zardozAnd now, coming soon to Wisconsin, FOXCONN (admittedly Foxconn is a Taiwanese company); however, the facility may not live up to the bogus promises Foxconn made when they were bribing our not-so-illustrious governor Scott Walker.
I read that as well. It's a glass half full or half empty scenario . Opposing politicans to Walker trotted out the glass half empty (including the old geazer that is Governor now). Proponents of Walker trotted out the glass half full.
Truth is the CEO of FOXCONN doesn't know yet either way but definitely wants a precence in Wisconsin he can expand later if needed. I believe he is also running for President of Taiwan so that has to be a distraction and FOXCONN might have a new CEO soon.
EuclidThey say that trade wars can lead to real wars.
Interesting because Japan's entry into World War II was prompted by another round of Economic Sanctions being imposed upon it by the United States. Not really a trade war there, we were punishing Japan for past aggression against another country. Sanctions are considered an act of war via international law. Tarriffs are not.
Regardless the President usually has a Council of Economic Advisors which is a group of individuals (25 in 2016). Of which Navarro is a co-equal. If he is still in that capacity.
BaltACDAAR has been reporting decreased car loading since the first of the year if not into the later part of 2018. I suspect solid business men have real distrust of Trump's economic policy or the lack thereof. Flip Flopping does not create trust.
Less than 5% in each traffic category is that a predictive of a business downturn or normal ebb and flow?
Also the largest two categories above 5% decline were Coal (no surprise there) and Frac Sand, which the article I read which I would love to link to but TRAINS gets upset because it is a competing publication.
Anyway they stated Frac Sand is increasingly sourced locally to where it is used which has led to drop off in shipments that were previously shipped across several states. Crude Oil shipments by rail are up 23% from last year in a YTD comparison to 2018.........according to AAR.
CMStPnP Euclid They say that trade wars can lead to real wars. Interesting because Japan's entry into World War II was prompted by another round of Economic Sanctions being imposed upon it by the United States. Not really a trade war there, we were punishing Japan for past aggression against another country. Sanctions are considered an act of war via international law. Tarriffs are not. Regardless the President usually has a Council of Economic Advisors which is a group of individuals (25 in 2016). Of which Navarro is a co-equal. If he is still in that capacity.
Euclid They say that trade wars can lead to real wars.
I realize tariffs are not an act of war. But they raise tensions between two countries and make them become adversaries. Shooting wars don’t necessarily break out on rational grounds. Trade wars cause economic damage to both parties, and economic damage is sufficient to start a shooting war.
Navarro may be a "co-equal" in some respect, but he is the one who has been interviewed on the news to explain what we are doing with tariffs on China. Our national position is that Americans need not worry because our tariffs on China will not cost us anything. He was asked about that, and he gave a very misleading answer that dodged the question. He said that China will bear costs of the tariffs by the reduction of sales of their products.
That is perfectly true, but the clear implication of our officially stated position is that China pays all the costs, and that is an outright lie to the America people.
It is crystal clear that Navarro is the architect of this misinformation contained in our official national position on our tariffs imposed on China. If you read his background, it is easy to see how radical he is with plans to bring back all lost manufacturing jobs by punishing the countries they went to. Navarro seems like a rather mean spirited and vindictive person who is seeking revenge on China because he thinks they have done us wrong.
The part Navarro leaves out is that our tariffs on Chinese imports are like a sales tax that raises the cost of those products. That tax leaves less money for consumers to spend. When they spend less, U.S. economic growth slows down. As this slowdown cascades and ripples, it can lead to a recession. And with the two biggest actors in the world economy engaged in this tariff war, the recession can become world-wide. It will reduce that quality of life for billions of people.
