By on May 24, 2018

Trump

President Donald Trump issued a tweet promising car manufacturers good tidings on Wednesday. “There will be big news coming soon for our great American Autoworkers,” he said. “After many decades of losing your jobs to other countries, you have waited long enough!”

Later that same day, the administration announced it had launched a national security investigation into car and truck imports under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The Commerce Department explained that the probe would investigate whether imported vehicles and parts threaten the domestic industry’s wellbeing, taking into account its ability to develop new technologies and the impact of tariffs.

“There is evidence suggesting that, for decades, imports from abroad have eroded our domestic auto industry,” Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said.

While Ross assures a “thorough, fair and transparent investigation,” opposition to the probe has already begun to emerge. “China opposes the abuse of national security clauses, which will seriously damage multilateral trade systems and disrupt normal international trade order,” Gao Feng, spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, said at a news briefing on Thursday.

China recently agreed to cut its tariffs on imported automobiles in a bid to open its market to foreign automakers. This occurred after the U.S. announced new import taxes on steel and aluminum. Meanwhile, America recently worked out a deal with South Korea that involved a tentative promise to open its own market a bit if the western nation agreed to give it a break on steel tariffs.

No such deal exists with Japan. Curious, since it’s one of the United States’ closest security allies and imposes no tariffs on vehicles.

According to Reuters, Germany’s DIHK Chambers of Industries and Commerce said Trump completely ignored the fact that German companies invest heavily in the U.S. and create manufacturing jobs there — a claim that could be similarly made for Japan and South Korea.

“To cite aspects of national security as justification is totally constructed and far-fetched. We almost have to take this as a provocation,” DIHK President Eric Schweitzer said. “I gain more and more the impression that the United States no longer believes in competition for ideas and customers, but only in the right of the supposedly stronger.”

“It fills me with great concern that the U.S. is moving away from a free and fair world trade order,” he added.

The Commerce Department’s claim that the probe is intended to determine if lost domestic production has affected the U.S. economy seems clear cut enough, but analyzing if automakers lost the ability to research advanced technologies is somewhat perplexing. While the United States isn’t the global leader in every category that qualifies as advanced tech, it’s the way in the field of autonomous driving and remains competitive just about everywhere else as far as development is concerned.

A Trump administration official said prior to the probe’s announcement that the expected strategy would be involve pressuring Canada and Mexico to make concessions on NAFTA. Considering how poorly and slowly those talks have progressed, threatening research that could result in higher import fees could be a way to convince them to play ball. The investigation could have a similar goal in regard to other countries that ship a lot of cars to the United States, too.

In a meeting with automakers earlier this month, Trump speculated that tariffs on imported automobiles and parts may be increased. Sources claimed the president said 20 percent or 25 percent on some vehicles, which would represent a massive increase. While trucks have been subject to U.S. import duties of 25 percent for decades, imported cars sit at a only 2.5 percent.

For the sake of comparison, Europe imposes a relatively flat 10 percent import tariff on vehicles. China has said it will reduce its 25 percent fee on automobiles to 15 percent starting this July. However, trucks are expected to stay at 20 percent.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

117 Comments on “Trade War Watch: Trump Launches National Security Investigation On Auto Imports...”


  • avatar
    SSJeep

    “To cite aspects of national security as justification is totally constructed and far-fetched. We almost have to take this as a provocation,” DIHK President Eric Schweitzer said.

    Well Eric, how about starting with an even balance of tariffs on automobile exports? As I am sure you are aware, the US charges the EU a 2% tariff on vehicles exported from the EU to the US, while the EU charges the US 10%-12% on vehicles exported from the US to the EU. That is hardly “free and fair trade”. China is reducing their 25% tariff. Maybe its time the EU followed suit.

    Or are you afraid of the Tesla models taking over the Autobahn?

    • 0 avatar
      DearS

      I don’t like the racist president we have, but other countries do have a tax advantage, the U.S. has many advantages also. I wonder if Trump will try to be fair to those countries we have a trade surplus with and try to shrink that.

      • 0 avatar
        "scarey"

        @deerSYou, Sir or Madame, are an idiot calling our President a racist. An idiot and a fool. President Trump has demonstrated time and time again that he is the least racist President we have had in recent years. And that includes SPECIFICALLY the years 2009 to 2017.

