Juggernaut of hypocrisy but with steel tariffs

[Rolla ZE]

So you firmly believe that the tariffs will benefit the US?

A tariff placed on imported steel will raise the price of steel in the US.

You want steel protection because the price of steel has been declining. But this has been happening for many years and can mainly be attributed to new technology lowering the cost of production, not from imports.

You believe that the tariffs will protect jobs, but what of the jobs in other industries such as auto, appliances etc. that rely on steel?

The big troubled steel companies have to worry about the domestic competition, not the foreign.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Davros:
You asked Dramnek where he was from, but there's no mistaking where you're coming from Magik . I guess I can look forward to a caustic reply very shortly, because to date almost no one has been allowed to challenge the Bush policy without getting an earful from you. You will be pleased to note that I come from a land with no protectionism for it's steel, sugar, beef etc - one that is quite use to getting regularly kicked by the subsidy wars.

************************************************** ***************
AUSTRALIA is considering a protest to the World Trade Organisation against a US decision to slap a 30 per cent tariff on imported steel to protect its moribund domestic industry.

The move risks a trade war with key US allies in the fight against terrorism, threw half of BHP's US steel exports into turmoil and potentially threatens hundreds of Australian jobs.

The Howard Government announced an immediate industry summit and raised the prospect of a WTO appeal.

The European Union promised action at the WTO, branding the decision a massive setback for world trade. Russia announced it was banning imports of US chickens, depriving American poultry producers of half their exports.

The decision affects 400,000 tonnes of BHP's rolled steel exports, worth about $200 million, and BHP Steel chief Kirby Adams described the decision by President George W. Bush as an "affront". Mr Adams would not rule out job losses at the Port Kembla steelworks, south of Sydney.

Trade Minister Mark Vaile, who was woken at 5am by a call from US Commerce Secretary Don Evans conveying the news, said the decision would have "serious negative impacts" on Australia.

The Government flagged better laws to protect the Australian market from becoming a dumping ground for cheap steel, but Mr Vaile said the Australian industry was "well placed – it is very, very competitive".

Mr Bush, a self-proclaimed free-trader, denied he was hypocritical or acting illegally.

He said the decision, made under heavy pressure from US steel states, was levelling the playing field against subsidised foreign competition.
************************************************** ******************

The news is just "Too Bad", if you are a superior and more cost effective "non-subsidised" competitor. Bush will try to drive you out of business to protect what plainly isn't working back home.


Don't get me wrong Magik, I support Bush on many things - certainly on his stance on terrorism, and the free trade ethics he espouses. The tariff moves that he made can be defended on the basis of an attempt to address national interest, but that infers that the hypocrisy inherent in his statements wrt free trade become indefensible.

Only my 2 cents - and in US terms (conversion rate) that is worth about 1.04 cents .

---

Your first point..yes I make it publicly known which country I live in its in my profile and at the bottom of my posts, so when I bash another country people know if I live there or not. I commented that Not everyone and ONE person in particular seem to prefer not to let that be known. It was a comment nothing more, no antipathy at all. Sorry to hear your country of Australia is doing so poorly. Mayhap that isnt the fault of the USA though. Actually Im pretty certain its the fault of the Australian government. Every country should be charged with taking care of its own business, sorry that big countries are better suited in some areas than smaller but thats life. As for Bush and his policy..he is following the advice of his cabinet, which by the way is made up of a people from both sides of our government..I read once that due to the closeness of the election Bush actually went out of his way to try and balance the cabinet.

Lastly Id like to say, that my posts are not written to be "caustic" I just TRY to make my point directly without too much extraneous BS but I fail miserably and I know it [img]smile.gif[/img] at least I try [img]smile.gif[/img] Im not a writer by nature and do much better in a live verbal debate than I do in type. So don't take it personally its just the way I am...I TRY not to take stuff from here personally.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rolla ZE:
So you firmly believe that the tariffs will benefit the US?

A tariff placed on imported steel will raise the price of steel in the US.

You want steel protection because the price of steel has been declining. But this has been happening for many years and can mainly be attributed to new technology lowering the cost of production, not from imports.

You believe that the tariffs will protect jobs, but what of the jobs in other industries such as auto, appliances etc. that rely on steel?

The big troubled steel companies have to worry about the domestic competition, not the foreign.

---

Its good to see Rolla that you are so much more qualified to make economic policy than the people who have dedicated their lives and carreers to it. Im looking foward to the day we can see your name in print as a cabinet member [img]smile.gif[/img] Ok that was sarcasm...your post just sounded like the Monday Morning Quarterbacks...seriously if you are an economic expert in the field of tarrifs and trade please, volunteer your services to the government, you will be able to make quite a decent living here in the nations capitol. This is a serious invite, because for people who really are talented it is very very easy to get involved. If I get some time Ill PM you a couple of addresses down on NewHampshire ave, they have an organization that does nothing but work on Economic models.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Donut:


I think 2,3 & 4 are more or less the same thing but never mind. As for Bush did not campaign on free trade here is a quote from his campaign announcement speech in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, June 12, 1999.:

'I’ll work to end tariffs and break down barriers everywhere, entirely, so the whole world trades in freedom. The fearful build walls. The confident demolish them. I am confident in American workers and farmers and producers. And I am confident that America’s best is the best in the world.'

and from a Republican debate in West Columbia, South Carolina Jan 7, 2000:

I would be a free trading president, a president that will work tirelessly to open up markets for agricultural products all over the world. I believe our American farmers. can compete so long as the playing field is level. That’s why I am such a strong advocate of free trade and that’s why I reject protectionism and isolation because I think it hurts our American farmers.

