Nope, it's an opinion, not a fact. That I'm not trying to hide. Unlike some of the other political stuff posted on here.
I've visited several places in the U.S, and I had a good time. But I still wouldn't want to live there. The politics and news cycles (fake or otherwise) are just a bit too crazy for my liking.
But they do make for some great entertainment from a distance [popcorn emoji]
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Gee, yes I do know where Alberta is. Even more unbelievably, I've been there. It's a great place.
And you really don't see anything wrong with your statement?
York1 John
York1 SD70Dude and I don't live in the U.S. (thank goodness). While that is how you feel, this is probably not the proper place to express that opinion. This forum is populated mainly by U.S. and Canadian posters, and we can get along without the comment.
SD70Dude and I don't live in the U.S. (thank goodness).
While that is how you feel, this is probably not the proper place to express that opinion. This forum is populated mainly by U.S. and Canadian posters, and we can get along without the comment.
I do live in Canada, which is quite obvious unless you don't know where Alberta is, so I don't really see the point of your comment.
Unfortunately we are all affected by what happens on the south side of our shared border.
SD70Dudeand I don't live in the U.S. (thank goodness).
Gramp jeffhergert The Chinese remembered what the Russians forgot about what Lenin said. "The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." Jeff When Nixon restored relations with Mao in the early 70's, China was essentially a third world country. When a friend of mine was involved in the sale of high precision tooling to China 20 or so years ago, the temperature/humidity sensitive machinery was installed in a factory that had a dirt floor. Today, China has markedly expanded their military, told it to be battle-ready, claimed international waters as theirs, is pushing influence worldwide, shooting for the Moon. Xi took power in 2012, eliminated term limits, and is now "president for life". It's "Xi Jinping Thought" (on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era) time. Two socialist regimes, the Nazi's and the Soviet's, started WWII in Europe by together attacking Poland. As leftist's do, the Nazi's then turned on the Soviets. When the Soviet's lost the Cold War, we didn't learn our lesson. Now the hard left here, little different than the French revolutionaries of old, has taken over the Dems. Won't be surpised if Pelosi, like Robespierre, ends up getting guillotined (figuratively). The withdrawal pangs will be painful, but we have to be willing to pay for our foolishness in becoming addicted to the China low-price narcotic while we still can. I'm glad we finally have someone who is standing up, and demanding win-win deals. The freight car CEO's need to realize they have to lead and serve their customers better than their competition. No time for crying. Believe it or don't.
jeffhergert The Chinese remembered what the Russians forgot about what Lenin said. "The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." Jeff
The Chinese remembered what the Russians forgot about what Lenin said. "The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them."
Jeff
When Nixon restored relations with Mao in the early 70's, China was essentially a third world country. When a friend of mine was involved in the sale of high precision tooling to China 20 or so years ago, the temperature/humidity sensitive machinery was installed in a factory that had a dirt floor. Today, China has markedly expanded their military, told it to be battle-ready, claimed international waters as theirs, is pushing influence worldwide, shooting for the Moon. Xi took power in 2012, eliminated term limits, and is now "president for life". It's "Xi Jinping Thought" (on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era) time.
Two socialist regimes, the Nazi's and the Soviet's, started WWII in Europe by together attacking Poland. As leftist's do, the Nazi's then turned on the Soviets.
When the Soviet's lost the Cold War, we didn't learn our lesson. Now the hard left here, little different than the French revolutionaries of old, has taken over the Dems. Won't be surpised if Pelosi, like Robespierre, ends up getting guillotined (figuratively).
The withdrawal pangs will be painful, but we have to be willing to pay for our foolishness in becoming addicted to the China low-price narcotic while we still can.
I'm glad we finally have someone who is standing up, and demanding win-win deals. The freight car CEO's need to realize they have to lead and serve their customers better than their competition. No time for crying.
Believe it or don't.
You had me until you called the Nazis "leftist's".
Going out on a limb here, but I'm pretty sure that Hitler & company were far-right Fascists, while they may have called themselves "National Socialists" their actions do not fit the definition of "Socialism".