        • 0 avatar
          Fordson

          Moderators – ?

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            Let it ride, Ford. Scarey embarasses himself every time he offers opinions here and nothing reveals the moral character and intellectual capacity of the pro-Trump fanatical extremist than letting one preach unhindered. A number of them have settled onto this site, it’s fascinating to watch.

            A David Duke endorsement doesn’t mean anything anyway, the KKK has really been coming around lately and lots of really great people march in white supremacist rallies.

            I feel for the pragmatic reasonable conservatives who had to choose between this and Clinton Mk II

        • 0 avatar
          Numbers_Matching

          ‘@deerSYou, Sir or Madame, are an idiot calling our President a racist. An idiot and a fool. President Trump has demonstrated time and time again that he is the least racist President we have had in recent years. And that includes SPECIFICALLY the years 2009 to 2017.’

          I tasted a bit of my lunch twice after reading this…while only paying once…thanks!

        • 0 avatar
          sutherland555

          I thought your were being sarcastic at first. Then I realized you’re being 100% serious.

          Wow….you definitely live in a comfortably ignorant bubble of your own making.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          “scarey”,
          Trump is a racist, simple.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          Well, there’s always the folks who fall for swindlers, con-men and carnival barkers.

      • 0 avatar
        Sub-600

        @ DearS, A racist? Really? Based on what? Wow, I’m sure, with some diligence, you could become a village idiot one day.

        • 0 avatar
          nrcote

          Sub-600 > “A racist? Really? Based on what?”

          Where have you been during the last 16 months? Get your head out of your stupid ass.

          • 0 avatar
            bking12762

            nrcote-I highly recommend a crash course in civil discourse.

          • 0 avatar
            bking12762

            nrcote-A crash course in civil discourse is highly recommended.

          • 0 avatar
            Sub-600

            Not very civil. Please cite some examples of his racism, and by “examples” I don’t mean anecdotes from Don Lemon, Rachel Maddow, or Joy Reid. Something he said or did that was racist, that can be quantified. You do know what that word means, right?

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        DearS, snowflaking much lately. What is racist about Trump? I hear this every time from some, but no one could tell why. Take his cabinet. The people in it have such diverse backgrounds. His daughter took Judaism. Ben Carson is his best friend. Oh yea, he is so racist.

    • 0 avatar
      Robbie

      You leave out that we charge 25% import tax for the most profitable part of the market.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        You leave out that the EU charges 22% import tax for the most profitable part of the Market. There’s another side of the Chicken tax you probably didn’t know about.

        But can you explain how the “most profitable” thing would change without the US Chicken tax?

        And could the Tundra and Titan be any less profitable if the Chicken tax was boosted to 250% (and no more, easy loopholes)?

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Um, SS Jeep. I think rather believing all you should do a little research. TTAC, the right wing publication it is only reproduces right wing opinion.

      The reality is don’t think simplistically.

      The Truth About Cars here is it covers ALL compnents as well, ie, content. These are more or less traded tax free.

      Face it. Overall the US vehicle manufacturing model is not as competitive as it once was.

      Manufacture what the customer wants. US manufacturers hide behind massive tariffs and trade barriers. They seem to only operate profitably in the US under the layers of protection.

      The rest of the World confront identical challenges in trade. The World doesn’t employ a system that penalises the US.

      Compete and stop blaming all for your reluctance to make change.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        “Face it. Overall the US vehicle manufacturing model is not as competitive as it once was.”

        A perfect example of this is, believe it or not, a 1958 movie entitled, Mon Oncle. While a comedy with some very subtle humor and numerous sight gags, one thing that becomes glaringly obvious is that American cars were common in France around that time… to the point that one of the main characters purchases a brand-new 1956 Chevrolet four-door hardtop to replace what I think was a ’53 or earlier Chevy. Studebaker and Ford were visibly common in this movie as well, beside at least a few Renaults and other European models.

        Where are Chevy and Ford in Europe now? Why?

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Vulpine,
          What amazes me are some of the comments here totally omit the fact these proposed new taxes will impact auto parts as well…… and they ain’t taxed.