Euclid CMStPnP Euclid They say that trade wars can lead to real wars. Interesting because Japan's entry into World War II was prompted by another round of Economic Sanctions being imposed upon it by the United States. Not really a trade war there, we were punishing Japan for past aggression against another country. Sanctions are considered an act of war via international law. Tarriffs are not. Regardless the President usually has a Council of Economic Advisors which is a group of individuals (25 in 2016). Of which Navarro is a co-equal. If he is still in that capacity. I realize tariffs are not an act of war. But they raise tensions between two countries and make them become adversaries. Shooting wars don’t necessarily break out on rational grounds. Trade wars cause economic damage to both parties, and economic damage is sufficient to start a shooting war. Navarro may be a "co-equal" in some respect, but he is the one who has been interviewed on the news to explain what we are doing with tariffs on China. Our national position is that Americans need not worry because our tariffs on China will not cost us anything. He was asked about that, and he gave a very misleading answer that dodged the question. He said that China will bear costs of the tariffs by the reduction of sales of their products. That is perfectly true, but the clear implication of our officially stated position is that China pays all the costs, and that is an outright lie to the America people. It is crystal clear that Navarro is the architect of this misinformation contained in our official national position on our tariffs imposed on China. If you read his background, it is easy to see how radical he is with plans to bring back all lost manufacturing jobs by punishing the countries they went to. Navarro seems like a rather mean spirited and vindictive person who is seeking revenge on China because he thinks they have done us wrong. The part Navarro leaves out is that our tariffs on Chinese imports are like a sales tax that raises the cost of those products. That tax leaves less money for consumers to spend. When they spend less, U.S. economic growth slows down. As this slowdown cascades and ripples, it can lead to a recession. And with the two biggest actors in the world economy engaged in this tariff war, the recession can become world-wide. It will reduce that quality of life for billions of people.
Very well explained. Unfortunately, many Americans are taken in by the snake oil salesman in chief's lies.
Shadow the Cats ownerEven during the last major recession my boss did not LAYOFF a single employee.
zardoz over 2000 of those came from 2 carriers alone. NEMF a New England based LTL carrier that shut down due to losing money for years and Falcon which imploded when GM shut down the Lordstown OH plant which accounted for almost 80% of their freight. They were the dedicated steel hauling carrier for Auto plant in Lordstown. When GM closed that plant they lost their primary revenue stream and well they could not make up the difference. LME was a recent one they had been fighting the Teamsters for years over contract talks. LME drivers 3 times had voted out the Teamsters Union and 3 times the NLRB said they had to redo the vote. LME tried to create a new carrier and transfer all their freight to it like CF did and the Teamsters sued and won. So LME said fine and closed the doors putting everyone out of work. Don't believe everything your hearing on the Media reports when it comes to why a carrier shut down. The ones that have failed recently most of them had been on life support for a few years. Falcon was bought a few years ago by a Venture Capital firm that got tired of pouring money down that black hole and said the Hell with it. NEMF had a bigger issue no one wanted to drive for them why they had gone to a deferred maintance program and had a safer score that made them a target for the DOT on every scale. LME the owners there where just tired of dealing with the Teamsters and quit. These 3 carriers account for 2300 out of the 2500 drivers all of which more than likely are already back at work.
EuclidI realize tariffs are not an act of war. But they raise tensions between two countries and make them become adversaries. Shooting wars don’t necessarily break out on rational grounds. Trade wars cause economic damage to both parties, and economic damage is sufficient to start a shooting war.
I really don't see that happening. If it was solely just a China vs U.S. dispute, I still would not see it happening. It's China versus the rest of the world, however.
EuclidThe part Navarro leaves out is that our tariffs on Chinese imports are like a sales tax that raises the cost of those products.
Well #1 your too fixated on Navarro, he does not dominate Economic policy anymore than John Bolton dominates foriegn policy. It's best to have a range of opinions on Economic policy than to get opinions from a choir.