It should be noted here that Pelosi was actively preaching against impeachment until Trump solicited the help of a foreign country (ally or not) in undermining one of his political opponents, and then released the transcript proving he did it while claiming (as usual) that he did nothing wrong. In the face of such evidence they House would be negligent if the did not start a inquiry.
As has been discussed on here before, trade wars and tariffs only end up hurting the consumer who pays for the products in the end.
Go right ahead and believe that the repeatedly bankrupt self-titled billionare has the intrests of the little guy at heart. After all it's a free country, and I don't live in the U.S. (thank goodness). But so far he's only taken actions that mainly serve to benefit the rich, ie himself.
And before you bash Socialism too hard, maybe take a look at its Nordic Democratic variant, and see how the standards of living in the Scandanavian countries compare to ours.
They even have well-run electrified passenger rail systems that everyone uses!
And as more places eliminate hydrocarbon-based packaging, the wood pulp demand will grow.
nhrand Juniata Man I haven’t read the TRAINS article yet but; I suspect economics is why you are seeing more and more TTX and GATX boxcars in trains now. In some NS trains; I’m also seeing a respectable number of short line reporting marks. Someone appears to have figured out how to make money soliciting boxcar traffic. The TRAINS article reports that box car usage can be profitable but warns against the sharp decline of existing box cars and the probability that as a very large amount continue to be retired because of age there will be no finacial incentive to replace them. Earnings are positive but low relative to cost of replacement.
Juniata Man I haven’t read the TRAINS article yet but; I suspect economics is why you are seeing more and more TTX and GATX boxcars in trains now. In some NS trains; I’m also seeing a respectable number of short line reporting marks. Someone appears to have figured out how to make money soliciting boxcar traffic.
I haven’t read the TRAINS article yet but; I suspect economics is why you are seeing more and more TTX and GATX boxcars in trains now. In some NS trains; I’m also seeing a respectable number of short line reporting marks. Someone appears to have figured out how to make money soliciting boxcar traffic.
The TRAINS article reports that box car usage can be profitable but warns against the sharp decline of existing box cars and the probability that as a very large amount continue to be retired because of age there will be no finacial incentive to replace them. Earnings are positive but low relative to cost of replacement.
TTX and Canadian National are still buying new boxcars. CN apparently did their most recent purchase through a leasing company.
Boxcars are still in high demand for pulp and paper products. While newsprint and finished white paper are in decline there is still big demand for cardboard, packaging and other consumer products made from wood pulp. Diapers are a good example.
York1 Can anyone tell us who said the following?: "And I will not stand by when our competitors don't play by the rules. We've brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration - and it's made a difference. Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It's not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It's not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they're heavily subsidized." Trump? No. Navarro? No. President Barack Obama, 1/24/2012 Yes. I guess you were complaining about President Obama's high tariffs on Chinese tires. Did you also complain when President Obama put tariffs (as high as 118%) on steel imported from eight different countries in 2014? How about President Obama's 31% tariff on Chinese solar panels in 2012? By the way, those were before Navarro.
Can anyone tell us who said the following?:
"And I will not stand by when our competitors don't play by the rules. We've brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration - and it's made a difference. Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It's not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It's not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they're heavily subsidized."
Trump? No.
Navarro? No.
President Barack Obama, 1/24/2012 Yes.
I guess you were complaining about President Obama's high tariffs on Chinese tires. Did you also complain when President Obama put tariffs (as high as 118%) on steel imported from eight different countries in 2014? How about President Obama's 31% tariff on Chinese solar panels in 2012?
By the way, those were before Navarro.
Um. Still bad. https://money.cnn.com/2017/01/03/news/economy/obama-china-tire-tariff/index.html
If someone is dumping, go the WTO for remediation. It has worked before.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Euclid York1 Can anyone tell us who said the following?: I was not focused at all on that move by Obama. We got through it with no obvious effect, so it was not a problem. It might have saved a lot of lives being lost to poorly made tires. Don't get me wrong. I would have preferred that the outsourcing to China trend never happened. I am not one who buys only the cheapest price. I think that is usually a bad bargain. I hate the lousy quality of Chinese products. So if all Chinese imports were banned tomorrow, I would rejoice. If these present tariffs pass quietly into the night with no noticeable effect and become just a fogotten chapter, that would be fine. I am certainly not relying on them to solve a problem. But I suspect that what we are doing now with tariffs is vastly greater than what Obama was doing with the tariffs you mention. Navarro says the goal of these tariffs is to bring all those lost jobs back from China and put Americans back to work with good wages. I expect these tariffs to have a massive negative effect on our economy. We shall soon find out.
York1 Can anyone tell us who said the following?:
I was not focused at all on that move by Obama. We got through it with no obvious effect, so it was not a problem. It might have saved a lot of lives being lost to poorly made tires. Don't get me wrong. I would have preferred that the outsourcing to China trend never happened. I am not one who buys only the cheapest price. I think that is usually a bad bargain. I hate the lousy quality of Chinese products. So if all Chinese imports were banned tomorrow, I would rejoice.
If these present tariffs pass quietly into the night with no noticeable effect and become just a fogotten chapter, that would be fine. I am certainly not relying on them to solve a problem. But I suspect that what we are doing now with tariffs is vastly greater than what Obama was doing with the tariffs you mention. Navarro says the goal of these tariffs is to bring all those lost jobs back from China and put Americans back to work with good wages. I expect these tariffs to have a massive negative effect on our economy. We shall soon find out.
I guess you better throw out your Apple products.
York1Can anyone tell us who said the following?:
The last trade war we entered culminated in the Smoot-Hawley tariffs. And that led to an economic catastrophe of great enormity. But I guess you forgot about that as well.
York1 Euclid China's government is subsidizing their industries, and that is unfair to us...Why is it a crime? It is their country and they can publically subsidize their industries. Euclid And unless China repents, Navarro will destroy them. With this moral crusading lunatic running our trade policy, these competition losers should be celebrating that such an extreme policy is coming to their rescue. Instead they beg for more help from government. I don't quite understand. (There's a lot I don't understand. Just ask my wife.) On the one hand, it's completely understandable. "It is their country..." On the other hand, you seem upset that Navarro advocates helping our country. It's our country, we can impose tariffs if we want.
Euclid China's government is subsidizing their industries, and that is unfair to us...Why is it a crime? It is their country and they can publically subsidize their industries.
Euclid And unless China repents, Navarro will destroy them. With this moral crusading lunatic running our trade policy, these competition losers should be celebrating that such an extreme policy is coming to their rescue. Instead they beg for more help from government.
I don't quite understand. (There's a lot I don't understand. Just ask my wife.)
On the one hand, it's completely understandable. "It is their country..."
On the other hand, you seem upset that Navarro advocates helping our country. It's our country, we can impose tariffs if we want.
Yes that is true. Navarro and the Adminstration are trying to help our country, and there is nothing wrong with that principle. However, Navarro considers it a crime when China does it, and that is part of his premise of taking action against China.
But aside from that: What bothers me is that I don't believe the result that Navarro promises as benefit to this country will come true. In fact, I expect his tariff policy will cause great damage to the country even though it will damage China too. This is the key point about Navarro, that is that he insists that our tariffs on imports from China will not cost us a dime. He says we will only reep billions of dollars of new revenue from China paying for the tariffs that we have imposed on our imports. In my humble opinion, this theory is way off into tinfoil hat territory. Navarro has been vigorously challenged on his claim, but he fiercely fights back with arguments that are impossible to analize. Navarro has spent his whole career cultivating this idea that life would be perfect if it were not for all the sins that China commits.
The fact is that several players have the option of picking up the tab for a portion of the tariffs, and China is one of them. Others are the U.S. import companies, U.S. distributors, U.S. retailers, and U.S. consumer. For each of these potential payers, the tariff represents a tax that makes the product more expensive and reduces the demand for it. Ultimately its consumption will slow down and that will hurt China.
But lunacy is the claim that China will pay 100% of the tariffs. Typicaly most of it is passed on to the consumers, and they are made poorer as a result. This reduction in consumer wealth manifests as a U.S. economic recession.
But aside from all of that: China will also retaliate against us by imposing tariffs on goods we export to them, like soybeans. It becomes a trade war, and it is a conflict just like a shooting war, in that it is an all-out conflict until one side or the other is destroyed or gives up. When it all done, both sides find that it has cost them dearly, and both are set way back from where they would have been if the original trade imbalance had been just left in place and ignored. Both sides lose ground from where they started. That is why economic wisdom always advises against tariffs.
In our case, we have the largest #1 superpower locked into a very extreme trade war with the one top rival world manufacturing country. I think there will be major fallout from this that could tip the entire world economy into severe depression to a degree that has never been experiended before. It is not just the direct cost of tariffs that will slow down the economies. It is also the loss of business investor confidence due to the uncertainty of how this all plays out.
York1On the other hand, you seem upset that Navarro advocates helping our country. It's our country, we can impose tariffs if we want.
Well, Navarro is way, way out of the mainstream...and wrong. Sure, we can have tariffs, no matter how much they hurt us now and slow us down in the long run.
The problem with China is the unholy aliance between the gov't and their industry - which allows all sorts of games to be played. The way to deal with this is to form alliances and apply some group pressure. The TPP would have been a good start.
As for railroad stuff? Suppliers need stop whining and deal with things as they are. We already have "buy American" provisions in transit and commuter rail vehicle procurement, which has lead to all sorts plants popping up and vaporizing and raised the costs for transit agencies. Maybe it's time to recognize the rail supply industry is global, like everything else.
Looking for a scapegoat? I'd suggest Malcolm McLean.
charlie hebdo Our government has been subsidizing Boeing commercial airliner division for years through DOD contracts, but our hawkish members apparently never heard of Ike's warning about the MIC.
Our government has been subsidizing Boeing commercial airliner division for years through DOD contracts, but our hawkish members apparently never heard of Ike's warning about the MIC.
I completely agree. Our government has subsidized a lot of things, from food to big electric windmills. Our government has its hand in too many things. Why?
Because we have senators and congressmen delivering the bacon to just about every group in the country.
EuclidChina's government is subsidizing their industries, and that is unfair to us...Why is it a crime? It is their country and they can publically subsidize their industries.
EuclidAnd unless China repents, Navarro will destroy them. With this moral crusading lunatic running our trade policy, these competition losers should be celebrating that such an extreme policy is coming to their rescue. Instead they beg for more help from government.
York1 Euclid The CEOs of these competition losers cannot admit their failure, so the gin up an excuse that China is cheating and that’s not fair. While global demand for steel dropped, and demand for steel inside China dropped, Chinese steel companies expanded. The expansion was funded by huge infusions of Chinese government money to cover operating losses. This low-priced steel was dumped onto the world market, undercutting North American, South American, and European steel companies, basically driving them out of business.
Euclid The CEOs of these competition losers cannot admit their failure, so the gin up an excuse that China is cheating and that’s not fair.
While global demand for steel dropped, and demand for steel inside China dropped, Chinese steel companies expanded. The expansion was funded by huge infusions of Chinese government money to cover operating losses. This low-priced steel was dumped onto the world market, undercutting North American, South American, and European steel companies, basically driving them out of business.
I hear this a lot. China's government is subsidizing their industries, and that is unfair to us. Navarro characterizes that as a crime by China. Why is it a crime? It is their country and they can publically subsidize their industries. They are a communist country. Who says they must separate government from industry? It is another Navarro red herring. If anybody wants to give steel away, who's to stop them? The whole goal of free market economics is to undercut your competition.
And how many countries has China invaded since action in Korea? Maybe one, if you count a border skirmish with Vietnam (both communist nations). On the other hand, how many countries have we invaded, occupied, bombed, etc.? I lost count but more than a few.
All this has trickled down to ground level. Bleak times ahead. Industry already has an alarming number of condrs OIFR (over 100 @ Amaril). Bleeding into othe crafts as well. BNSF has announced that at least 625 engs going in storage and the projections for upcoming peak season could be lowest since 2008. That, of course, could swing and go the other way. This from a company that about six yrs ago projected a huge increase in coal shipping which in turn created about 600(?) condrs being hired and only for the coal not to return and the workers hired were not needed either
EuclidThe CEOs of these competition losers cannot admit their failure, so the gin up an excuse that China is cheating and that’s not fair.