          I think the US manufacturers (Big 3) need to take stock on how they operate. Yes they are making big bucks on pickups, but again, big pickups are protected with tariffs, technical barriers and even energy policy.

          Donald Dump states that others should buy US vehicles, well they do, they buy Toyotas, BMWs and Mercedes Benz made in America.

          It seems all other global manufacturers don’t seem to have the same issues as the Big 3 in manufacturing.

          Maybe something is wrong in Detroit, or the controls that support US vehicle manufacturing.

          If the US wants to export, then they had better build vehicles the customer wants.

          There is a pickup truck revolution going on globally and the US hasn’t profited as much as they could of with “Murican” made pickups.

          This shows me that the US might not be the pickup capital anymore.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Historically, if there had never been automotive tariffs, globally, the US vehicle landscape would look as it does now, for the most part.

        That’s hardly the case around the world, especially in large markets that also build cars.

  • avatar
    notapreppie

    This is what first came to mind…

  • avatar
    VW4motion

    Complete moron leading this country.

    • 0 avatar
      redapple

      Yes.
      Obama was the greatest. Proof. Nobel prize- less than 1 year in office.

      How this moron became;
      1- king of New York real estate
      2- host of highly rated – multi year TV show.
      3- defeated the the shoo in Hillary

      …is a complete and utter crock.

      Hillary would have gotten the Nobel in 4 months.

      • 0 avatar
        bking12762

        It is utterly amazing this type of thinking exist, but it goes on by BOTH sides. I pity those that aren’t objective.

        • 0 avatar
          TW5

          Obama was a traitor. Trump is trying to undo Obama’s presidency. This is an objective fact.

          I know it’s difficult to grasp sometimes. It’s not like Donald Trump has publicly expressed his desire to erase Obama’s legacy on dozens of occasions. It’s not like he’s pulled out of the Iran Deal or TPP or the Paris Accord or he’s attempting to repeal Obamacare or attempting to repeal Dodd-Frank or attempting to undo CAFE 2025. It’s not like Trump pardoned Joe Arpaio.

          It’s not like the secret service gave Obama the code name “Renegade”, which means traitor. It’s not like Renegade was spying on his political opponents, or using the IRS to harass his political opponents, or ordering the DEA not to prosecute Hezbollah, or protecting ISIS, or giving billions of dollars to Iran, or clearing uranium sales to Russia, or allowing the DOJ to make corporations pay federal fines to left wing special interest groups. It’s not like the Hawaiian health services official who certified his birth certificate was the lone fatality in a freak plane crash, and it’s not like Obama’s DOJ convicted the sheriff who’s investigative team concluded Obama’s birth certificate was a fake.

          This is as cut and dry as politics will ever get. It’s idiot proof, and yet it seems nearly half the country still doesn’t get it.

          They also struggle to understand how corrupt Hillary is, though Trump said he was going to lock her up throughout the campaign. But maybe he went to far, I mean, it’s not like she rigged her own party’s primary, and had an illegal server for backchanneling, and deleted state department emails after receiving a subpoena, and took bribes to close international deals, and unmasked valuable intelligence assets, and stole relief money meant for Haiti, and sent her husband to interfere with a federal investigation by obtaining favors from Loretta Lynch, etc.

          • 0 avatar
            VW4motion

            Tw5, Nice bipolar post.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            And TW5’s taken it off the rails! Stunning analytical gymnastics. “Objective fact” used in a manner strongly suggesting the author knows what neither of those words mean. And cherry-picked facts mixed with fever-dream conspiracy theories to paint a *totally* non-partisan picture. Lord knows the W administration never did anything untoward and Trump’s administration and past conduct are squeeeeeeky clean. But you’re probably outraged about both of those but just aren’t showing it here. Because you are factual, and objectively so.

            I love the SS code name indictment most. Trump’s is Mogul, which means “an Indian Muslim of or descended from one of several conquering groups of Mongol, Turkish, and Persian origin”. So Trump’s a closet Islamic extremist. I always knew it but now have the smoking gun.

            I really don’t know why I’m on this site anymore. I’m not in the car market and political extremists annoy me to no end. May be time to sod off.