#2 you leave out that it is a "voluntary tax" on consumers. I would agree that consumers HAVE to pay the tax if China was the sole supplier of anything but that is rarely the case and consumers have a choice to switch to alternate items that are less costly.....and they usually will. If the tariffs across the board raised the price of a T-Shirt by 25% I would be concerned but I think you will find the manufacturer will flip T-Shirt manufacture to a country selling at Chinas price or cheaper OR the consumer will. Additionally, you have manufacturers that can cut the cost of the tariff impact via cutting costs such as say transportation. Did you know that Chinese government claims it is still a third world country for various advantages including discounted shipping costs (see link below), is that fair to the U.S.? Last China can cushion some of the tariffs via currency manipulation which I am sure it will continue to do because nowhere on our trade agenda do I see anyone working on that problem. You portray China as the victim here with it's back up against the wall. And I say not so much until we see 50-75% tarriffs. Thats how the Chinese are able to stall and stall, the % amounts Trump has assessed are really not starting to bite the Chinese yet and are only inflicting moderate pain........which they are attempting to circumvent via other means of cheating.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2169144/chinas-cheap-shipping-advantage-explained
Also, check out the explosion in National Debt China owes now. For the life of me I can't figure out why a country that is growing at 6-7% needs even more money that it has to borrow so much.....unless of course, some of the stats we are reading are BS. Also note we only owe China $1.3 Trillion of our debt and that figure might be declining, the rest is IOU's to the U.S. Taxpayer. China owes a much larger portion of it's debt to outside players, which should be worrying to people given how the increase in borrowing by China is increasing year over year.
Shadow the Cats ownerThese 3 carriers account for 2300 out of the 2500 drivers all of which more than likely are already back at work.
CMStPnP Euclid I realize tariffs are not an act of war. But they raise tensions between two countries and make them become adversaries. Shooting wars don’t necessarily break out on rational grounds. Trade wars cause economic damage to both parties, and economic damage is sufficient to start a shooting war. I really don't see that happening. If it was solely just a China vs U.S. dispute, I still would not see it happening. It's China versus the rest of the world, however. Euclid The part Navarro leaves out is that our tariffs on Chinese imports are like a sales tax that raises the cost of those products. Well #1 your too fixated on Navarro, he does not dominate Economic policy anymore than John Bolton dominates foriegn policy. It's best to have a range of opinions on Economic policy than to get opinions from a choir. #2 you leave out that it is a "voluntary tax" on consumers. I would agree that consumers HAVE to pay the tax if China was the sole supplier of anything but that is rarely the case and consumers have a choice to switch to alternate items that are less costly.....and they usually will. If the tariffs across the board raised the price of a T-Shirt by 25% I would be concerned but I think you will find the manufacturer will flip T-Shirt manufacture to a country selling at Chinas price or cheaper OR the consumer will. Additionally, you have manufacturers that can cut the cost of the tariff impact via cutting costs such as say transportation. Did you know that Chinese government claims it is still a third world country for various advantages including discounted shipping costs (see link below), is that fair to the U.S.? Last China can cushion some of the tariffs via currency manipulation which I am sure it will continue to do because nowhere on our trade agenda do I see anyone working on that problem. You portray China as the victim here with it's back up against the wall. And I say not so much until we see 50-75% tarriffs. Thats how the Chinese are able to stall and stall, the % amounts Trump has assessed are really not starting to bite the Chinese yet and are only inflicting moderate pain........which they are attempting to circumvent via other means of cheating. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2169144/chinas-cheap-shipping-advantage-explained Also, check out the explosion in National Debt China owes now. For the life of me I can't figure out why a country that is growing at 6-7% needs even more money that it has to borrow so much.....unless of course, some of the stats we are reading are BS. Also note we only owe China $1.3 Trillion of our debt and that figure might be declining, the rest is IOU's to the U.S. Taxpayer. China owes a much larger portion of it's debt to outside players, which should be worrying to people given how the increase in borrowing by China is increasing year over year.
Euclid I realize tariffs are not an act of war. But they raise tensions between two countries and make them become adversaries. Shooting wars don’t necessarily break out on rational grounds. Trade wars cause economic damage to both parties, and economic damage is sufficient to start a shooting war.
Euclid The part Navarro leaves out is that our tariffs on Chinese imports are like a sales tax that raises the cost of those products.
