for some of the zombies though, they seem to be able to use their brains and understand things like stock buybacks which have gotten more coverage in their daily propaganda. They still wonder why those heroic vets keep bothering them for cash at the stop lights and can't get free money with a big house like they do.

    The US taxpayers could save over 75% of the current budget by one simple expedient -- Dump the Welfare Military. The military serves zero purpose other than to steal from the hard working taxpayers and give to the parasitic rich. All across the country the slaves, and the real slaves in prison must sacrifice their bodies for the complex.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. bjondo says:

    have to start somewhere . Trump did right.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. Rurik says:
    @Liberty Mike
    In order to enforce the tariffs, money must be confiscated from the middle and working class stiffs.

    Let us look at the middle class / working class stiffs of one American company, American Keg, of Pottstown Pennsylvania. The company has 20 employees and it operates a factory in Pennsylvania. The company claims that it is the last American manufacturer of steel beer kegs. In fact, on the face page of its website, the company boasts:

    American Keg Company is the ONLY steel beer keg manufacturer in the United States of America. Our American craftsmen manufacture the highest quality 1/2 BBL and 1/6 BBL kegs, with pride, for the American Craft Brewer, Cider Maker, and Vintner from domestically sourced 304 stainless steel.

    Although it imports kegs from China and other countries, it has devoted itself to manufacturing its own kegs right here in the good ole Zio-USA. The company asserts that the steel tariff will hurt it because it purchases raw steel from US manufacturers while it purchases the finished product from the Chi-coms. There is no tariff on finished beer kegs. Trump's tariff is on raw steel.

    Nobody, not even the most rabid of Trump cheerleaders, would deny that there are far many more times the number of jobs in steel consuming industries than there are in the steel manufacturing industry. This morning, I read that for every job in the steel making industry, there are 46 in the steel consuming industries.

    Let us not forget the GWB steel tariff disaster of 2002. How many hundreds of thousands of jobs lost does it take before we realize that tariffs are not the answer? Why should American consumers and businesses, inclusive of which are millions of middle and working class folks, subsidize big steel?

    Human nature dictates that we compete, not whine for more communist, Fabian, Hamiltonian (so glad he got offed by Burr), Lincolnesque, Maoist, progressive, Rooseveltian, and socialist measures.





    Once again, why should any person who is on the alt-right / dissident right / paleo-conservative / paleo-libertarian / preservation and protection of western civilization spectrum repose any confidence, faith, and trust in the very same entity that sees fit to nation build, erect empire, and genuflect to Zionist design?

    In order to enforce the tariffs, money must be confiscated from the middle and working class stiffs.

    bullshit

    they may pay a little more for their imports, but that is a price the working class stiffs would be happy to pay in order to have a job.

    Nobody, not even the most rabid of Trump cheerleaders, would deny that there are far many more times the number of jobs in steel consuming industries than there are in the steel manufacturing industry.

    yea, so what?

    if you’re an American corporation that uses steel or aluminum for production, why would you buy your steel from China at a discount when you can pay a little more for American steel? Unless you’re blinded by greed and so short-sighted that you can’t see or understand the long-term implications?

    Whenever I can, I go to local, ‘Mom and Pop’ shops, grocery or hardware stores, and always seek to patronize the small, non-corporate greedy mega-corporations,whenever can. Sure I pay a little more, but the long term reasons and motivations for doing so allow me to sleep like a baby at night.

    Why should American consumers and businesses, inclusive of which are millions of middle and working class folks, subsidize big steel?

    for the same reason we should want our Navy fighter jets or nuclear submarines built here in the US, rather than China, where I’m sure it’d be cheaper.

    Human nature dictates that we compete, not whine…

    how would you like to compete with a Chinaman (no offense intended) for your manufacturing job, eh?

    in China they make about $2 an hour in manufacturing. (at least according to a quick search)

    now with your ‘compete’ theory, what that means is ‘in and out’sourcing until Americans are at parity with the Chinese. This is good for the Chinese, and good for the greedy corporations, and good for all the billions of people who hate America and American’s guts with a netherworld passion, but it is not good for the working class American, who will, (and has) seen his wages founder, and will continue to do so as long as ‘free trade’ plagues him and his family.

    To the Champaign toasts of the Chinese and 1%

    Once again, why should any person who is on the alt-right / dissident right / paleo-conservative / paleo-libertarian / preservation and protection of western civilization spectrum repose any confidence, faith, and trust in the very same entity that sees fit to nation build, erect empire, and genuflect to Zionist design?

    because what is the alternative?

    when Germany’s government, such as it was at the end of WWI, signed away the German people into slavery, it did so because the only other alternative was mass-starvation, until every German man, woman and child was dead.

    I’d rather have Donald Trump signing trade agreements on behalf of the ZUS over Xi Jinping.

    I’d rather have Donald Trump signing trade agreements on behalf of the US citizen over Enrique Peña Nieto.

    If not Donald Trump, then who would you trust as an alternative to represent the American worker and economy? Kim Jong-un?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
    Last time I checked, Donald Trump is not, and has not, advocated the elimination of all income taxation of middle and working class stiffs. In other words, he has not stood up for the little guy in seeking to end his federal tax burden. Why not just come out and demand that there be no income tax levied on those making less than $100,000.00 per year.

    Failing that, the middle and working class stiffs will have a portion of their wages confiscated so that the Trump administration can enforce its tariffs. The middle and working class stiffs will also continue to see a portion of their wages confiscated so as to subsidize big steel.

    Whether a middle class or working stiff should be happy to pay a little bit more for domestically produced products is a decision for each and every individual middle or working class member, not for Leviathan. I submit that this philosophy is far more in keeping with the values of Western civilization than a top-down, pyramidal approach. The latter approach is much more of an Oriental approach; much more of a Soviet approach; and, indeed, much more of a Hamiltonian / Clay / Lincoln / Roosevelt approach.

    The race to the bottom is most conspicuously manifested by the degree to which one hitches his wagon to communist / Fabian / progressive / socialist measures.

    I, too, often go out of my way to purchase local. I do so, in part, to patronize the little guy - even if that little guy also does business with China or other foreign entities. I doubt that those small businesses that you patronize never do business with China or other foreign entities.

    One of the reasons that the mega-corporations and the multi-national companies achieve their position is through their skillful manipulation of the state. In their view, the bigger and more powerful the state, the better. They know that the middle and working class stiffs will also appeal to the all powerful state, but they know that they can use such appeals to their advantage.

    The middle and working class stiffs will always get hosed by the state and their confidence in the state is laughable. The state and its multi-national, money-changing, Wall street backers themselves laugh at the notion.

    Given all of recorded history, why should you limit your choices to some binary proposition: if I can't trust my socialist politicians, who can I trust?

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser's killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?

    As for 1918, I do not think it was as black and white as you suggest. To the extent that it was as stark as you suggest, was not part of the reason the willingness of American "Patriot" middle and working class stiffs signing up for war and empire building? The rubes did not even begin to know that they were serving as cannon fodder for Leviathan and its financiers.

    The enemy is the state, always, always, always. No exceptions. Just as Josey Wales and Ten Bears understood.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Rurik says:
    @anarchyst
    We have never had “free trade”. Foreign governments place trade restrictions on U S products while freely shipping us their products. The “Value Added Taxes” that many countries impose are a way for foreign governments to “protect” their industries. Most people are unaware that “value added taxes” are rebated upon export, while imports are slapped with the “value added tax”.
    Another way is government regulation on imports. When a Japanese auto company wishes to sell cars in the USA, they submit each model for testing in a U S laboratory which certifies each respective model as meeting U S safety and emissions requirements. They are then free to import as many cars as they want. If an American car company wishes to import cars into Japan, EACH INDIVIDUAL CAR has to be “tested”. Japan does not have a “certification system” (only applies to imported vehicles) and requires each car rolling off the ship to be individually “inspected”. This is the method Japan uses to keep out imports.
    For an economy to truly prosper, consumers (employees, workers) have to be part of the equation. What good are “cheap goods” when you have outsourced (offshored) your manufacturing capabilities? What is the difference between making 5 million dollars and keeping your USA-based workforce employed (and able to purchase your goods) and offshoring (and getting rid of your US workers) for another mere million in “profits”? Message to all you wall street types and banksters. UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS DO NOT MAKE GOOD CONSUMERS.
    Wall street types praise Wal-Mart for “keeping wages low and corporate profits high” while criticizing companies such as Costco for paying their employees decent wages (and still prospering handsomely).
    The same thing happened in the last century when Henry Ford paid his employees $5.00 per day (when the average wage was $1.50 per day). Of course, the same wall street and banksters howled that Henry Ford would destroy capitalism by paying his workers a decent wage. The OPPOSITE happened. Henry Ford CREATED a good portion of the “middle class” (of which the wall street types and banksters are presently destroying). Henry Ford (among others) KNEW who was behind wall street and the banksters, published his findings and was roundly (and unjustly) criticized for speaking the TRUTH. Radio priest Father Coughlin had the same message and was muzzled by the Catholic Church…WHY??
    We are at a “race to the bottom”. . .
    Business “schools”, wall street, banksters and politicians–there are many more of us than there are of you . . .
    As an aside, President Trump has the right idea. “Tit for tat” reciprocity is the only way to insure truly “free” and “fair” trade. "Tit for tat" trade policies keep everyone honest...

    What is the difference between making 5 million dollars and keeping your USA-based workforce employed (and able to purchase your goods) and offshoring (and getting rid of your US workers) for another mere million in “profits”?

    the difference is a million dollars!

    to a (globalist, internationalist) man or woman who couldn’t give a flying fuck about the American worker, unless to despise them.

    Message to all you wall street types and banksters. UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS DO NOT MAKE GOOD CONSUMERS.

    the Wall Street types don’t care either. They too despise fly-over, Red State America.

    No one has more contempt for Heritage America and the unemployed Americans than the rats at Goldman Sachs.

    Henry Ford CREATED a good portion of the “middle class” (of which the wall street types and banksters are presently destroying).

    and that’s why ((they)) hate Henry Ford’s guts

    and despise heroic men like Father Coughlin and others. Because Henry Ford and Father Coughlin were the best of the best. Honorable, intelligent, patriotic, heroic. And worst of all loved America and the American people.

    those demanding free trade, like Gary Cohn, despise with all their black hearts- Red State America, and want it stomped on economically and driven into abject despair. Ultimately replaced with a less ‘white, Christian, gun-loving, freedom demanding, “racist” slave population.

    So why would someone like that want to protect American jobs?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The United Military States exports more weapons than the entire planet. This trade imbalance is National Security for the greedy American rich.

    If peace breaks out anywhere this threatens the greatest ponzi export scheme in history. American slaves work hard and pay their taxes for war but America exports this misery to her allies so they too can feel what it’s like to be raped.

    Japanese and Korean citizens contribute billions protecting Lockheed Martin from poverty which their elite skim and then turn around to lecture their citizen-children about the pressing need for defense. Korea and Japan now have the fake billion dollar welfare rockets that can be aimed at the evil North Korea.

    Trump puppet throws money at the MIC. 100% of the voting class asks the upper class to use its military to kill the lower classes around the world. Every day. The slaves are told they must make sacrificies during the holy times of slaughtering millions of women and babies.

    The question fake conservatives need to ask is which defense contactor uses the most carbon and alloy steel and how can I handle becoming a poorer, angrier, nationalistic racist and blame something or someone else other than master for my own slavehood?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. @Rurik

    In order to enforce the tariffs, money must be confiscated from the middle and working class stiffs.
     
    bullshit

    they may pay a little more for their imports, but that is a price the working class stiffs would be happy to pay in order to have a job.


    Nobody, not even the most rabid of Trump cheerleaders, would deny that there are far many more times the number of jobs in steel consuming industries than there are in the steel manufacturing industry.
     
    yea, so what?

    if you're an American corporation that uses steel or aluminum for production, why would you buy your steel from China at a discount when you can pay a little more for American steel? Unless you're blinded by greed and so short-sighted that you can't see or understand the long-term implications?

    Whenever I can, I go to local, 'Mom and Pop' shops, grocery or hardware stores, and always seek to patronize the small, non-corporate greedy mega-corporations,whenever can. Sure I pay a little more, but the long term reasons and motivations for doing so allow me to sleep like a baby at night.


    Why should American consumers and businesses, inclusive of which are millions of middle and working class folks, subsidize big steel?
     
    for the same reason we should want our Navy fighter jets or nuclear submarines built here in the US, rather than China, where I'm sure it'd be cheaper.

    Human nature dictates that we compete, not whine...
     
    how would you like to compete with a Chinaman (no offense intended) for your manufacturing job, eh?

    in China they make about $2 an hour in manufacturing. (at least according to a quick search)

    now with your 'compete' theory, what that means is 'in and out'sourcing until Americans are at parity with the Chinese. This is good for the Chinese, and good for the greedy corporations, and good for all the billions of people who hate America and American's guts with a netherworld passion, but it is not good for the working class American, who will, (and has) seen his wages founder, and will continue to do so as long as 'free trade' plagues him and his family.

    To the Champaign toasts of the Chinese and 1%


    Once again, why should any person who is on the alt-right / dissident right / paleo-conservative / paleo-libertarian / preservation and protection of western civilization spectrum repose any confidence, faith, and trust in the very same entity that sees fit to nation build, erect empire, and genuflect to Zionist design?
     
    because what is the alternative?

    when Germany's government, such as it was at the end of WWI, signed away the German people into slavery, it did so because the only other alternative was mass-starvation, until every German man, woman and child was dead.

    I'd rather have Donald Trump signing trade agreements on behalf of the ZUS over Xi Jinping.

    I'd rather have Donald Trump signing trade agreements on behalf of the US citizen over Enrique Peña Nieto.

    If not Donald Trump, then who would you trust as an alternative to represent the American worker and economy? Kim Jong-un?

    Last time I checked, Donald Trump is not, and has not, advocated the elimination of all income taxation of middle and working class stiffs. In other words, he has not stood up for the little guy in seeking to end his federal tax burden. Why not just come out and demand that there be no income tax levied on those making less than $100,000.00 per year.

    Failing that, the middle and working class stiffs will have a portion of their wages confiscated so that the Trump administration can enforce its tariffs. The middle and working class stiffs will also continue to see a portion of their wages confiscated so as to subsidize big steel.

    Whether a middle class or working stiff should be happy to pay a little bit more for domestically produced products is a decision for each and every individual middle or working class member, not for Leviathan. I submit that this philosophy is far more in keeping with the values of Western civilization than a top-down, pyramidal approach. The latter approach is much more of an Oriental approach; much more of a Soviet approach; and, indeed, much more of a Hamiltonian / Clay / Lincoln / Roosevelt approach.

    The race to the bottom is most conspicuously manifested by the degree to which one hitches his wagon to communist / Fabian / progressive / socialist measures.

    I, too, often go out of my way to purchase local. I do so, in part, to patronize the little guy – even if that little guy also does business with China or other foreign entities. I doubt that those small businesses that you patronize never do business with China or other foreign entities.

    One of the reasons that the mega-corporations and the multi-national companies achieve their position is through their skillful manipulation of the state. In their view, the bigger and more powerful the state, the better. They know that the middle and working class stiffs will also appeal to the all powerful state, but they know that they can use such appeals to their advantage.

    The middle and working class stiffs will always get hosed by the state and their confidence in the state is laughable. The state and its multi-national, money-changing, Wall street backers themselves laugh at the notion.

    Given all of recorded history, why should you limit your choices to some binary proposition: if I can’t trust my socialist politicians, who can I trust?

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?

    As for 1918, I do not think it was as black and white as you suggest. To the extent that it was as stark as you suggest, was not part of the reason the willingness of American “Patriot” middle and working class stiffs signing up for war and empire building? The rubes did not even begin to know that they were serving as cannon fodder for Leviathan and its financiers.

    The enemy is the state, always, always, always. No exceptions. Just as Josey Wales and Ten Bears understood.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Why not just come out and demand that there be no income tax levied on those making less than $100,000.00 per year.
     
    he doubled the standard deduction and lowered the federal tax on the working poor

    he can only do so much. Congress wants to keep the poor - taxed and poor, so as to exploit them better in service to their donor class.


    their wages confiscated so as to subsidize big steel.
     
    you're wrong

    The middle and working class stiffs will always get hosed by the state and their confidence in the state is laughable.
     
    you still didn't answer the question..

    'if not Donald Trump, then who?

    Hillary?


    volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine
     
    many were conscripted, but many joined out of their indoctrination

    Germany did not start that war, and it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points' treachery that did Germany in. It seems perfidy was not exclusive to "Albion'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRjKkG35ogo

    The rubes did not even begin to know that they were serving as cannon fodder for Leviathan and its financiers.
     

    how ironic that you make that statement right after condemning the German people for a war they had no choice over.

    The enemy is the state, always, always, always. No exceptions. Just as Josey Wales and Ten Bears understood.
     
    that's fine if you live in 19th century America

    not so much today, where the state is ubiquitous.

    if Donald Trump is the only one willing to protect the American worker from the ravages of the infinite greed (and overt hostility to the American people) of the International corporations, then my money's on Trump. Not because he's that great, but because the alternative is suicide.

    We don't live in a 197s Hollywood movie. We live in the 21st century, where realpolitik are essential, and the American worker has been getting the shaft from every corner, including the internationalists, the banksters, China and all foreign nations who intelligently look out for their own, and even our own zio-infested government and ((media )) who hate the American worker even more that all the rest of them do.

    , @jacques sheete
    You were making good points til this.:

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?
     
    People really ought to research a topic thoroughly before commenting. That goes double, by the way for column authors. Clue: If a person finds himself parroting the usual propaganda, then he really needs to hit the books. Your comment about the Germans is about as twisted as it's possible to get.