          • 0 avatar
            VW4motion

            I’ve been thinking the clicks have been down for the site. This type of article brings those clicks back up. A few weeks ago someone wrote an article on this site basically talking about another article on this site. I’ve slowed down reading the articles since that time.
            So this type of posting brings a lot of the wood work with a lot of pent up ignorance. So let the clicks begin!

          • 0 avatar
            VW4motion

            I’ve been thinking the clicks have been down for the site. This type of article brings those clicks back up. A few weeks ago someone wrote an article on this site basically talking about another article on this site. I’ve slowed down reading the articles since that time.
            So this type of posting brings a lot of the wood work with a lot of pent up ignorance. So let the clicks begin!

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @ 30-mile fetch

            Does Mogul have any modern meanings that might apply to Trump, like media VIP or tycoon? Does Renegade have any alternative meanings? I’m sure the Secret Service approved the name “traitor” on accident. It’s not like they have access to dictionary.com. And since we have all of Obama’s records and a detailed history of his life it’s easy to debunk the Renegade conspiracy theory.

            Plus, we know that Trump is going to great pains to eliminate every vestige of Obama’s presidency because he is a vindictive ideologue. That’s how he made his billions–by spending his money on political crusades while eschewing compensation. Plus, Trump has never changed his position on anything or his party affiliation so it makes sense he’d go on a partisan crusade. Furthermore, we have no evidence of corruption by Trump’s predecessor or by his opponent in the 2016 election. It’s not as if the former DNI admitted they were spying on the Trump campaign or a bunch of FBI agents have been busted for breaking the law while conspiring against the president.

            Anyway, you know what I’ve said is true, which is why you’ve threatened to leave if the moderators don’t no-platform. Bertel already tried to silence the B&B once.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            I’m borrowing your style of thinking, TW5, so mogul does not have any alternative definitions or interpretations. He’s an Islamic extremist and that’s an objective fact because the TW5 in me wants it to be. And I can’t no-platform you if I don’t even suggest moderator intervention. What I’m proposing is to simply leave the room in which someone farted.

          • 0 avatar
            "scarey"

            @TW5- congratulations ! Well spoken.. You make ME sound shy and timid. Which I am not.
            @30milefetch- you will be missed [/sarcasm]

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @ 30-mile fetch

            If it were up to me we’d all be singing folk songs about Barack Obama’s miraculous tenure. Unfortunately, his presidency nosedived from the outset.

            When have you ever heard a political candidate declare that he was going to erase his predecessor’s illegitimate legacy and also jail his electoral opponent?

            You can explain Trump’s comments by pretending he is the sort partisan who comes along once a century, though he’s never held public office nor adhered to any political orthodoxy.

            or

            You can look at the news regarding Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and contemplate whether Trump ran for president to fulfill the promise he made on Oprah in 1988, to run for president if the plunder of the US by our political class ever threatened the existence of our country.

      • 0 avatar
        VW4motion

        Sounds like someone is having a panic attack. How does trump being a moron cause you to think this has something to do with Obama’?

      • 0 avatar
        Maxb49

        “How this moron became;
        1- king of New York real estate”

        Okay, that’s bullchit.

        • 0 avatar
          Maxb49

          “king of New York real estate”
          Maybe the king of self-promotion. The Corcoran Group is the king of New York real estate. They closed $6.29 billion in Manhattan deals alone in 2017, up from $6.13 billion (again, in Manhattan deals alone) in 2016.

          Whatever your political persuasion is, try not to let facts get in the way.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Maxb49,
          You don’t here the Donald Dump supporters mention how many times he’s been bankrupt and how many lives he’s screwed over.

          I just hope he doesn’t bankrupt the US as he has done to his businesses. Because the World doesn’t have the same bankruptcy laws as the US.

          Once you fnck a country, you have fncked the people. Then the US can truly be a China or Mexico competitor.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      VW, why is he moron? Because he will tax your lovely nazi-mobils?