I certainly did not intend to portray China as a victim in this with their back against the wall, as you say. I don’t like their lousy quality, and I wish we had never let our manufacturing sector freely move all production to China. I like quality. I think you get the best buy for the highest quality, and that people fool themselves by buying the lowest price goods.
I also believe that there is a secondary effect beyond just our job loss. That is that the lower cost products from China have changed our consumer market for our domestic manufacturing. China has taught our domestic manufacturing marketing sector that U.S. consumers want lowest price possible regardless of the lower quality that accompanies it. So now, unencumbered by the need to compete on quality, U.S. marketing is racing China to the lowest possible product pricing no matter how much quality is lost in the process. This seems to be just getting started, but when it plays out, the U.S. consumer will not have any choice but to accept the lowest possible quality. And also because the U.S. manufacturing has a higher overhead cost than China, the U.S. will have to achieve lower quality than China in order to compete with them.
So, no, I don’t think China is a victim here. If anything, I would not be surprised if they turn out to be the victor. While fundamentally, China does not pay the tariffs, they do have the option to pay them in effect by reimbursing those who do actually pay them. So China would, in effect, be discounting their products in order to maintain sales. I suspect that they are economically strong enough to do that. It would be a bold noble statement for them to pick up our tariff tab on behalf of the U.S. consumer. It would make them seem magnanimous and further endear them to the U.S. consumer while making our Administration’s tariffs seem petty. It would turn them into the winner in the eyes of the world.
I focus on Navarro because he is the only one who has come out and explained the tariff rationale to the American public. He explained it word for word the way the President explained it, and then he went on to elaborate. He reiterated the point made by the President that U.S. consumers will not pay the tariffs, but rather, China will. When pressed on this, he veered off into the premise that the tariffs will cost the Chinese in reduced sales, which of course they will. But he most clearly dodged and dismissed premise that the U.S. consumers will be paying the tariffs and this is pure deceit. The tariffs are not a cost that we impose on China as if we were placing a tax on them. Our only power is to impose the tariffs on the imported products for the purpose of raising the price and reducing the consumption. Then the reduced consumption hurts China.
The tariffs may be a voluntary tax on U.S. consumers considering that consumption is optional. But if they shift their purchases to other countries where no such tariffs apply, that new surge of demand upon those other countries will cause them to raise their price, and so the consumers will be paying the tariffs in the form of inflated prices from those substitute source countries.
Also, those other countries are not going to increase buying our products just because our consumers have started to buy their products. So again, we will have what tariff advocates call unfair trade; and they will want to put tariffs on those countries that have suddenly stepped up their imports to the U.S. as a workaround for our tariffs on China.
China is getting scared as hell why they were expecting about a 8% with all the government spending growth in the GDP. They had a less than 5% actual growth due to the tariffs. That means their economy shrunk overall 3%. Yes they showed a positive expansion however if you removed all the government expansion in spending they had a shrinking economy. This is the first time they ever had a shrinking economy in the last 3 decades ever since they started making everything for the world. People that know say it is about to hit the fan in China and get a heck of a lot worse overthere in the next 6 months.
Is that something to be happy about?
The sudden emergence of this vindictive and spiteful attitude toward China reveals itself to be a populist backlash against China under the faulty premise that they stole all of our jobs and have been cheating ever since. So now we are going to finally stand up to them and set things straight. This is a pretty creepy attitude if you ask me. We are blaming them for our shortcomings. It is like an international lynching.
Apparently completely lost in this lust for vengeance is the fact that tariffs are a two-way street. They start fights. Both sides get hurt. That is why the economic wisdom concludes that it is best to never use tariffs to solve a problem. They always lead to retaliation and both sides end up with less than they started with.
This move on China is being framed as America reclaiming its lost glory by showing the world we will no longer be pushed around. It has been described as re-ordering the last several decades.
If this move on China with tariffs causes a U.S. recession, are we going to blame that on China too? Of course it will be their fault because if it wasn’t for their cheating, we would not have had to place tariffs on them. No, this is a dumb move and I suspect China may be smart enough to win this trade war.
