United We Stand - uwsboard.com

Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
It is currently Wed Apr 25, 2018 10:24 am

Time zone: America/New_York [ DST ]


UWS DWF UWS Lunch UWS Sports UWS Help TSL Football TSL Lounge TSL MBB Acronyms Top 25 Topics


Forum rules


Please be civil.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:25 am
Posts: 9757
Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thought[/quote]
There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.

Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html[/quote]

Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/

So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.[/quote]

First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.

Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.

There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.

The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.[/quote]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 5c4664c638[/quote]

ok, on fair terms as the article says, it it not the give away the farm Obummer terms[/quote]

Please explain the give away in the TPP.[/quote]

I will work up the dissertation this evening after I get home from work (office job), get all the farm work done, get the work done for my old job that I am still doing the accounting for, and get my taxes done which are rather complex this year. patience grasshopper. My guess is the people that are very skilled in trade negotiations and their dissatisfaction with the current terms of the TPP are aware of the issues, thus why Trump said "on our terms". But I will get right on it!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:06 am
Posts: 2818
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
Please explain the give away in the TPP.


I will work up the dissertation this evening after I get home from work (office job), get all the farm work done, get the work done for my old job that I am still doing the accounting for, and get my taxes done which are rather complex this year. patience grasshopper. My guess is the people that are very skilled in trade negotiations and their dissatisfaction with the current terms of the TPP are aware of the issues, thus why Trump said "on our terms". But I will get right on it!


I didn't ask for a dissertation. Basically, you don't know of any issues other than Obama.

There are certainly issues, and there always will be. It's a deal signed by multiple countries, you can't get 100% of what you want.

_________________
People who know, know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:58 pm
Posts: 20625
Party: Draintheswamp
CFB Apologist wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VisorBoy wrote:
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html


Oh, bullshit


No kidding.. I love it. If Trump tweeted that he was a VT fan, liberal VT alumni would root for UVA. Clockwork


Yep. Trump signed legislation shutting down prostitution websites (Backpage?) today and the women's march bozos ridiculed him for destroying methods of income for women. :lol:

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018 ... ex-worker/

_________________
“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child — miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”

― P.J. O'Rourke


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 11255
Location: New York, NY
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thought

There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.

Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html[/quote]

Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/

So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.[/quote]

First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.

Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.

There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.

The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.[/quote]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 5c4664c638[/quote]

ok, on fair terms as the article says, it it not the give away the farm Obummer terms[/quote]

Please explain the give away in the TPP.[/quote]

I will work up the dissertation this evening after I get home from work (office job), get all the farm work done, get the work done for my old job that I am still doing the accounting for, and get my taxes done which are rather complex this year. patience grasshopper. My guess is the people that are very skilled in trade negotiations and their dissatisfaction with the current terms of the TPP are aware of the issues, thus why Trump said "on our terms". But I will get right on it![/quote]

Blind spot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:12 am
Posts: 5445
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thought

There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.

Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html


Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/

So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.[/quote]

First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.

Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.

There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.

The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.[/quote]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 5c4664c638[/quote]

ok, on fair terms as the article says, it it not the give away the farm Obummer terms[/quote]

Please explain the give away in the TPP.[/quote]

I will work up the dissertation this evening after I get home from work (office job), get all the farm work done, get the work done for my old job that I am still doing the accounting for, and get my taxes done which are rather complex this year. patience grasshopper. My guess is the people that are very skilled in trade negotiations and their dissatisfaction with the current terms of the TPP are aware of the issues, thus why Trump said "on our terms". But I will get right on it![/quote]

Blind spot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

No clue spot.

_________________
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." - Voltaire


"Christian socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat" Karl Marx


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 11255
Location: New York, NY
HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thought

There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.

Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html


Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/

So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.


First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.

Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.

There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.

The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.[/quote]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 5c4664c638[/quote]

ok, on fair terms as the article says, it it not the give away the farm Obummer terms[/quote]

Please explain the give away in the TPP.[/quote]

I will work up the dissertation this evening after I get home from work (office job), get all the farm work done, get the work done for my old job that I am still doing the accounting for, and get my taxes done which are rather complex this year. patience grasshopper. My guess is the people that are very skilled in trade negotiations and their dissatisfaction with the current terms of the TPP are aware of the issues, thus why Trump said "on our terms". But I will get right on it![/quote]

Blind spot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

No clue spot.[/quote]

You are correct that I have no clue why Trump would pull out of the TPP, cite the ability to negotiate better deals with individual countries, and then propose re-joining the TPP before trying to negotiate with the individual countries.

I’m sure it’s a brilliant move.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Time zone: America/New_York [ DST ]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: