re: Car prices set to sky rocket after 25% tariff on Steel and 10% on Aluminium

This whole thread has been idiotic. Tariffs won't deal with issues of Chinese dumping, nor will they do anything but hurt our trade partners, and serve as a temporary crutch for the domestic steel industry.

If people were so concerned about Chinese dumping, why not subsidize it directly through nationalization, increase production, and then dump our own products to counteract the Chinese doing so? I mean, nationalization is fricking stupid, and is more stupid than tariffs, but tariffs are still really stupid and in this instance do not solve the issues they at which they are purportedly aimed.

quote:

---

This whole thread has been idiotic.

---

Filled with straw men

quote:

---

There are many areas that will grow from this.... and need to be reborn. This is the second time you have copied and pasted it.

---

I restated it because those are facts. I didn't copy and paste, although I should have to make it fact-presenting quicker.

quote:

---

There will be secondary business that were totally lost reborn from this.

---

What secondary bussiness? And if the primary business's growth is in questionable, any would we expect secondary business, especially since the growth is a function of inceased costs.

quote:

---

Why is there a loss of importers?

---

Because tariff is intended to increase the domestic market share of domestic steel. So if that happens, foreign steel that was here will look elsewhere, increasing completion for the foreign market it's entering. Not to mention, it's quite possible that the export steel bussiness will become less profitable than the domestic bussiness. So companies could just maintain production and costs yet incease profits by just switching markets, especially if current capacity limits makes production increases more costly (construction; supplies; recruitment, hiring, & training) and since increasing production, increases supply with resulting downward price pressure limiting potential revenue by unit across all its steel.

quote:

---

As with Beer.. the companies are already saying how much the cost of a can of beer will go up. .005.

---

This seems to be based purely on the incease in cost of materials under the assumption that the tarrif is the only cost incease. But that also means that the materials costs already passed onto the consumer is only roughly 0.03 to 0.06 per can. Maybe it is, but that seems awfully low.

quote:

---

So again, the sky did not fall, is not falling. Nobody is going to lay off people over a .oo5 increase.

---

Well of course, nobody lays off someone for the price increase of the absolute smallest unit of a product. But when talking about 350 aluminum can drink consumption per capita in the US, billions of those units, that's pushing upwards of 600 million in increased costs just in those cans alone, not to mention canned goods.

So you can parse the costs any which way you like, but for companies that use those materials, there is a baseline for those materials cost of X% with some Y% margin. If those tarrifs suddenly incease costs by 10% then that X% increase suddenly makes that Y% margin worse. So the higher a company's X% baseline and/or the lower it's Y% margin baseline, the more likely the added costs will negatively impact employment.

But regardless, people want to talk about "unfair" trade, but that's not near as unfair as the own government of downstream companies deciding that another group of companies is more somehow more important, so basically decided to directly raises the costs on the downstream companies.

"Let's Make America Great Again, WELL, except for you downstream companies; we'll make you worse."

quote:

---

No. IT's not. The steel market has been broken for a long time due to the dumping of China.

---

We import 33% of our steel, and China is 2% of our imports,; that's 0.66% of our domestic steel market.

So despite representing a small portion of our steel, fhey've broken our system, and we didn't at least take advantage of the decreased costs on the way?

AND OUR SOLUTION, is to institute a tarriff that will not have a meaningful impact on the nation that broke our system?

quote:

---

Straw men....


Straw men everywhere

---

Easily the biggest strawman in this thread has been you insisting on steering the discussion towards reciprocal tariffs, when we're talking about an announcement of across-the-board tariffs that are in no way targeted except by the material.

Is the entire world tariffing our steel at 25%, and our aluminum at 10%?

quote:

---

I think the tariffs are a bad idea, but I think China’s actions need to be addressed somehow. Atleast Trump is talking about the issues, that’s a lot more than the other politicians.

---

The problem IMO is that a tariff will have a greater negative impact on Americans than the actual problems caused by importing Chinese steel. It appears to be a classic case of "doing something" just to ...do something.

quote:

---

You have been in a Trade war!!

---

Just wait and see when the steel and aluminum tariffs take effect. You may "think" you've seen a real trade war and its effects, but you ain't seen nothing yet.

quote:

---

No.. I don't. They need us more than we need them..

---

That is not only hubristic thinking, it is totally delusional thinking as well.