Looks like he was in favour of free trade there.

Before anyone complains that this is an American bashing thread, I would like to say that I have read quite a few articles from US newspapers about this subject and they all appear to be against this move.

I think that a blanket statement that we are making uninformed generalisations is a bit rich coming from you Magik.

---

Hiho Davros I envy your research time [img]smile.gif[/img] And Ill have you know that MY generalisms are ANYTHING but Uninformed, unlike 90% of the posters here I have lived the events you guys speculate and pontificate on. Ive been out there, Ive been under fire and I have seen what I talk about. I dont mind youngsters proffering thier takes on things [img]smile.gif[/img] but I do discount the value of a lot of it because it lacks one lil tiny ingredient...experience... when you're 40 come talk to me. Or when you have actually been part of the process by helping to make policy talk to me... (in useing the term You're Im speaking in general and not meaning YOU in specific here)

There is a reason that most radicals are college students [img]smile.gif[/img] they are young, and impetuous and they have no concept of what cannot be done. They are the idealists, the dreamers and in a lot of cases the motivators of change....more often though they grow up, learn that things are the way they are because of the way things work in the real world So Ill sit here and make my INFORMED Generalisms and when PROVEN wrong, I will admit it.

As for your speech excerpts (nice job of finding them by the way) sounds like he is for free trade when it is possible, doesnt mean that he is going to blindly apply his idealisms despite the facts or the realities that his economic advisors give him.

And lastly I would like to say [img]smile.gif[/img] LONG LIVE KING GEORGE W BUSH! Im sure he is behind the black helicopters and the new world order too [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Davros]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:



Your first point..yes I make it publicly known which country I live in its in my profile and at the bottom of my posts, so when I bash another country people know if I live there or not. I commented that Not everyone and ONE person in particular seem to prefer not to let that be known. It was a comment nothing more, no antipathy at all. Sorry to hear your country of Australia is doing so poorly. Mayhap that isnt the fault of the USA though. Actually Im pretty certain its the fault of the Australian government. Every country should be charged with taking care of its own business, sorry that big countries are better suited in some areas than smaller but thats life. As for Bush and his policy..he is following the advice of his cabinet, which by the way is made up of a people from both sides of our government..I read once that due to the closeness of the election Bush actually went out of his way to try and balance the cabinet.

Lastly Id like to say, that my posts are not written to be "caustic" I just TRY to make my point directly without too much extraneous BS but I fail miserably and I know it [img]smile.gif[/img] at least I try [img]smile.gif[/img] Im not a writer by nature and do much better in a live verbal debate than I do in type. So don't take it personally its just the way I am...I TRY not to take stuff from here personally.

---

Hi MagiK - yes, I am aware that your location is displayed in your profile - I was maKing the point that it didn't need to be, because all and sundry can see where you're coming from via your replies.

You again missed the point- Australia's steel manufactureres aren't doing poorly - they are extremely competitive in an open playing field. In case you hadn't noted - that playing field has been changed. Yes, our government could play tit for tat on subsidies. Thing is we also have a belief on free trade, and we try not to be so hypocritical about it. It is not just something we espouse at election time or when visiting that country or area.

I understand your defense of his actions, but thinK you are being just a tad blinKered on the hypocrisy issue. So man goes on to prove blacK is white and gets Killed at the next zebra crossing. I wasn't trying to get personal when I addressed my first post at you, but it was a way of noting the obvious - anyone with a contrary opinin on the thread had already recieved a MagiKal reply. I knew mine was coming .

And what do you mean by slandering me when you were really replying to Donut - are you implying that we are the same person? Hey Donut - we have a Konspiracy theorist here .

quote:

---

Originally posted by Davros:


Hi MagiK - yes, I am aware that your location is displayed in your profile - I was maKing the point that it didn't need to be, because all and sundry can see where you're coming from via your replies.

You again missed the point- Australia's steel manufactureres aren't doing poorly - they are extremely competitive in an open playing field. In case you hadn't noted - that playing field has been changed. Yes, our government could play tit for tat on subsidies. Thing is we also have a belief on free trade, and we try not to be so hypocritical about it. It is not just something we espouse at election time or when visiting that country or area.

I understand your defense of his actions, but thinK you are being just a tad blinKered on the hypocrisy issue. So man goes on to prove blacK is white and gets Killed at the next zebra crossing. I wasn't trying to get personal when I addressed my first post at you, but it was a way of noting the obvious - anyone with a contrary opinin on the thread had already recieved a MagiKal reply. I knew mine was coming .