    As far as the tariff goes, who knows? This country has had a centrally planned economy since FDR adopted the national socialist or commie Swopes plan back in the '30s*, and that introduces all sorts of complexities that I won't even pretend to understand or sort out.

    Tariffs were a big issue back in 1787 in Philadelphia at the constitutional convention, and they continue to be. Since the centralizing Swopes' plan and nearly everything else that's done by government ultimately serve the "elite" at the expense of the proles and peasants, I suspect we just better bend over and drop our shorts and practice grinning. Again.

    *One could also make the case that Wilson's War Industries Board of 1917 was a precursor to this.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Liberty Mike
    What part of subsidizing steel manufacturers is the slave shouting communism don't you get?

    Compete. Compete. Compete. Don't whine to bid daddy government for protection.

    Hard to argue with a zombie. The filthy rich have relied on protectionism through every generation. High income professionals have their positions protected, it’s free trade for everyone else. The poors are taxed shitless for their upward transfers, rich scum have no such need to compete.

    There is hope for some of the zombies though, they seem to be able to use their brains and understand things like stock buybacks which have gotten more coverage in their daily propaganda. They still wonder why those heroic vets keep bothering them for cash at the stop lights and can’t get free money with a big house like they do.

    The US taxpayers could save over 75% of the current budget by one simple expedient — Dump the Welfare Military. The military serves zero purpose other than to steal from the hard working taxpayers and give to the parasitic rich. All across the country the slaves, and the real slaves in prison must sacrifice their bodies for the complex.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. BTW, Donald Trump has a history of shafting the American worker and American small businesses.

    Have you ever examined how many times he and his organizations have been sued for failure to pay invoices due?

    If he was so concerned about the welfare of the little guy, why did he stick it to so many small businesses?

    Look at who he has employed at Mara-Lago.

    Look at the business he has done with the Chinese.

    There are none as blind as those who will not see.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. Rurik says:
    @Liberty Mike
    Last time I checked, Donald Trump is not, and has not, advocated the elimination of all income taxation of middle and working class stiffs. In other words, he has not stood up for the little guy in seeking to end his federal tax burden. Why not just come out and demand that there be no income tax levied on those making less than $100,000.00 per year.

    Failing that, the middle and working class stiffs will have a portion of their wages confiscated so that the Trump administration can enforce its tariffs. The middle and working class stiffs will also continue to see a portion of their wages confiscated so as to subsidize big steel.

    Whether a middle class or working stiff should be happy to pay a little bit more for domestically produced products is a decision for each and every individual middle or working class member, not for Leviathan. I submit that this philosophy is far more in keeping with the values of Western civilization than a top-down, pyramidal approach. The latter approach is much more of an Oriental approach; much more of a Soviet approach; and, indeed, much more of a Hamiltonian / Clay / Lincoln / Roosevelt approach.

    The race to the bottom is most conspicuously manifested by the degree to which one hitches his wagon to communist / Fabian / progressive / socialist measures.

    I, too, often go out of my way to purchase local. I do so, in part, to patronize the little guy - even if that little guy also does business with China or other foreign entities. I doubt that those small businesses that you patronize never do business with China or other foreign entities.

    One of the reasons that the mega-corporations and the multi-national companies achieve their position is through their skillful manipulation of the state. In their view, the bigger and more powerful the state, the better. They know that the middle and working class stiffs will also appeal to the all powerful state, but they know that they can use such appeals to their advantage.

    The middle and working class stiffs will always get hosed by the state and their confidence in the state is laughable. The state and its multi-national, money-changing, Wall street backers themselves laugh at the notion.

    Given all of recorded history, why should you limit your choices to some binary proposition: if I can't trust my socialist politicians, who can I trust?

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser's killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?

    As for 1918, I do not think it was as black and white as you suggest. To the extent that it was as stark as you suggest, was not part of the reason the willingness of American "Patriot" middle and working class stiffs signing up for war and empire building? The rubes did not even begin to know that they were serving as cannon fodder for Leviathan and its financiers.

    The enemy is the state, always, always, always. No exceptions. Just as Josey Wales and Ten Bears understood.

    Why not just come out and demand that there be no income tax levied on those making less than $100,000.00 per year.

    he doubled the standard deduction and lowered the federal tax on the working poor

    he can only do so much. Congress wants to keep the poor – taxed and poor, so as to exploit them better in service to their donor class.

    their wages confiscated so as to subsidize big steel.

    you’re wrong

    The middle and working class stiffs will always get hosed by the state and their confidence in the state is laughable.

    you still didn’t answer the question..

    ‘if not Donald Trump, then who?

    Hillary?

    volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine

    many were conscripted, but many joined out of their indoctrination

    Germany did not start that war, and it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points’ treachery that did Germany in. It seems perfidy was not exclusive to “Albion’.

    The rubes did not even begin to know that they were serving as cannon fodder for Leviathan and its financiers.

    how ironic that you make that statement right after condemning the German people for a war they had no choice over.

    The enemy is the state, always, always, always. No exceptions. Just as Josey Wales and Ten Bears understood.

    that’s fine if you live in 19th century America

    not so much today, where the state is ubiquitous.

    if Donald Trump is the only one willing to protect the American worker from the ravages of the infinite greed (and overt hostility to the American people) of the International corporations, then my money’s on Trump. Not because he’s that great, but because the alternative is suicide.

    We don’t live in a 197s Hollywood movie. We live in the 21st century, where realpolitik are essential, and the American worker has been getting the shaft from every corner, including the internationalists, the banksters, China and all foreign nations who intelligently look out for their own, and even our own zio-infested government and ((media )) who hate the American worker even more that all the rest of them do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
    Germany's WWI timeline:

    1. Germany declares war on Russia on August 1

    2. Germany invades Luxembourg on August 2

    3. Germany declares war on France on August 3

    4. Germany invades Belgium on August 4

    5. Great Britain declares war on Germany August 4

    Don't forget that the Germans had already agreed to give support to Austria-Hungary. Mutual defense assurances / pacts are not in the interests of the average middle and working class stiffs. Our boy Pat Buchannan would agree with that.

    If there was any difference between American young men and German young men, it was that under no circumstances could one argue that our boys were defending hearth and home. They were fighting for the war-profiteers, many of whom were ((( them ))). Sadly, the German boys did so as well, but I do appreciated that the fight was much closer to home for them. But, just as the British public should not have tolerated a mutual defense pact with Poland, the German public should not have tolerated such an arrangement with Austria-Hungary.

    I did answer your question regarding whom to trust. One part of the answer is we should not allow ourselves to be subject to a false binary paradigm, i.e., if not Trump, who else. A second part of the answer is why should a working stiff trust Trump given all of the times he shafted the little guy?

    BTW, I trust that you know that I LOATHE Hillary Clinton and all of her ilk.

    Also, I know that you are not a bolzhevik or a commie or a proggie. There is no doubt that we want the same result - the protection and preservation of western civilization, our culture, and our race. I just do not think those ends are best served by the federal government - if served at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @kemerd
    Threatening to destroy Mexico city? That would be killing golden egg laying chicken for nothing. US elites have tremendous wealth resulting from outsourcing their production to Mexico and using Mexican workers to suppress wages in the US. Any such move would force Mexico to stop this.

    Besides, US is still the top dog but not invincible. Unless you mean nuking the country, the Mexicans can also retaliate in kind. And, I am pretty sure they would start to seek a security partner the same day. No need to say, Russians and Chinese would be happy to oblige.

    Third, the US image of the leader of free world would be gone for good along with its influence in Europe, Korea, and Japan in that order. So, bye bye to military bases in those countries. Not that it was true for any moment but such an act would alienate everyone, including Canadians.

    So, a better solution would be perhaps to stop talking about the wall; the people would forget it eventually.

    No need to say, Russians and Chinese would be happy to oblige.

    Neither one would make it across the pacific without interdiction.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Which country would have the better economy?

    Country A) 0% impediment or tariffs on foreign trade, but 100% tax on income.
    Country B) 100% proscription of foreign trade, but 0% tax on income.

    This should tell us that economic development is primarily driven by human VOLITION.
    So what stimulates the desire to risk? What suppresses risk-taking?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. @Rurik

    Why not just come out and demand that there be no income tax levied on those making less than $100,000.00 per year.
     
    he doubled the standard deduction and lowered the federal tax on the working poor

    he can only do so much. Congress wants to keep the poor - taxed and poor, so as to exploit them better in service to their donor class.


    their wages confiscated so as to subsidize big steel.
     
    you're wrong

    The middle and working class stiffs will always get hosed by the state and their confidence in the state is laughable.
     
    you still didn't answer the question..

    'if not Donald Trump, then who?

    Hillary?


    volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine
     
    many were conscripted, but many joined out of their indoctrination

    Germany did not start that war, and it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points' treachery that did Germany in. It seems perfidy was not exclusive to "Albion'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRjKkG35ogo

    The rubes did not even begin to know that they were serving as cannon fodder for Leviathan and its financiers.
     

    how ironic that you make that statement right after condemning the German people for a war they had no choice over.

    The enemy is the state, always, always, always. No exceptions. Just as Josey Wales and Ten Bears understood.
     
    that's fine if you live in 19th century America

    not so much today, where the state is ubiquitous.

    if Donald Trump is the only one willing to protect the American worker from the ravages of the infinite greed (and overt hostility to the American people) of the International corporations, then my money's on Trump. Not because he's that great, but because the alternative is suicide.

    We don't live in a 197s Hollywood movie. We live in the 21st century, where realpolitik are essential, and the American worker has been getting the shaft from every corner, including the internationalists, the banksters, China and all foreign nations who intelligently look out for their own, and even our own zio-infested government and ((media )) who hate the American worker even more that all the rest of them do.

    Germany’s WWI timeline:

    1. Germany declares war on Russia on August 1

    2. Germany invades Luxembourg on August 2

    3. Germany declares war on France on August 3

    4. Germany invades Belgium on August 4

    5. Great Britain declares war on Germany August 4

    Don’t forget that the Germans had already agreed to give support to Austria-Hungary. Mutual defense assurances / pacts are not in the interests of the average middle and working class stiffs. Our boy Pat Buchannan would agree with that.

    If there was any difference between American young men and German young men, it was that under no circumstances could one argue that our boys were defending hearth and home. They were fighting for the war-profiteers, many of whom were ((( them ))). Sadly, the German boys did so as well, but I do appreciated that the fight was much closer to home for them. But, just as the British public should not have tolerated a mutual defense pact with Poland, the German public should not have tolerated such an arrangement with Austria-Hungary.

    I did answer your question regarding whom to trust. One part of the answer is we should not allow ourselves to be subject to a false binary paradigm, i.e., if not Trump, who else. A second part of the answer is why should a working stiff trust Trump given all of the times he shafted the little guy?

    BTW, I trust that you know that I LOATHE Hillary Clinton and all of her ilk.

    Also, I know that you are not a bolzhevik or a commie or a proggie. There is no doubt that we want the same result – the protection and preservation of western civilization, our culture, and our race. I just do not think those ends are best served by the federal government – if served at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Don’t forget that the Germans had already agreed to give support to Austria-Hungary. Mutual defense assurances / pacts are not in the interests of the average middle and working class stiffs.
     
    well, you just made my whole point vis-a-vis Germany being dragged into WWI

    the German public should not have tolerated such an arrangement with Austria-Hungary.
     
    they, like us Americans living in a "democracy", had no say in it.

    One part of the answer is we should not allow ourselves to be subject to a false binary paradigm, i.e., if not Trump, who else.
     
    and how, pray tell.. do we go about accomplishing that?!

    do we change reality by wishing for it real, real hard?

    http://images.christianpost.com/blog/full/20176/benny-hinn2.jpg?w=640&h=350

    I just do not think those ends are best served by the federal government – if served at all.
     
    well, if you know of an alternative to the fecal government we're cursed with, then by all means, please, do tell!
    , @jacques sheete

    Germany’s WWI timeline:

    1. Germany declares war on Russia on August 1

    2. Germany invades Luxembourg on August 2

    3. Germany declares war on France on August 3

    4. Germany invades Belgium on August 4

    5. Great Britain declares war on Germany August 4


     

    For a guy who seems to see so clearly on other subjects, it's amazing that you offer that as proof of Germany's guilt.

    You didn't even mention the Russian mobilization ( postponed briefly at the request of the Kaiser) and the secret agreements between the Brits, the French and the Russkies.

    The whole story takes a book to explain, but suffice it to say that the timeline doesn't prove much. Wars start long before the first shot is fired and the one who fires it or declares war may not be the main aggressor.


    [He] seems to think that the "aggressor" in a war is necessarily the party who fires the first shot. But this is by no means the case, and the history of many wars disprove it.

    E.D. Morel, Truth and the War, pp.57-58 1916
     

    Note that he was able to ascertain the truth during the war. Nock also recognized the truth and published in 1922. By now we have no excuse for parroting old war propaganda. The state, and its court historians are the enemy. Always. They lie continually.

    Anyway, back to the tariff. As for me the jury is still out and it's too early to celebrate. Trump will always put his class' interests first, and it would shock me if they coincided with our interests for once.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Alfa158
    You're right, other countries are the ones in a position to lose in any trade war.
    Hudson also suffers from the disconnection from reality common to leftists. These people are wondrously incurious about anything that might interfere with their beliefs. He talks about other countries retaliating by punishing US exports of Levi jeans and Harley-Davidsons. Has Hudson purchased any Levi's lately? None of them are made in the US. He reminds me of some of his fellow leftists who produced a segment on Cuban baseball prior to relations being loosened up. They were bemoaning the the pitiable fact that the two teams had to share the same set of baseball gloves because of the US not trading with Cuba, apparently not realizing that there are zero baseball gloves produced in the US.
    What is the dollar volume of Harley-Davidson exports to Japan versus Japanese motorcycle exports to the US? Has he bothered looking up those numbers and seeing which country would suffer the most from a trade war? What about technology exports to China? Does he mean all those televisions, computers and mobile phones pouring out of US factories into the Chinese market? Or maybe all the home appliances we ship to Korea? Or is he referring to Airbus airliners? Or the General Electric power turbines that the Chinese require have the technology transferred to China so they can be produced there? Or the Boeing airliner wings that have to be made in China in order to sell planes there? Most of the technology the Chinese are importing is the Intellectual Property they buy steal or finagle, not the products themselves.
    The current trade situation is the opposite of the classical theories. The US, the supposedly advanced country exports raw materials like timber and wheat and imports advanced manufactured products. Countries like China even explicitly ban the US exporting the timber as finished product like lumber or plywood, it has to go as logs. If reality is the opposite of your theory then you might want to consider revising your theory, at least that is how science works.

    Boeing making WINGS in China? That is suicide. Any other partitions airframe, Yes but not the wings, landing gear or engines. Those make a plane. Better not to sell the machines than handover the wings.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Michael Kenny
    Don't forget that the original EU model was a large internal market protected by a high tariff wall. That worked very well until the free trade ideology of the 1980s was rammed down the throats of Europe's reluctant leaders by the US, using Thatcher as a trojan horse. Thus, the more the US backs away from free trade, the better it is for the EU.

    The EU average tarriff on industrial goods is 1.8%. Practically Free Trade.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @Liberty Mike
    Last time I checked, Donald Trump is not, and has not, advocated the elimination of all income taxation of middle and working class stiffs. In other words, he has not stood up for the little guy in seeking to end his federal tax burden. Why not just come out and demand that there be no income tax levied on those making less than $100,000.00 per year.

    Failing that, the middle and working class stiffs will have a portion of their wages confiscated so that the Trump administration can enforce its tariffs. The middle and working class stiffs will also continue to see a portion of their wages confiscated so as to subsidize big steel.

    Whether a middle class or working stiff should be happy to pay a little bit more for domestically produced products is a decision for each and every individual middle or working class member, not for Leviathan. I submit that this philosophy is far more in keeping with the values of Western civilization than a top-down, pyramidal approach. The latter approach is much more of an Oriental approach; much more of a Soviet approach; and, indeed, much more of a Hamiltonian / Clay / Lincoln / Roosevelt approach.

    The race to the bottom is most conspicuously manifested by the degree to which one hitches his wagon to communist / Fabian / progressive / socialist measures.

    I, too, often go out of my way to purchase local. I do so, in part, to patronize the little guy - even if that little guy also does business with China or other foreign entities. I doubt that those small businesses that you patronize never do business with China or other foreign entities.

    One of the reasons that the mega-corporations and the multi-national companies achieve their position is through their skillful manipulation of the state. In their view, the bigger and more powerful the state, the better. They know that the middle and working class stiffs will also appeal to the all powerful state, but they know that they can use such appeals to their advantage.

    The middle and working class stiffs will always get hosed by the state and their confidence in the state is laughable. The state and its multi-national, money-changing, Wall street backers themselves laugh at the notion.

    Given all of recorded history, why should you limit your choices to some binary proposition: if I can't trust my socialist politicians, who can I trust?

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser's killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?

    As for 1918, I do not think it was as black and white as you suggest. To the extent that it was as stark as you suggest, was not part of the reason the willingness of American "Patriot" middle and working class stiffs signing up for war and empire building? The rubes did not even begin to know that they were serving as cannon fodder for Leviathan and its financiers.

    The enemy is the state, always, always, always. No exceptions. Just as Josey Wales and Ten Bears understood.

    You were making good points til this.:

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?

    People really ought to research a topic thoroughly before commenting. That goes double, by the way for column authors. Clue: If a person finds himself parroting the usual propaganda, then he really needs to hit the books. Your comment about the Germans is about as twisted as it’s possible to get.

    As far as the tariff goes, who knows? This country has had a centrally planned economy since FDR adopted the national socialist or commie Swopes plan back in the ’30s*, and that introduces all sorts of complexities that I won’t even pretend to understand or sort out.