For those that think doing business in China is a great thing here is what is required when you sign a contract to do business in China. First off you agree to give the Chinese Government full and complete access to all Intellectial property you have along with all patents your company and employees hold. Second you grant them with no termintation clause at all full production rights to make same even if you stop working with the company your doing business with or if they start competing with you in the same markets. Next you agree to pay a tax of 30% on all your raw materials that makes your product even if they are locally sourced in China. Lastly your company agrees to pay a 10% export tax to the Chinese Government on all products made at the factory. My source for this is several classmates of my husbands that have been running factories for US based companies that are pulling out of China. That is what doing business in China is like.
Shadow the Cats ownerFor those that think doing business in China is a great thing here is what is required when you sign a contract to do business in China.
Now, all of a sudden, we don't like free trade because it is not fair. There are winners and losers. The playing field is not level. The evidence we cite is that we import more from China than they import from us. We treat this imbalance as a crime committed by China. We say it is not fair trade, and that China is cheating.
All of this sounds like the standard argument against capitalism. It is not fair. The rich get richer.
EuclidWe say it is not fair trade, and that China is cheating.
A lot of the imbalance is in wages. There are places (not just China) paying people single digits per day to do work we insist on paying $15 an hour and more for.
Something that takes, say, two manhours to manufacture costs $30 (and more) here, but perhaps fifty cents elsewhere.
That they can manufacture an item and ship it half way around the world for less than we can produce it here speaks volumes.
If we can figure a way around that issue, maybe things will balance out.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
tree68 Euclid We say it is not fair trade, and that China is cheating. A lot of the imbalance is in wages. There are places (not just China) paying people single digits per day to do work we insist on paying $15 an hour and more for. Something that takes, say, two manhours to manufacture costs $30 (and more) here, but perhaps fifty cents elsewhere. That they can manufacture an item and ship it half way around the world for less than we can produce it here speaks volumes. If we can figure a way around that issue, maybe things will balance out.
Euclid We say it is not fair trade, and that China is cheating.
Times have changed. The quality and technology of many/most consumer and other goods made in China is at least as good or better than what might be made here (often hasn't been made here in 20+ years, just assembled, if that).
charlie hebdoTimes have changed. The quality and technology of many/most consumer and other goods made in China is at least as good or better than what might be made here (often hasn't been made here in 20+ years, just assembled, if that).
Exactly. If we can figure out how to make those items at equal quality for $4 a day, we'll be all set.
Unfortunately, we've largely priced ourselves out of the world labor market.
EuclidI focus on Navarro because he is the only one who has come out and explained the tariff rationale to the American public. He explained it word for word the way the President explained it, and then he went on to elaborate. He reiterated the point made by the President that U.S. consumers will not pay the tariffs, but rather, China will. When pressed on this, he veered off into the premise that the tariffs will cost the Chinese in reduced sales, which of course they will. But he most clearly dodged and dismissed premise that the U.S. consumers will be paying the tariffs and this is pure deceit. The tariffs are not a cost that we impose on China as if we were placing a tax on them.
A few years ago, maybe as much as 8 or 10 because time gets away from me, I was watching the head of the US Chamber of Commerece testifying before some congressional committee. He was asked what changes needed to be done in the US to make us competative with the world.
His reply was we needed to get rid of minimum wage laws, labor laws, environmental laws and regulations, and just about any other regulation that business finds too restrictive. In effect he said to compete with the third world countries that our manufacturing was moving to, we would have to become a third world country, too.
Jeff
jeffhergertA few years ago, maybe as much as 8 or 10 because time gets away from me, I was watching the head of the US Chamber of Commerece testifying before some congressional committee. He was asked what changes needed to be done in the US to make us competative with the world. His reply was we needed to get rid of minimum wage laws, labor laws, environmental laws and regulations, and just about any other regulation that business finds too restrictive. In effect he said to compete with the third world countries that our manufacturing was moving to, we would have to become a third world country, too. Jeff
And it would apper that the current administration is trying to implement that strategy - making the USA 3rd World.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
tree68 charlie hebdo Times have changed. The quality and technology of many/most consumer and other goods made in China is at least as good or better than what might be made here (often hasn't been made here in 20+ years, just assembled, if that). Exactly. If we can figure out how to make those items at equal quality for $4 a day, we'll be all set. Unfortunately, we've largely priced ourselves out of the world labor market.
charlie hebdo Times have changed. The quality and technology of many/most consumer and other goods made in China is at least as good or better than what might be made here (often hasn't been made here in 20+ years, just assembled, if that).
