Except for the facts that 1) he wouldn't have done it because this was prompted by the United Steelworkers union and 2) he didn't make campaign promises as well as recent statements against protectionism while in office of just this sort.Somehow, I can't help the feeling that if Dubja would've done the same thing, he'd have been declared a hero for saving American jobs and standing up to those commie bastards. Really depends on the angle you want to view it from I suppose...
So, the only real, tangible consequence of all of this right now is that shit tires will probably go up in price about $10/tire? Yeah, real terrible.Q: How does all this affect the consumer?
A: For tire shoppers, the tariff will raise the cost of Chinese imports, which tend to be mostly lower-end and store or generic brands.
Some industry observers put the average cost of an American tire at over $100, while the cost of a comparable Chinese model can be half that.
The Alliance for American Manufacturing, which includes the Steelworkers union and supports the higher tariff, said the ITC report shows that the higher tariff would only result in price increases of 5 percent to 7 percent for Chinese tires, or about $3.50 per tire.
But the tariffs are expected to raise pricing of all kinds of tires to some degree because there will be fewer cheap competitors.
Companies like Goodyear will be under less pressure to lower prices since their cheaper competition will shrink. These companies have also been cutting production to scale back their business, so that means there will be fewer tires for sale. It all adds up to less incentive for tire makers to put their products on sale.
That may be good news for the struggling industry, but not for consumers looking for a bargain.
As for chicken, there are no tariffs to deal with since the U.S. does not import chicken from China, so it's not likely U.S. prices will be affected. But a spat with a major export market could hurt the already struggling industry if it escalates. There could be retaliatory tariffs against exports of chicken to China, or the loss of access to that market altogether.
Someone else explain to Dogbert how kneecapping the bottom of a market makes *all* the prices in said market rise, please. I'm unfortunately too busy with work to teach Econ 102 at the current time, plus I am not going to type it out on this iPhone.
FTFM.I still don't see the big deal.
So, the only real, tangible consequence of all of this right now is that
shittires will probably go up in price about $10/tire? Yeah, real terrible.
Funny, that wasn't bolded in the article.Obama's action marks a shift from the Bush administration, which was routinely criticized for being too delicate in confronting Beijing's alleged trade violations. Obama promised during his presidential campaign that he would do it differently.
Well, that would take away from the Obama-"Hope and Change"-bashing. Duh.Funny, that wasn't bolded in the article.
Because I already covered the price increase, and because I'm not going to type out a long post on a goddamn iPhone keyboard to explain basic economics.Well, that would take away from the Obama-"Hope and Change"-bashing. Duh.
I was actually trolling to see if Spectre would start complaining about the price increase, which is the real issue of this article... since he hasn't yet. All he's said is a little blurb about it, and then he goes off on an Obama/union/bailout/etc tangent.
Except Chicken Little, that's exactly what the Little Shrub did back in 2002 when he imposed tariffs on steel imports to try to cultivate union support for the '04 election. Bush's tariff was much farther reaching since steel is a raw material and not a finished product. They helped steel producing states, but drastically hurt steel consumer states, such as Michigan, Tennessee, and other manufacturing states. This tariff is on a finished product from a country that artificially keeps its export prices down.Except for the facts that 1) he wouldn't have done it because this was prompted by the United Steelworkers union and 2) he didn't make campaign promises as well as recent statements against protectionism while in office of just this sort.
Are you kidding me? You want the Federal Government to create another level of bureaucracy to test tire performance? Who determines the criteria for passing the test or the procedures of the test themselves? Is it a lab test or real world test? How often are the test run? Will there be revaluations of a tire that all ready past the test? Are the tires taken by random from the production line? Where does the money come from to pay for these test; the technicians, evaluators, the testing site, etc... If the cost burden is pushed to the tire manufactures, how do you think they are going to recoup their cost...by increasing the price of the tires.Spectre said:If they'd been smart (asking way too much from this administration, I know), you simply raise the minimum standards for tires and require by-the-lot testing. Most of the Chinese tires would fail miserably and both 'protectionist' and safety interests would be served - plus the Chinese couldn't complain about it without looking like idiots.
But we are still in the driver seat in this relationship. When you have more cash than you know what to do with, you invest it. In essence China has panted themselves in a corner and that is why the Chinese keep buying US Treasury Bonds...Spectre said:How stupid do you have to be to annoy the people who are the only ones lending you money to carry out your schemes????
What the Chinese are worried about is that the Obama administration's fiscal policy will cause the price of US bonds to fall and/or the purchasing power of the dollar could fall. Either way China loses. Plus in recent history the US has had a bad habit of stiffing our creditors by letting the dollar slide, such as Japan in the 1980s. Similar to today Japan had a huge trade surplus with the US, which in turn led to asset bubble that when it popped, spun Japan into a resession that they are still realing from. Some say China is facing the same bubble since they report Madoff like increase in GDP each year. If China did sell US holdings we would simple devalue our currency,(basically print even more money) then value of those holdings would plummet.The reality behind the noisy public debate is that China has little choice. Because the nation still runs a large trade surplus ? although a smaller one this year ? it has to find somewhere to put large amounts of foreign currency every month. The U.S. debt market remains the best and only real option. If China really wanted to cut back on its purchases of U.S. debt, it would have to take steps to reduce the size of its trade surplus: most obviously, letting its currency appreciate again. Most economists think that?s unlikely to happen while China?s exports remain depressed.
Chinese officials have themselves publicly expressed worries about what U.S. fiscal and monetary policies will do to the values of their holdings. But those statements have poorly matched the government?s actual behavior in the bond market. Such comments seem to be mostly a response to public opinion, of the kind reflected in the Global Times, that is generally skeptical of the value of buying U.S. debt.