    Tariffs were a big issue back in 1787 in Philadelphia at the constitutional convention, and they continue to be. Since the centralizing Swopes’ plan and nearly everything else that’s done by government ultimately serve the “elite” at the expense of the proles and peasants, I suspect we just better bend over and drop our shorts and practice grinning. Again.

    *One could also make the case that Wilson’s War Industries Board of 1917 was a precursor to this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
    Tell me how my comment about Germany was twisted.
    , @Rurik

    As far as the tariff goes, who knows?
     
    you know how you can tell Jacque?

    by who's screeching

    when Goldman Sachs is screeching

    and the Chamber of Commerce is screeching

    and the Economist is screeching

    and Kruggy! and the NYT are screeching

    and Lindsey Graham and Chucky Schumer and Jeff Flake and all the usual cloaca are apoplectic and pulling their hair out and running around like their wigs are on fire....

    Then you know Donald Trump is on to something good.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @jacques sheete
    You were making good points til this.:

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?
     
    People really ought to research a topic thoroughly before commenting. That goes double, by the way for column authors. Clue: If a person finds himself parroting the usual propaganda, then he really needs to hit the books. Your comment about the Germans is about as twisted as it's possible to get.

    As far as the tariff goes, who knows? This country has had a centrally planned economy since FDR adopted the national socialist or commie Swopes plan back in the '30s*, and that introduces all sorts of complexities that I won't even pretend to understand or sort out.

    Tariffs were a big issue back in 1787 in Philadelphia at the constitutional convention, and they continue to be. Since the centralizing Swopes' plan and nearly everything else that's done by government ultimately serve the "elite" at the expense of the proles and peasants, I suspect we just better bend over and drop our shorts and practice grinning. Again.

    *One could also make the case that Wilson's War Industries Board of 1917 was a precursor to this.

    Tell me how my comment about Germany was twisted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Tell me how my comment about Germany was twisted.
     
    It appears that you subscribe to the theory that Germany was the cause of the war. That's completely false.

    Books have been written about it. A couple of good ones are Nock's "The Myth of a Guilty Nation," E.D Morel's masterful "Truth and the War." I also think that "super patriot," Albert J. Beveridge's "What is Back of the War" is worth a read as well.

    It was Brit gamesmanship, specifically Asquinth, Grey, Haldane and Churchill who were the most to blame.

    The Kaiser worked overtime to maintain a precarious peace while surrounded and goaded by monsters representing 3 of the 4 major empires of the time, Britain, France and Russia. he was foiled time and again by "perfidious Albion," which is not some corny cliche.
    , @jacques sheete
    Here's another. I can't believe I neglected to mention it. Barnes is always tops.

    HARRY ELMER BARNES

    THE GENESIS
    THE WORLD WAR

    Available on line, free.

    https://archive.org/details/genesisofworldwaOOharr
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Aluminum is the easiest thing to produce,
    Steel is quite different story. There are myriad types of steel products . Steel metallurgy is a true art.
    There is huge amount of knowledge involved. If the old metallurgists die and do not transfer the their knowledge to the new generation all steel production in US will die out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  62. FKA Max says: • Website

    I just shared Mr. Hudson’s most excellent article and commented on Trump, etc.:

    FKA Max
    Posted March 12, 2018 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    I highly recommend the recent piece by economist Michael Hudson on the topic:

    “A really nationalistic trade strategy is to buy raw materials cheaply, and sell finished manufactured goods at a high value-added price.

    The idea of industrial protectionism, from British free trade in the 19th century to U.S. trade strategy in the 20th century, was to obtain raw materials in the cheapest places – by making other countries compete to supply them – and protect your high-technology manufactures where the major capital investment, profits and monopoly rents are.

    Trump is doing the reverse: He’s increasing the cost of steel and aluminum raw materials inputs. This will squeeze the profits of industrial companies using steel and aluminum – without protecting their markets.” – http://www.unz.com/mhudson/a-travesty-of-protectionism/

    For me personally, the tariffs are my “God Emperor No More” http://www.unz.com/article/god-emperor-no-more/ moment.

    I am officially off the Trump Train now, but I have no regrets supporting and advocating for Trump over the last almost three years (I started being a vocal supporter of his in September of 2015).

    Commenter “Intelligent Dasein” put it well:

    ” I knew that this was our time to stand our ground and fight, and we did that. The Alt-Right has proven that it is able to think politically, to define objectives and to organize and pursue them with rational strategies. We are, as Greg Johnson said, “a government in exile.”

    Despite the failures of our candidate, the fact that we managed to elect him was a real victory for us, and I will take that with me as I soldier onward.” – https://www.counter-currents.com/2017/04/thats-it-were-through/#comment-1384329

    I would love to hear from other WNs and Alt Righters how you feel towards Donald Trump now and what the next steps for the movement should be?

    Thank you.

    https://www.counter-currents.com/2018/03/why-we-need-protectionism/#comment-1401152

    Trump’s trade policies are a huge mistake, says President Macron | Business Today

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. Rurik says:
    @Liberty Mike
    Germany's WWI timeline:

    1. Germany declares war on Russia on August 1

    2. Germany invades Luxembourg on August 2

    3. Germany declares war on France on August 3

    4. Germany invades Belgium on August 4

    5. Great Britain declares war on Germany August 4

    Don't forget that the Germans had already agreed to give support to Austria-Hungary. Mutual defense assurances / pacts are not in the interests of the average middle and working class stiffs. Our boy Pat Buchannan would agree with that.

    If there was any difference between American young men and German young men, it was that under no circumstances could one argue that our boys were defending hearth and home. They were fighting for the war-profiteers, many of whom were ((( them ))). Sadly, the German boys did so as well, but I do appreciated that the fight was much closer to home for them. But, just as the British public should not have tolerated a mutual defense pact with Poland, the German public should not have tolerated such an arrangement with Austria-Hungary.

    I did answer your question regarding whom to trust. One part of the answer is we should not allow ourselves to be subject to a false binary paradigm, i.e., if not Trump, who else. A second part of the answer is why should a working stiff trust Trump given all of the times he shafted the little guy?

    BTW, I trust that you know that I LOATHE Hillary Clinton and all of her ilk.

    Also, I know that you are not a bolzhevik or a commie or a proggie. There is no doubt that we want the same result - the protection and preservation of western civilization, our culture, and our race. I just do not think those ends are best served by the federal government - if served at all.

    Don’t forget that the Germans had already agreed to give support to Austria-Hungary. Mutual defense assurances / pacts are not in the interests of the average middle and working class stiffs.

    well, you just made my whole point vis-a-vis Germany being dragged into WWI

    the German public should not have tolerated such an arrangement with Austria-Hungary.

    they, like us Americans living in a “democracy”, had no say in it.

    One part of the answer is we should not allow ourselves to be subject to a false binary paradigm, i.e., if not Trump, who else.

    and how, pray tell.. do we go about accomplishing that?!

    do we change reality by wishing for it real, real hard?

    I just do not think those ends are best served by the federal government – if served at all.

    well, if you know of an alternative to the fecal government we’re cursed with, then by all means, please, do tell!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Rurik says:
    @jacques sheete
    You were making good points til this.:

    The German people allowed themselves to be ruled by a militaristic warfare / welfare state. Decent people would have taken steps to prevent Germany making war. A decent person would not have jerked off to the Junkers or volunteered to join the Kaiser’s killing machine. Why would a decent German in 1914 want to kill an Italian or a Serb or a Russian or a Frenchman?
     
    People really ought to research a topic thoroughly before commenting. That goes double, by the way for column authors. Clue: If a person finds himself parroting the usual propaganda, then he really needs to hit the books. Your comment about the Germans is about as twisted as it's possible to get.

    As far as the tariff goes, who knows? This country has had a centrally planned economy since FDR adopted the national socialist or commie Swopes plan back in the '30s*, and that introduces all sorts of complexities that I won't even pretend to understand or sort out.

    Tariffs were a big issue back in 1787 in Philadelphia at the constitutional convention, and they continue to be. Since the centralizing Swopes' plan and nearly everything else that's done by government ultimately serve the "elite" at the expense of the proles and peasants, I suspect we just better bend over and drop our shorts and practice grinning. Again.

    *One could also make the case that Wilson's War Industries Board of 1917 was a precursor to this.

    As far as the tariff goes, who knows?

    you know how you can tell Jacque?

    by who’s screeching

    when Goldman Sachs is screeching

    and the Chamber of Commerce is screeching

    and the Economist is screeching

    and Kruggy! and the NYT are screeching

    and Lindsey Graham and Chucky Schumer and Jeff Flake and all the usual cloaca are apoplectic and pulling their hair out and running around like their wigs are on fire….

    Then you know Donald Trump is on to something good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    True enough, sir, but I suspect that if he does do some good, it'll just be a mere side effect from his efforts to line the wallets of the few, and little will tinkle (not even trickle) down to us peasants. If any crumbs do, our rulers will soon enough figure ways to snatch them from us.

    I do hope I'm wrong, but, based on prior experience, I have less than no faith in the crummy extortion and protection racket cesspool we call the US government.

    Good comments, as usual BTW.

    PS: If Trump does nothing other than make monkeys out of the screeching cloacas you named, then I call it a win. Schadenfreude can be a b____!!!!!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Liberty Mike
    Tell me how my comment about Germany was twisted.

    Tell me how my comment about Germany was twisted.

    It appears that you subscribe to the theory that Germany was the cause of the war. That’s completely false.

    Books have been written about it. A couple of good ones are Nock’s “The Myth of a Guilty Nation,” E.D Morel’s masterful “Truth and the War.” I also think that “super patriot,” Albert J. Beveridge’s “What is Back of the War” is worth a read as well.

    It was Brit gamesmanship, specifically Asquinth, Grey, Haldane and Churchill who were the most to blame.

    The Kaiser worked overtime to maintain a precarious peace while surrounded and goaded by monsters representing 3 of the 4 major empires of the time, Britain, France and Russia. he was foiled time and again by “perfidious Albion,” which is not some corny cliche.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Rurik

    As far as the tariff goes, who knows?
     
    you know how you can tell Jacque?

    by who's screeching

    when Goldman Sachs is screeching

    and the Chamber of Commerce is screeching

    and the Economist is screeching

    and Kruggy! and the NYT are screeching

    and Lindsey Graham and Chucky Schumer and Jeff Flake and all the usual cloaca are apoplectic and pulling their hair out and running around like their wigs are on fire....

    Then you know Donald Trump is on to something good.

    True enough, sir, but I suspect that if he does do some good, it’ll just be a mere side effect from his efforts to line the wallets of the few, and little will tinkle (not even trickle) down to us peasants. If any crumbs do, our rulers will soon enough figure ways to snatch them from us.

    I do hope I’m wrong, but, based on prior experience, I have less than no faith in the crummy extortion and protection racket cesspool we call the US government.

    Good comments, as usual BTW.

    PS: If Trump does nothing other than make monkeys out of the screeching cloacas you named, then I call it a win. Schadenfreude can be a b____!!!!!

    Read More
    • Agree: Rurik
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Liberty Mike
    Tell me how my comment about Germany was twisted.

    Here’s another. I can’t believe I neglected to mention it. Barnes is always tops.

    HARRY ELMER BARNES

    THE GENESIS
    THE WORLD WAR

    Available on line, free.

    https://archive.org/details/genesisofworldwaOOharr

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Liberty Mike
    Germany's WWI timeline:

    1. Germany declares war on Russia on August 1

    2. Germany invades Luxembourg on August 2

    3. Germany declares war on France on August 3

    4. Germany invades Belgium on August 4

    5. Great Britain declares war on Germany August 4

    Don't forget that the Germans had already agreed to give support to Austria-Hungary. Mutual defense assurances / pacts are not in the interests of the average middle and working class stiffs. Our boy Pat Buchannan would agree with that.

    If there was any difference between American young men and German young men, it was that under no circumstances could one argue that our boys were defending hearth and home. They were fighting for the war-profiteers, many of whom were ((( them ))). Sadly, the German boys did so as well, but I do appreciated that the fight was much closer to home for them. But, just as the British public should not have tolerated a mutual defense pact with Poland, the German public should not have tolerated such an arrangement with Austria-Hungary.

    I did answer your question regarding whom to trust. One part of the answer is we should not allow ourselves to be subject to a false binary paradigm, i.e., if not Trump, who else. A second part of the answer is why should a working stiff trust Trump given all of the times he shafted the little guy?

    BTW, I trust that you know that I LOATHE Hillary Clinton and all of her ilk.

    Also, I know that you are not a bolzhevik or a commie or a proggie. There is no doubt that we want the same result - the protection and preservation of western civilization, our culture, and our race. I just do not think those ends are best served by the federal government - if served at all.

    Germany’s WWI timeline:

    1. Germany declares war on Russia on August 1

    2. Germany invades Luxembourg on August 2

    3. Germany declares war on France on August 3

    4. Germany invades Belgium on August 4

    5. Great Britain declares war on Germany August 4

    For a guy who seems to see so clearly on other subjects, it’s amazing that you offer that as proof of Germany’s guilt.

    You didn’t even mention the Russian mobilization ( postponed briefly at the request of the Kaiser) and the secret agreements between the Brits, the French and the Russkies.

    The whole story takes a book to explain, but suffice it to say that the timeline doesn’t prove much. Wars start long before the first shot is fired and the one who fires it or declares war may not be the main aggressor.

    [He] seems to think that the “aggressor” in a war is necessarily the party who fires the first shot. But this is by no means the case, and the history of many wars disprove it.

    E.D. Morel, Truth and the War, pp.57-58 1916

    Note that he was able to ascertain the truth during the war. Nock also recognized the truth and published in 1922. By now we have no excuse for parroting old war propaganda. The state, and its court historians are the enemy. Always. They lie continually.

    Anyway, back to the tariff. As for me the jury is still out and it’s too early to celebrate. Trump will always put his class’ interests first, and it would shock me if they coincided with our interests for once.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Thorfinnsson
    Geography means that we can stop that, and neither Russia nor China can do anything about it.

    And over time we could develop working agreements with China (and other industrial countries) to discuss how inferior nations should be handled.

    There's no reason whatsoever brown and black countries (India and Iran exempted) should be allowed to manage their own trade policies.

    And prior to 1914, the world really did work this way. Weak states had "unequal treaties" imposed on them. China even had a Briton heading up its customs office.

    Latin America and the Caribbean clearly in the American sphere influence, though I don't believe it's worth trying to impose upon Brazil or the Southern Cone. Perhaps cut a deal with these countries to allow their trade goods in tariff free throughout the Americas south of the Rio Grande as well.

    And of course it goes without saying that Canada should be annexed, with Quebec made an independent protectorate.

    There’s no reason whatsoever brown and black countries (India and Iran exempted) should be allowed to manage their own trade policies…

    Latin America and the Caribbean clearly in the American sphere influence…

    Lothrop Stoddard lives!

    And of course it goes without saying that Canada should be annexed…

    “Goes without saying”, indeed– you’re the first one who’s said it in decades.

    Problem is, there are two very large constituencies that would oppose such a deal. One of them is Canadians. The other, Americans.

    Maybe Canada can annex Greenland and Iceland? There was some talk in recent years of them taking in some small Anglophone Caribbean island nation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @anarchyst
    We have never had “free trade”. Foreign governments place trade restrictions on U S products while freely shipping us their products. The “Value Added Taxes” that many countries impose are a way for foreign governments to “protect” their industries. Most people are unaware that “value added taxes” are rebated upon export, while imports are slapped with the “value added tax”.
    Another way is government regulation on imports. When a Japanese auto company wishes to sell cars in the USA, they submit each model for testing in a U S laboratory which certifies each respective model as meeting U S safety and emissions requirements. They are then free to import as many cars as they want. If an American car company wishes to import cars into Japan, EACH INDIVIDUAL CAR has to be “tested”. Japan does not have a “certification system” (only applies to imported vehicles) and requires each car rolling off the ship to be individually “inspected”. This is the method Japan uses to keep out imports.
    For an economy to truly prosper, consumers (employees, workers) have to be part of the equation. What good are “cheap goods” when you have outsourced (offshored) your manufacturing capabilities? What is the difference between making 5 million dollars and keeping your USA-based workforce employed (and able to purchase your goods) and offshoring (and getting rid of your US workers) for another mere million in “profits”? Message to all you wall street types and banksters. UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS DO NOT MAKE GOOD CONSUMERS.
    Wall street types praise Wal-Mart for “keeping wages low and corporate profits high” while criticizing companies such as Costco for paying their employees decent wages (and still prospering handsomely).
    The same thing happened in the last century when Henry Ford paid his employees $5.00 per day (when the average wage was $1.50 per day). Of course, the same wall street and banksters howled that Henry Ford would destroy capitalism by paying his workers a decent wage. The OPPOSITE happened. Henry Ford CREATED a good portion of the “middle class” (of which the wall street types and banksters are presently destroying). Henry Ford (among others) KNEW who was behind wall street and the banksters, published his findings and was roundly (and unjustly) criticized for speaking the TRUTH. Radio priest Father Coughlin had the same message and was muzzled by the Catholic Church…WHY??
    We are at a “race to the bottom”. . .
    Business “schools”, wall street, banksters and politicians–there are many more of us than there are of you . . .
    As an aside, President Trump has the right idea. “Tit for tat” reciprocity is the only way to insure truly “free” and “fair” trade. "Tit for tat" trade policies keep everyone honest...

    Ford hired thugs and secret police to put the beat down on his workers. He was behind the times with his propaganda film work or he might have been able to avoid the violence he directed at his employees, breaking their will more peacefully the way the Nazis pulled their soldiers together for the work ahead.

    The press never reported the organized violence Ford used to control his empire. But by 1941 and the reaping of the war windfall he called off his Pinkerton goons and the workers were able to strike a deal. Most people who worked in their factories wouldn’t be expected to live to their late 50s anyway dropping dead from years of exposure to toxicity. By the 1970s they were all dead anyway. The Ford Foundation, or CIA for short, managed perceptions, buried bodies and hid the core. An obsolete behemoth spasming in near bankruptcy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marco
    Ford was known for treating his workers very well, but offended many with his controversial political views. Those who have run the Ford Foundation for the past few decades have very different attitudes. I would take stories of him terrorizing his employees with a grain of salt.
    , @jacques sheete

    Ford hired thugs and secret police to put the beat down on his workers.
     
    Valid citations needed.
    , @anarchyst
    You are correct about Ford resisting unionization and using his "thugs" (the Ford "Service Department"--NOT Pinkerton) to maintain the "status quo". Still, people were willing to work for Ford Motor Company, as the jobs were good-paying and highly prized. It is interesting to note that today's American unions have adopted the "thug" label, calling their organizers T.H.U.G.S="The Helpful Union Guys"...
    The "dirty trick" that unions use to organize companies is called "salting". Union organizers get jobs in non-union firms (with no real intention of keeping them) and then attempt to organize workers. A good example of this is of an electrical contractor in the Detroit area. According to NLRB (National Labor Relation Board) "rules", all it takes is 51% of workers who are present at work on any one day, when a certification election is held, to gain union representation. This electrical contractor employed around 20 employees. The union purposely scheduled the election during Christmas break, when only two employees were at work. Guess what? The union got certified with only two employees voting. As a result, the contractor went out of business about a year later.
    Working in a Ford plant was no different than working in any other manufacturing plant of the day. Every manufacturing and industrial plant of the day was rife with dangerous processes and systems--not just Ford.
    As to a Ford bankruptcy, you are mistaken. Ford was the only automaker family who kept control of the company within the family. In fact, during the "crash" of 2006, Ford was in better shape than the rest of the auto industry and was able to leverage its equity in order to keep running, unlike every other automaker which went to the federal government for "help"..
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @kemerd
    I think you should read the article once more. There is no inconsistency at all. It basically says that protection is indeed good but not necessarily all types of protection and Trump chose the wrong type.

    That’s my point – how come steel protectionism is bad other than because Trump chose it?

    The argument presented against steel protectionism does not hold water, given that the current great industrial powers of the world – Japan, Korea, China and Germany, are all steel-producing powerhouses. Steel is not a raw material as such. Steel is the building block of an industrial economy.

    The American steel tariffs of the late 19th century are a textbook example of how tariffs are supposed to work.

    Hudson is not stupid. The only reasonable explanation for his schizophrenic arguments I can think of is the Trump Derangement Syndrome. The same syndrome befell poor Webster Tarpley back in 2016. Wonder what he’s saying now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Marco says:
    @Anonymous
    Ford hired thugs and secret police to put the beat down on his workers. He was behind the times with his propaganda film work or he might have been able to avoid the violence he directed at his employees, breaking their will more peacefully the way the Nazis pulled their soldiers together for the work ahead.

    The press never reported the organized violence Ford used to control his empire. But by 1941 and the reaping of the war windfall he called off his Pinkerton goons and the workers were able to strike a deal. Most people who worked in their factories wouldn't be expected to live to their late 50s anyway dropping dead from years of exposure to toxicity. By the 1970s they were all dead anyway. The Ford Foundation, or CIA for short, managed perceptions, buried bodies and hid the core. An obsolete behemoth spasming in near bankruptcy.

    Ford was known for treating his workers very well, but offended many with his controversial political views. Those who have run the Ford Foundation for the past few decades have very different attitudes. I would take stories of him terrorizing his employees with a grain of salt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Trump is clearly a proponent of the state.

    We proles need not fantasize that the state exists to serve or protect us or our class. The only interest the state has in protecting us is the interest a dairy farmer has in his cows.

    Why are governments formed?

    “The primitive state is the creation of warlike robbery; and only by warlike robbery can it be preserved.”
    - Franz Oppenheimer, The State [1919] , Chap II,(d) the primitive feudal state of higher grade

    http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1662&Itemid=99999999

    “Almost all the governments, which exist at present, or of which there remains any record in story, have been founded originally, either on usurpation or conquest, or both, without any pretence of a fair consent, or voluntary subjection of the people.”

    David Hume, “On Government” (1777)

    http://lf-oll.s3.amazonaws.com/titles/2472/Hume_OnGovernment1777.pdf

    “…and when it was finally discovered that more profit was to be gained by enslaving the weak and systematically exploiting their productive capacities, instead of spoiling and destroying, this discovery opened a new and fruitful era of progress, for it involved the formation of political States.”
    - Gustave de Molinari, The Society of Tomorrow [1899]

    Part II: Chapter XV Summary and Conclusion – Gustave de Molinari, The Society of Tomorrow [1899]
    Edition used: The Society of Tomorrow: A Forecast of its Political and Economic Organization, ed. Hodgson Pratt and Frederic Passy, trans. P.H. Lee Warner (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904).
    oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=228&chapter=36940&layout=html&Itemid=27#a_1585595

    Thomas Paine recognized some distinctions between society and the state. Societies evolve for the benefit of the people and precede the formation of governments which evolve as parasites on society.

    Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

    Thomas Paine, Common Sense, CHAPTER 4

    Paine neglects to mention, however, that while the state restrains our vices, it encourages and leverages the vices of our overlords.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  74. @Anonymous
    Ford hired thugs and secret police to put the beat down on his workers. He was behind the times with his propaganda film work or he might have been able to avoid the violence he directed at his employees, breaking their will more peacefully the way the Nazis pulled their soldiers together for the work ahead.

    The press never reported the organized violence Ford used to control his empire. But by 1941 and the reaping of the war windfall he called off his Pinkerton goons and the workers were able to strike a deal. Most people who worked in their factories wouldn't be expected to live to their late 50s anyway dropping dead from years of exposure to toxicity. By the 1970s they were all dead anyway. The Ford Foundation, or CIA for short, managed perceptions, buried bodies and hid the core. An obsolete behemoth spasming in near bankruptcy.

    Ford hired thugs and secret police to put the beat down on his workers.

    Valid citations needed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Thorfinnsson
    Geography means that we can stop that, and neither Russia nor China can do anything about it.

    And over time we could develop working agreements with China (and other industrial countries) to discuss how inferior nations should be handled.

    There's no reason whatsoever brown and black countries (India and Iran exempted) should be allowed to manage their own trade policies.

    And prior to 1914, the world really did work this way. Weak states had "unequal treaties" imposed on them. China even had a Briton heading up its customs office.

    Latin America and the Caribbean clearly in the American sphere influence, though I don't believe it's worth trying to impose upon Brazil or the Southern Cone. Perhaps cut a deal with these countries to allow their trade goods in tariff free throughout the Americas south of the Rio Grande as well.

    And of course it goes without saying that Canada should be annexed, with Quebec made an independent protectorate.

    And over time we could develop working agreements with China (and other industrial countries) to discuss how inferior nations should be handled.

    We have yet to figure out how to handle the morally and financially inferior nation, the one with the most colossal public debt ever known to man, and the most inferior, stupid, grifting leadership (Hillary and the line up of simpleton loser Republikkan goons as potential leaders? You kidding me?) in history, the good ‘ol US of A.

    Maybe China could help us out of our atavistic stupidity, but I doubt it; it’s a corrupt cesspool beyond redemption. Trump himself admitted publicly that America was no longer great, and that the swamp needed to be drained.

    If Mr. Showtime thinks he can stem the slide to oblivion, he’s as bad as the rest. I will, however, applaud him to eternity for making monkeys out of the rest and pissing them off as well. I wish him godspeed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. anarchyst says:
    @Anonymous
    Ford hired thugs and secret police to put the beat down on his workers. He was behind the times with his propaganda film work or he might have been able to avoid the violence he directed at his employees, breaking their will more peacefully the way the Nazis pulled their soldiers together for the work ahead.

    The press never reported the organized violence Ford used to control his empire. But by 1941 and the reaping of the war windfall he called off his Pinkerton goons and the workers were able to strike a deal. Most people who worked in their factories wouldn't be expected to live to their late 50s anyway dropping dead from years of exposure to toxicity. By the 1970s they were all dead anyway. The Ford Foundation, or CIA for short, managed perceptions, buried bodies and hid the core. An obsolete behemoth spasming in near bankruptcy.

    You are correct about Ford resisting unionization and using his “thugs” (the Ford “Service Department”–NOT Pinkerton) to maintain the “status quo”. Still, people were willing to work for Ford Motor Company, as the jobs were good-paying and highly prized. It is interesting to note that today’s American unions have adopted the “thug” label, calling their organizers T.H.U.G.S=”The Helpful Union Guys”…
    The “dirty trick” that unions use to organize companies is called “salting”. Union organizers get jobs in non-union firms (with no real intention of keeping them) and then attempt to organize workers. A good example of this is of an electrical contractor in the Detroit area. According to NLRB (National Labor Relation Board) “rules”, all it takes is 51% of workers who are present at work on any one day, when a certification election is held, to gain union representation. This electrical contractor employed around 20 employees. The union purposely scheduled the election during Christmas break, when only two employees were at work. Guess what? The union got certified with only two employees voting. As a result, the contractor went out of business about a year later.
    Working in a Ford plant was no different than working in any other manufacturing plant of the day. Every manufacturing and industrial plant of the day was rife with dangerous processes and systems–not just Ford.
    As to a Ford bankruptcy, you are mistaken. Ford was the only automaker family who kept control of the company within the family. In fact, during the “crash” of 2006, Ford was in better shape than the rest of the auto industry and was able to leverage its equity in order to keep running, unlike every other automaker which went to the federal government for “help”..