Really cheap, low-tech goods were outsourced by China several years ago to SE Asia because of increased domestic wages. Then they shifted. Now they are often cutting edge tech and very concerned with IP protection. China has also become much more of a consumer economy than previously. The standard of living has increased greatly, as has per capita wealth.
This will move from China to another country where it can be done cheaper, just like it did from Japan, Korea, Taiwan before.
It seems that our Administration thought they could push China into a quick surrender in the matter of the trade imbalance. It would be quick so, it would not have time to get messy. But I think China was suddenly taken aback by being characterized as criminals by the leader of the free world. We backed them right into a corner and demanded they march to our tune.
But they have made it clear that their tactic will be to delay. They will take the long road. They will give tariffs time to work on us as well as on them. It will demonstrate to the American people that we have been lied to about U.S. tariffs on China not hurting the U.S. We are approaching a critical time of decision in the U.S. China will give tariffs time to become the centerpiece of the table as we head into this time of decision. In this way, China will win the trade war by getting rid of the ones who started it.
Shadow the Cats owner China is getting scared as hell why they were expecting about a 8% with all the government spending growth in the GDP. They had a less than 5% actual growth due to the tariffs. That means their economy shrunk overall 3%. Yes they showed a positive expansion however if you removed all the government expansion in spending they had a shrinking economy. This is the first time they ever had a shrinking economy in the last 3 decades ever since they started making everything for the world. People that know say it is about to hit the fan in China and get a heck of a lot worse overthere in the next 6 months.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy the Chinese government spends on average enough to grow their economy 5-10% a year alone just on expanding their infastructure on projects such as their HSR network their highways and other massive projects like that. The last quarter the economists that montior the Chinese economy were expecting 8% they barely reached 5 based on offical figures released by the government. From what my husband was told the riots in Hong Kong were a result of what the truth really was they did not even make that. Thats why the Chinese Government tried to seize assets of businesses based out of Hong Kong that were leaving China to prop up their numbers. He's been told that the actual number was closer to -10 Percent but the Media and Government of China would never release that why it would cause 1 widespread panic in China and 2 make the President here look good for standing up to China worldwide and might give other nations the idea that they can do the same to the Chinese government. China is scared to death right now that they are going to implode if we stand firm that is why they threatened the last card they have in the deck to withhold Rare earth metals from Export to the US. However there are sources outside of China for all of them just no refining capacity yet. So we have to build those up.
Shadow the Cats ownerThe last quarter the economists that monitor the Chinese economy were expecting 8% they barely reached 5 based on offical figures released by the government. From what my husband was told the riots in Hong Kong were a result of what the truth really was they did not even make that.
Reminds me of the refined psychostatistical techniques that detected the abnormal rate of increase in the rate of decrease of the expansion of the trend toward reduction of increasing (rather than unceasing) berp-nut consumption...
OvermodReminds me of the refined psychostatistical techniques that detected the abnormal rate of increase in the rate of decrease of the expansion of the trend toward reduction of increasing (rather than unceasing) berp-nut consumption...
Doesn't this belong over on the US growth thread?
Or on some jingoistic anti-Sino thread on Breitbart. When domestic problems threaten wannabe autocrats, play the "foreign enemies" or Red scare card. It's been done many times in many places before.
tree68Doesn't this belong over on the US growth thread?
It was an upturn in the downturn, to use layman's language, rather than a downturn in the upturn. So perhaps more applicable there than here, where there's a downturn in the rate of upturn of the downturn.
Or something.
Laumer could be a genius at this sort of thing.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.