US and EU in pissing contest,China giggles with glee

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-11 07:00pm

Would you rather have NO steel industry at all, and be a service
economy like Britain?

False dilemma. In any case, as long as we have enough steel-producing capacity to meet the demands of the U.S. military (which we do, and are in absolutely no danger of losing), I quite frankly don't care.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2003-11-11 07:06pm

Durran Korr wrote:
Would you rather have NO steel industry at all, and be a service
economy like Britain?
False dilemma. In any case, as long as we have enough steel-producing capacity to meet the demands of the U.S. military (which we do, and are in absolutely no danger of losing), I quite frankly don't care.

Not to mention that these sort of protective measures don't attack the real problem: The U.S steel industry is obsolete.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-11 07:16pm

Colonel Olrik wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:
Would you rather have NO steel industry at all, and be a service
economy like Britain?
False dilemma. In any case, as long as we have enough steel-producing capacity to meet the demands of the U.S. military (which we do, and are in absolutely no danger of losing), I quite frankly don't care.
Not to mention that these sort of protective measures don't attack the real problem: The U.S steel industry is obsolete.

Not so much; mini-mills that are doing quite well (one of the reasons for the loss of jobs in the steel industry is because mini-mills require less workers) and the United States still has the largest steel industry in the world, and will for the foreseeable future. The problem is larger firms with fatcat union laborers that need to go out of business, now, before they do more damage.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-11 07:19pm

that should be "mini-mills are doing quite well,".

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-11 09:48pm

Update:

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArt ... ction=news

Looks like Shrubby has worked himself into a nice corner...

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2003-11-12 05:17am

MKSheppard wrote:
Sharp-kun wrote: Which your companies happily bought.
It didn't do much damage to us...

Actually it did. It screwed all the companies that needed cheap steel. Now they have to buy your more expensive stuff, and so are having to lay of jobs.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-11-12 05:39am

Bush knew the tarriffs were illegal when he put them in place, knowing full well that the WTO would come back and bite the US in the ass on it. However by doing what he did he at least appeared to care, which he hopes will endear himself to more voters come 2004. Everything comes back to pandering these days

.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2003-11-12 12:20pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Dahak wrote: The fact that they produce cheap steel doesn't mean they produce bad steel. Otherwise they wouldn't sell it, anyway.
AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHA

Remind me to tell you about the aircraft bolt business a few decades ago.

See, these asian companies started making aircraft grade bolts for attaching
engines, etc, and they did it for much cheaper than Western bolt manufactuers.

Only problem is, when some of the bolts were tested later on, after
several failures, they were found to be very substandard, in that
they actually had a rating of about 5, but were marked for higher
ratings instead.

So no one no longer buys aircraft bolts from anyone else but western
manufacturers.

Which defeats your argument, Shep try and think this through with me.

Steel is used as a primary load bearing structure, as such it must adhere to the requirements of its application. Manufacturers of steel provide companies who intend to use them with all sorts of data, including their structual load rating.

The manufacturer then uses this data to asses wether this particular steel is suitable to their task, if it is they test it one more time to make sure, and then they use it.

If 'Asian' steel is of a poorer quality then there would be a weight or volume penalty, to use this particular steel in a certain application. But that doesn't mean that it would be used if volume and weight weren't a critical restriction of the design.

If however this steel was totally unsuitable for the required apllication then companies would not use it, or face a law suit for willing negligence on their part.

In summation, if your argument is that non-US steel is shit ergo don't use it (which it appears to be), then companies wouldn't, because it is shit, no matter what the cost. So there is no need for tariffs, is there?

This is nothing more than blatant protectionism, which is helarious considering how the neo-cons rave about 'the free market'. I guess free market is all well and good, as long as it is the US companies doing the selling.

By which, I am not trying to deflect critisism from other countries who palce tarrifs or subsedise their industry, it's just the hypocrasy of a neo-con that rattles me in this regard, and that also the reasoning behind it is inherently flawed.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-12 12:23pm

Well, 1) Bush isn't really a neocon, and 2) the tariffs aren't the neocons' fault, they're nothing more than blatant political pandering.

LordShaithis · Post by **LordShaithis** » 2003-11-12 12:24pm

I don't have any problems with Europe's "You tariff us? We tariff you!" strategy. What got me was this:

The EU has threatened to impose another set of sanctions against Washington from next spring if it does not repeal tax breaks for American exporters.

Trying to dictate American tax policy? Die!

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2003-11-12 12:25pm

Durran Korr wrote:Well, 1) Bush isn't really a neocon, and 2) the tariffs aren't the neocons' fault, they're nothing more than blatant political pandering.

Fair enough, but he is a republican and correct me if I am wrong, but isn't always been the Republican parties pet project (the free market)?

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2003-11-12 12:27pm

GrandAdmiralPrawn wrote:I don't have any problems with Europe's "You tariff us? We tariff you!" strategy. What got me was this:

The EU has threatened to impose another set of sanctions against Washington from next spring if it does not repeal tax breaks for American exporters.
Trying to dictate American tax policy? Die!

Please you missed the best part;

The WTO's decision comes at a sensitive time, with the US presidential campaign about to begin in earnest. In drawing up its list of sanctions, the EU has deliberately selected products from states which are crucial to President Bush's electoral hopes.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-12 12:28pm

Fair enough, but he is a republican and correct me if I am wrong, but isn't always been the Republican parties pet project (the free market)?

Oh, he's a hypocrite, make no mistake, he's managed to completely go back on yet another campaign promise with the tariffs.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-12 12:30pm

Trying to dictate American tax policy? Die!

Well, this kind of favorable tax treatment could actually be considered protectionist policy, so they have a valid point.

The WTO's decision comes at a sensitive time, with the US presidential campaign about to begin in earnest. In drawing up its list of sanctions, the EU has deliberately selected products from states which are crucial to President Bush's electoral hopes.

That doesn't surprise me a bit, the EU desire to see Bush fail is so palpable that you can feel it across the ocean.

Bill Door · Post by **Bill Door** » 2003-11-12 08:01pm

Durran Korr wrote:That doesn't surprise me a bit, the EU desire to see Bush fail is so palpable that you can feel it across the ocean.

'It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it'--Quote by Bush from Reuters, May 5 2000
'Will the highways on the Internet become more few.'—Quote by Bush from Slate January 29 2000
With such quotes and more attributed to Bush is it really that hard to believe that its not desirable to have this idiot in charge of the worlds most powerful nation?
[/i]

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-11-12 08:04pm

If all you're gonna say is that he's an idiot, don't even bother saying it.

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2003-11-15 10:55pm

[quote][/quote]

The waiters are coming, the waiters are coming![/list]

Thinkmarble · Post by **Thinkmarble** » 2003-11-16 01:57am

Durran Korr wrote: That doesn't surprise me a bit, the EU desire to see Bush fail is so palpable that you can feel it across the ocean.

It is just a method to ensure that he will do something about it, instead of ignoring the tariffs.