EuclidThat is the competition of “free trade” at work.
Fair?
We are allowing a communist government aiming for world domination to drive our steel industry into the ground. Someday, our military might need that steel to defend ourselves and we are at the mercy of an enemy.
Blame this all on Navarro? This was going on during President Obama's term, also. We were already raising duties on Chinese steel then.
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/20/china-steel-overcapacity-war.html
Free market competition under a capitalist system does not expect someone to step in and level the playing field. Who is going to make a playing field level? Only government regulation can do that. Level playing fields, equal outcomes, and imposed fairness are the stuff of socialism, not capitalism.
These CEOs of rail supply firms cannot face the fact that they were being beaten in a fair competition. The consumer benefits from the lowest price. These U.S. supply firms can’t provide that, but China can. That is the competition of “free trade” at work.
The CEOs of these competition losers cannot admit their failure, so the gin up an excuse that China is cheating and that’s not fair. Trade war, General, Peter Navarro, has amplified this loser grievance into a doctrine that he calls, “The Seven Deadly Sins of China.” And unless China repents, Navarro will destroy them. With this moral crusading lunatic running our trade policy, these competition losers should be celebrating that such an extreme policy is coming to their rescue. Instead they beg for more help from government.
Balt,
Xi Jinping is in it for world dominance.
Joyous “Re-education camps“ and 200 million plus observation cameras to “help” those who don’t understand.
There never has been a level international economic playing field. In the post WW II world it was tilted toward the USA as most other countries were in shambles as a reqult of the war. Since then the tilt has changed - for a wide variety of reasons - some controlable and some not.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
jeffhergert Not surprising from the business interests who reap the benefit of cheap production costs. What is surprising to me is the other side that always called for action, doesn't really want action
Well, like I said, it's too late for a "painless" fix, and any truly effective reforms will be derided as "protectionism" by the vested interests who stand to lose the most......so why not a little "carrot vs stick" tax incentive game? They have manipulated taxes for years as a tool to steer policy.....they support the banking and housing industries with generous mortgage interest writeoffs , or look at the number of ways income taxes "reward" families for creating new taxpayers....
If we are really serious about doing something constructive about repatriating jobs, why not give tax disincentives on income for companies that promote job drain, and at the same time offer tax credits that will offset those disincentives to reward companies that support American jobs.
Just think of how thrilled all the "protectionism" naysayers will be after we point out that we are not proposing tariffs of any form.
If this motivates stockholders to jettison their holding in companies that promote job drain, in favor of companies that do not, then I believe the pendulum will start to swing back.
That's all way too crude to ever fly as-is,.... I'll admit. And it would require beaucoup fine tuning to get off the ground. But something along those lines I believe has a greater chance of succeeding than targeted trade sanctions.
jeffhergert I guess the political benefits of a shrinking working middle class are just to good to pass up. Jeff
Almost 40 years of huge, deficit-accumulating tax cuts for big corporations and the ultra-rich (read: wealth and income transfers and concentration) are the biggest factors to blame in that decline.
I have no desire to defend Chinese trade practices but I doubt protectionism is the best answer. The interest Congress may have in protecting transit car manufacturing in this country is suspect -- does anyone really think the interest is prompted by public need. Congress might better help the public by supporting public transit rather than raising the cost of new equipment. Bashing the Chinese might gain votes and campaign contributions but doing something about more pressing needs doesn't offer enough payback.
People seek the mythical level playing field. Is the playing field in the transportation arena level ? You can't blame the Chinese for that. And regarding protecting your own turf, I just read that New Jersey has recently spent someting like a $100 million in give-aways to keep businesses from moving to New York. Maybe New York should be applying tariffs to products made in New Jesey to punish them for unfair economic warfare. Economic warfare within the U. S. seems acceptable but if a foreign country plays the same game, watch out.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.