      • 0 avatar
        VW4motion

        Please explain your am radio lingo of nazi-mobils and I could have a response to your hate language.
        Hmm, raised taxes ? Well he did actually for people that buy equipment for their jobs. Lot of smoke and mirrors with new tax laws. But we did get a refund for the first time in ten years. Too bad inflation is getting out of control and that tax refund means nothing.
        Moron part is listening to trump change his mind every 2 days. Keeping his followers at here knees with excitement. Acting out like a man child. Banging escorts while his wife was pregnant. Putting down people that were not draft dodgers like himself. Having a team of lawyers for protection. Birtherism.. I could type away at how he is a moron.

        • 0 avatar
          don1967

          @VW4motion,

          Have a read of Scott Adams’ Win Bigly for a more enlightened perspective on Trump, specifically his skill in the area of negotiation and persuasion.

          Dismissing him as a childish moron based on a CNN-level analysis says more about you than him. Identity politics didn’t work in 2016, and it doesn’t work today either.

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            Don,
            many people say, “Trump moron, Trump stupid…” But he is the man who is POTUS and who has his name written on big buildings around the world. And they are who? nobody

          • 0 avatar
            VW4motion

            @don, yeah the dilbert writer has some good explanations of how trump can manipulate sections of society. And cnn has nothing to do with listening to his own words. Shiny keys work for some as we see they worked on you.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          At least Trump was banging [whoever] while paying out of his pocket. While some other guy was getting orals on government property, committing perjury along the way. Wondering how many layers were on that team.
          you don’t know nazi-mobiles? it vw. Company created by nazis, for nazis

          • 0 avatar
            VW4motion

            Slav, your words almost mimic this conversation I had with a homeless guy two weeks ago. That was until he started spitting on women and security tackled the moron. You also pretty much exemplify the decline of a moral society.

  • avatar
    bking12762

    Let the partisan political bomb-throwers begin. GRRRRRRRRRRR

  • avatar
    DearS

    One option I heard was to force others to invest in the U.S. if they run trade deficits and vice versa. We did the same with Europe after WW2, we invested in them and they bought our production surplus.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      That’s not an option. Capital investment what these mercantile robber barons do right now to sustain perpetual trade surplus with the US.

      Trade would have balanced long ago via currency fluctuations, but China, Japan, South Korea, EU, etc all order their central banks to buy US treasuries to inflate the dollar’s value. Since this is a widely known policy, foreign private investors, like corporations, follow suit. As a result the US reaps the “benefits” of asset bubbles like the dot com bubble, the real estate bubble, etc.

      They are basically bleeding the American middle class dry, and then selling fairy tales of capital account reciprocity to the utter morons who they just put out of work.

      • 0 avatar
        Maxb49

        ..

      • 0 avatar
        ect

        TW5, You’ve obviously never learned anything about economics. The US has consistently run a trade deficit for over 40 years, during which time all measures of national income and prosperity have grown considerably. And we reached full employment in 2016, after 7 successive years of growth.

        Balance of trade in goods is only one component of national accounts, and the trade in goods deficit is a reflection of US prosperity.

        • 0 avatar
          TW5

          @ ect

          It’s called deficit spending or monetary stimulus or quantitative easing or a host of names given to interrelated mechanisms for stimulating national income.

          Is this the first time you’ve heard of these things?

          Furthermore, a nation that accumulates a $20T public debt, nearly half of which came from the last administration, should experience a renaissance in all export industries as currency exchange moves in favor of exports and against imports. Surely you learned about this phenomenon while earning your economics degree?

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Dear S,
      So, how much did the US profit from WW2?

      Get real mate and become objective.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        Big A,

        are you kidding? US WWII gains are huge. Ok, read this https://www.quora.com/How-much-did-the-US-gain-from-the-second-world-war

        One thing nobody talks much about, is that US basically forced UK to give up its colonies where US could now have better trade conditions. Places like India, for example

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          slavuta,
          That was my point.

          The US along with Canada, Australia and New Zealand made massive money out of WWII.

          Now the rest of the world has caught up and we need to look at how we compete.

          Australia has the same kind of people whining about foreign competition.

          Yet, all Australian’s have never had the prosperity they now have, ie, 2nd highest average wealth globally, 2nd highest standard of living, etc.