And what do you mean by slandering me when you were really replying to Donut - are you implying that we are the same person? Hey Donut - we have a Konspiracy theorist here .

---

Nonono!!! Im sorry I did not mean to imply you and Donut were the same [img]smile.gif[/img] I mixed my replies..I do that a lot especially when Im replying from work..I apologize for that. At any rate, I don't think Im being blinkered [img]smile.gif[/img] I like that term though [img]smile.gif[/img] I just realize that Wanting to do something and promising to try and do it in an election campaign and having to live with realities that are only revealed to you after you get into office are part and parcel of how things work... Bush doesnt make the economic policies...he does what his cabinet members say he has to, of course he can push for the things he thinks are more important but usually presidents allow the experts in the cabinet draw up the policies and then as president he tries to pick the ones most akin to his own personal beliefs. I dont see it as being hypocritical. I see it as the way the game is played.

Personally I never liked tarrifs on anything BUT i realize that they are going to exist and that some countries just will never agree to drop them...indeed some countries can't afford to drop them.

But the speaches someone found on here and posted aside Tarrifs and free trade were not a major "plank" in this past election. The election was fought over military, foreign relations, welfare, medicare, and a whole host of issues, but neither candidate made much of an issue over free trade and tarrifs. Or if they did the News agencies here in Washington faile dot point it out on the nightly news as much as they did the other issues.

Anyway, I love Aussieland, and NZ too [img]smile.gif[/img] both high on my places to visit..Im really torqued that I didnt get to stop by either place when I was in my globe trotting youth.

[AzureWolf]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:

There is a reason that most radicals are college students [img]smile.gif[/img] they are young, and impetuous and they have no concept of what cannot be done. They are the idealists, the dreamers and in a lot of cases the motivators of change....more often though they grow up, learn that things are the way they are because of the way things work in the real world So Ill sit here and make my INFORMED Generalisms and when PROVEN wrong, I will admit it.

---

"They are the idealists, the dreamers and in a lot of cases the motivators of change"

And your saying this like it is a bad thing????
Have you ever stopped to think that its because we are not so damn set in our ways we think one thing and cannot be convinced that anything else has a rats chance in hell of being right. Thats not just being conservative. That is stopping dead in the tracks and refusing to move forward any more.
Try actually listening to some of the "youngsters" for a change (even though some of them are just as old or older then you!) instead of outright dismissing their ideas as flights of fancy, and you may get a refreshing take on the world.
Try opening your eyes a bit, the world is changing and if you refuse to change with it you will be left behind.

[norompanlasolas]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:


Hiho Davros I envy your research time [img]smile.gif[/img] And Ill have you know that MY generalisms are ANYTHING but Uninformed, unlike 90% of the posters here I have lived the events you guys speculate and pontificate on. Ive been out there, Ive been under fire and I have seen what I talk about. I dont mind youngsters proffering thier takes on things [img]smile.gif[/img] but I do discount the value of a lot of it because it lacks one lil tiny ingredient...experience... when you're 40 come talk to me. Or when you have actually been part of the process by helping to make policy talk to me... (in useing the term You're Im speaking in general and not meaning YOU in specific here)

There is a reason that most radicals are college students [img]smile.gif[/img] they are young, and impetuous and they have no concept of what cannot be done. They are the idealists, the dreamers and in a lot of cases the motivators of change....more often though they grow up, learn that things are the way they are because of the way things work in the real world So Ill sit here and make my INFORMED Generalisms and when PROVEN wrong, I will admit it.

---

ehmm... i could be wrong but as far as i know davros is in his 30s and donut in his 40s or somth like that. so i guess they are not what you would call "youngsters"... no offense you guys. [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/biglaugh.gif[/img]

[Downunda]

Carefull Azzy, you're playing with fire [img]graemlins/blueblink.gif[/img]

[Donut]

Yes Magik, it would be good if you could differentiate between Davros and myself. So you have been under fire. Was it in a real tariff war?


It wasn't too difficult to find the quotes - if you Know the subject. I found those quotes in seconds, there are hundreds of web sites devoted to the campaign promises of all the Presidential candidates. The idea that free trade was not a major planK of the Bush campaign is as ludicrous as your later assertion that he fought his campaign on foreign policy. He had no foreign policy until it was forced upon him.

Now to the part of your post that made me laugh the most.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:


I dont mind youngsters proffering thier takes on things [img]smile.gif[/img] but I do discount the value of a lot of it because it lacks one lil tiny ingredient...experience... when you're 40 come talk to me. )

---

Did you thinK I was a youngster? ROTFLSHMBB. I am 46 and have more experience than you can shake a sticK at. I have enough experience to Know that not having worn a uniform doesn't automatically make someone uninformed. Your other comment about not being able to have an opinion if you haven't been a policy maker. Do you really believe that?

BTW the 30% tariff on steel imports is expected to cost 6,000 jobs in Britain. Please don't tell me you don't care. You see, like Davros, I can see where you are coming from. ;D

[ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: Donut after re-reading Davros' post]

[ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: Donut ]