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Well well well, it does appear that there may be more than one side to the story. Whaddya know?

    What makes some people think they can post their one sided nonsense here and not get caught?

    Thanks for your much more informative and reasonable comment on the subject, little of which I previously knew.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @anarchyst
    You are correct about Ford resisting unionization and using his "thugs" (the Ford "Service Department"--NOT Pinkerton) to maintain the "status quo". Still, people were willing to work for Ford Motor Company, as the jobs were good-paying and highly prized. It is interesting to note that today's American unions have adopted the "thug" label, calling their organizers T.H.U.G.S="The Helpful Union Guys"...
    The "dirty trick" that unions use to organize companies is called "salting". Union organizers get jobs in non-union firms (with no real intention of keeping them) and then attempt to organize workers. A good example of this is of an electrical contractor in the Detroit area. According to NLRB (National Labor Relation Board) "rules", all it takes is 51% of workers who are present at work on any one day, when a certification election is held, to gain union representation. This electrical contractor employed around 20 employees. The union purposely scheduled the election during Christmas break, when only two employees were at work. Guess what? The union got certified with only two employees voting. As a result, the contractor went out of business about a year later.
    Working in a Ford plant was no different than working in any other manufacturing plant of the day. Every manufacturing and industrial plant of the day was rife with dangerous processes and systems--not just Ford.
    As to a Ford bankruptcy, you are mistaken. Ford was the only automaker family who kept control of the company within the family. In fact, during the "crash" of 2006, Ford was in better shape than the rest of the auto industry and was able to leverage its equity in order to keep running, unlike every other automaker which went to the federal government for "help"..

    Well well well, it does appear that there may be more than one side to the story. Whaddya know?

    What makes some people think they can post their one sided nonsense here and not get caught?

    Thanks for your much more informative and reasonable comment on the subject, little of which I previously knew.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. edNels says:

    Question: How could you tell if an Economist is a complete babbling idiot/obscuritanist who is really worthless? Answer: If his mouth is moving! Or better yet if he has a phd and published anything and works in Academia! and shows up on the Boobtube!

    However with that joke attempted, Hudson again has exhibited the rare exception, his article tells it like I see’s it. That might be a coincident, but I like it, so keep it up Mike.

    Trump has been even a worse let down than BO for crossing his supporters, even though again, the supporters are the last to figure it out!

    About the dumbest f’n thing I ever heard of this steal and aumn tariff. US has let its steel deplete for too long, steel in US is a thing of the colorful past, I think the principals are invested off shore under different corporate cover anyway, but pretending to be protecting what’s left is only going to drive the cost up, which is on everybody that pays for anything made of steel, 90% of which is imported. Steel became a raw commodity and it was a good thing to have it at the lowest possible price to push the consumer economies etc. But it is messy labor intense so let it go and ship in the best deal.

    The first thing any up and coming turd world country does is make steel, they can melt down old cars and scrap metal and make it into low grade rebar to get started.

    The best steel isn’t American anyway, think Germany, Japan, several high grade European steel producers, many average quality now china, Brazil Greece, Turkey, it’s a long list. I guess Mexico does some too, just don’t drink the aqua.

    The problem is, the president is now a flunky clown position who takes orders, to do mostly nothing, because the main plays happen with or without fanfare, and if needed to know, maybe you might if it necessary, but things presidents do, anymore, don’t matter much, so Trump is perfect for the slot. He is fully occupied with his tweeting, and assessing the insults incoming.

    Each and every president back to (potentially… haha, Daniel Quayle) has been worse, some might have had normal IQ’s only slightly impaired with sociopathy conditions, and so on, but the position is being eroded along with American living standards and conditions, in general, and though you might not notice, until you’re in your dotage, and the young will go blind from smartphone demensia syndrome. ( brain just falls out by early 30′s.) Looking back in the future (rear view mirror) of hindsight, ”Gee, how’d that happen?”

    Best economic articles and the worst comments, what’s up with Hudson that he only draws attention from half wit totally brainwashed contingent of the deplorable right who believe yesterdays BS rags to riches ”freemarket” mythology, I didn’t think they could hack through ”Economics articles” but good for them for trying, if they ain’t bots that is!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maple Curtain
    Given the ad hominems laced throughout your commentary, we can evaluate the strength of your (non) argument.

    Odds-on betting is that your are some white-collar time-server in a sinecure far removed from the actual creation of wealth in a society, and you don't give a toss about people in less secure positions economically.

    You want to know why nationalism is on the rise throughout the world, just look in the mirror.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Steel and aluminium are not raw materials; they are intermediate goods (the author is not talking about the mined metal, aluminium, but the forged product).

    The country that does not forge its own steel/aluminium is a country that cannot defend itself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. @edNels
    Question: How could you tell if an Economist is a complete babbling idiot/obscuritanist who is really worthless? Answer: If his mouth is moving! Or better yet if he has a phd and published anything and works in Academia! and shows up on the Boobtube!

    However with that joke attempted, Hudson again has exhibited the rare exception, his article tells it like I see's it. That might be a coincident, but I like it, so keep it up Mike.

    Trump has been even a worse let down than BO for crossing his supporters, even though again, the supporters are the last to figure it out!

    About the dumbest f'n thing I ever heard of this steal and aumn tariff. US has let its steel deplete for too long, steel in US is a thing of the colorful past, I think the principals are invested off shore under different corporate cover anyway, but pretending to be protecting what's left is only going to drive the cost up, which is on everybody that pays for anything made of steel, 90% of which is imported. Steel became a raw commodity and it was a good thing to have it at the lowest possible price to push the consumer economies etc. But it is messy labor intense so let it go and ship in the best deal.

    The first thing any up and coming turd world country does is make steel, they can melt down old cars and scrap metal and make it into low grade rebar to get started.

    The best steel isn't American anyway, think Germany, Japan, several high grade European steel producers, many average quality now china, Brazil Greece, Turkey, it's a long list. I guess Mexico does some too, just don't drink the aqua.

    The problem is, the president is now a flunky clown position who takes orders, to do mostly nothing, because the main plays happen with or without fanfare, and if needed to know, maybe you might if it necessary, but things presidents do, anymore, don't matter much, so Trump is perfect for the slot. He is fully occupied with his tweeting, and assessing the insults incoming.

    Each and every president back to (potentially… haha, Daniel Quayle) has been worse, some might have had normal IQ's only slightly impaired with sociopathy conditions, and so on, but the position is being eroded along with American living standards and conditions, in general, and though you might not notice, until you're in your dotage, and the young will go blind from smartphone demensia syndrome. ( brain just falls out by early 30's.) Looking back in the future (rear view mirror) of hindsight, ''Gee, how'd that happen?''

    Best economic articles and the worst comments, what's up with Hudson that he only draws attention from half wit totally brainwashed contingent of the deplorable right who believe yesterdays BS rags to riches ''freemarket'' mythology, I didn't think they could hack through ''Economics articles'' but good for them for trying, if they ain't bots that is!

    Given the ad hominems laced throughout your commentary, we can evaluate the strength of your (non) argument.

    Odds-on betting is that your are some white-collar time-server in a sinecure far removed from the actual creation of wealth in a society, and you don’t give a toss about people in less secure positions economically.

    You want to know why nationalism is on the rise throughout the world, just look in the mirror.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. poop says:

    Curious as to the thoughts of those who know what they are talking about. Note: I am leaving out the rest of the US bullshit political, military, social, and economic factors.

    As many have suggested, the US engages in a massive infrastructure overhaul. This means not just roads, but bridges, dams, levees, rail, harbors, dredging, etc. being built or rebuilt. This also means steel… lots of steel. Instead of raising tariffs, what if any government contract to do said work was contingent upon using US manufactured steel.

    Then:

    1. No trade war because no tariffs

    2. Theoretically, no increase in prices for manufacturers that import raw materials (ie beer kegs), maybe even lower them

    3. Essentially ensure domestic steel mills will have to be built and staffed to supply the materials for the end user, which is, say, a bridge being built from US steel.

    4. Theoretically, over the long run reinvigorate US industry to the extent that it is at least semi-competitive in a generation because modern manufacturing infrastructure is now already in place.

    Unless I am missing something, this is an opportunity to have “trickle down” employment and economic development without the net negative effects of trade tariffs. Those who know what they are talking about, please advise.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. Stein says:
    @freebird
    This article is nothing but elite globalist rubbish.

    http://inthesetimes.com/article/16895/subsidized_steel_is_ruining_us_industry

    You mean the article you link to

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Michael Hudson Comments via RSS