  • avatar
    TW5

    “Free and fair trade world order” always looks like a perpetual $750B trade deficit (BoP) to these leeches. Adopt corrective policy and include punitive measures for countries that whine.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      TW5,
      The US needs to produce what the World wants at prices that are competitive. Just because it has a “Made in the USA” sticker on it doesn’t denote quality that is of better value.

      If the US wants trade, then produce what the World wants. Blaming others and forcing others to buy American because of the very fact it’s American is not the answer.

      The US hasn’t faired all that poorly of late. I don’t understand the real issues here regarding trade. The global transition in global trade is just something the US needs to get a handle on and realise it’s not number one all the time. Get used to it as this is the future.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        @BAFO – Sir, which cars, like specifically, are not “competitive” in terms of “what the World wants”?

        Those are probably not competitive in the US either. But an EU 10% import tax, non conforming engine size and converting to right-hand drive, isn’t enough of a deterrent?

        There’s not a real point to export, especially if it’s redundant to models already for sale, established and well known in foreign markets, even if those, say Peugeots, Citroens, Fiats, etc, are less reliable.

        That’s if you were to (or can) look at the problem objectively.

      • 0 avatar
        TW5

        @ Big Al from Oz

        Your world view is somewhat naive and juvenile. Prices are not just a function of the costs of manufacturing inputs and overhead. Prices are also driven by currency exchange. We run massive trade deficits yet the dollar is still one of the premier currencies. Why? Is the US really that much better than emerging markets for capital investment? Volatility and asset bubbles suggest “no”. The stimulation of our capital account by foreign governments is synthetic and designed to cause deteriorating terms of trade for the United States.

        If we’re dealing with mercantilists, it doesn’t matter what we produce. They don’t want it. To make sure their people don’t buy US goods and services, they impose tariffs and trade barriers. This is exactly how the rest of the world operates.

        The US exists for the amusement of their exports. American imports are discouraged, unless they are inputs of production that can later be sold back to America. We don’t have to put up with this anymore.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          After reading your comments TW5 I really do believe you know the truth behind the trash you spew out on TTAC.

          You sound almost like a salaried far right Rep out to spam web sites.

          Your views are biased and you tend to omit data and information that is significant. You overstate, undersatate and over reach. This alone show you lack integrity and sincerity in discussion.

          Your economic views are undeveloped as your geopolitical understanding of the globe.

          You are a Nationalist of the worst type. You are blinded by nationalism. That is a dangerous place to place your mind.

          Become a Patriot and understand your competition. The disdain you display to any challenge (USA) you confront you become beligerant and adversarial.

          Learn economics, or just be truthful. It ain’t hard.

          You are as you are because you fear, fear. The US will gradually lose influence and control, politically and economically. That is something you need to be comfortable with.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            I know you think every American should go along with the Republican Chamber of Commerce talking points, but I will not. With the exception of US corporate tax reform, which was the fulcrum upon which the global economy could correct itself, most of their talking points about liberalization and immigration are self-destructive pablum designed to meet the demands of American banks and investment houses, who naturally believe that the US should have a perpetual capital account surplus of $750B per year.

            Furthermore, the only argument you’ve made is that the US needs to learn how capitalism works, which is cloying and insipid in the extreme since we effectively created modern global commerce and international business paradigms. The world is covered in American branding and media. Does America have a problem utilizing capitalistic culture to its advantage? No, and it hopefully never will.

            However, this country does have a problem with a political class who’ve become accustomed to using US taxpayer money to shape the globe according to bureaucratic desires. Once upon a time this was to the benefit of the American citizen. Today, Dollar Diplomacy is the vehicle through which the US citizen is sold out.

            This is not controversial to anyone who works outside of the banking or financial industries, and it’s only controversial to those professionals because their livelihoods are tied to the current charade.

  • avatar
    Verbal

    “ ‘There is evidence suggesting that, for decades, imports from abroad have eroded our domestic auto industry,’ Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said.”

    As opposed to imports that don’t come from abroad?

  • avatar
    Robbie

    Gregory Mankiw, chairman of the Harvard Economics Department, has said: “Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

  • avatar
    Numbers_Matching

    If anything, the US auto industry has been the benefactor from imports. Can you imagine what the US auto industry would have morphed into without competition from abroad?

  • avatar
    Dan R

    The US has so many more nuclear weapons than Subaru and I pray that they are never used.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    Waste of taxpayer money. All in the name of looking good for the People.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Who will watch the watchers?

    Or

    Who will investigate the investigators?

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    “Waste of taxpayer…”

    You could say that. You could also say the US is the freest and most open to foreign automakers, of any meaningful market in the world.

    True, provided they match or exceed the minimum of standards, Lemon Laws, etc, no different than “domestics”.

    That’s what Trump has a problem with. Yes US consumers benefit from unmatched selection of vehicle segments and brands within, but no other large markets reciprocate USA generosity.

    • 0 avatar
      Maxb49

      “That’s what Trump has a problem with. Yes US consumers benefit from unmatched selection of vehicle segments and brands within, but no other large markets reciprocate USA generosity.”

      This is not conservatism. This is not even mainstream economics. It is a fact that competitive markets lower prices and increase total surplus in an economy while import restrictions decrease competition and decrease overall surplus. Tariffs are taxes paid by us, the American consumer.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Max,
        Its a misnomer regarding the freedom of the US economy. There are a number of countries with freer economies.

        Even with vehicles. The US vehicle market is more restricted than the EU. Even Australia with 25 million people has a greater choice.

        As for day to day shopping the US can’t offer more than most any other nation.

        This is globalisation. Too many live in the distant past in the US, like 50 or 60 years ago. This is nearly 2020, not 1960.

  • avatar
    vehic1

    If he wants to jawbone, etc., on the tariffs – that’s one thing. But claiming “national security” is at stake, when so many autos from a great many brands are made over here – that is a stretch-and-5-halves.
    Are the American auto companies in such terrible shape? They got bailed out just a few years ago (even Ford benefited from parts suppliers being saved), and they just got big corporate tax cuts; now we have to shell out 25% more if we choose to buy an import, too?

    • 0 avatar
      "scarey"

      Having a viable auto industry and manufacturing in general is a national security issue. As are steel and aluminum industries. Democrats and most Republicans (in congress) talk about income disparity, but do nothing positive for the economy. When a President does something good for the economy, both sides should pitch in to help. Remember when Reagan did something for the auto industry ? He put QUOTAS on the import of Japanese cars. But instead of increasing market share, the Big 3 increased their prices to match the higher import prices. Greedy executives !
      This time, the President is doing something different. I hope the results are different too. A severe economic downturn at this time could badly damage the auto industry. The President is looking to the long term. We don’t want to end up like Great Britain.

      • 0 avatar
        Maxb49

        “Having a viable auto industry and manufacturing in general is a national security issue.”

        No, it isn’t. The term national security is used in a definite and limited sense and relates only to those activities which are directly concerned with the nation’s safety, as distinguished from the general welfare. Cole v. Young, 351 U.S. 536 (U.S. 1956). You of all people should know damned well that using terms like national security comes with the cost of allowing executive power to be usurped from the legislative branch and ultimately from the People.

        • 0 avatar
          "scarey"

          @Maxb49- Would you like to tell the class why we won World War Two ? That’s right, we were able to manufacture massive amounts of tanks, rifles, bullets, airplanes, ships, and two very special explosive devices that we dropped on Japan, Likewise our “allies” at the time- the U.S.S.R. . In these volatile times, we should be beefing up our manufacturing base, both for employment/economic and national security reasons.

          • 0 avatar
            Maxb49

            “@Maxb49- Would you like to tell the class why we won World War Two ? That’s right, we were able to manufacture massive amounts of tanks, rifles, bullets, airplanes, ships, and two very special explosive devices that we dropped on Japan, Likewise our “allies” at the time- the U.S.S.R. . In these volatile times, we should be beefing up our manufacturing base, both for employment/economic and national security reasons.”

            Take your line of putrid bullchit and stick it where the sun don’t shine. You’re full of crap and you know it. Number one, modern military industrial production is too advanced to farm that out to General Motors; number two, modern military production capacity is more than sufficient on its own; number three, there is no way in hell that the 2018 auto manufacturers’ production facilities could be retrofit to produce the advanced technology and munitions that come out of General Dynamics and Raytheon.

            Nevertheless, your attempt at a distraction does not deflect from the fact that consumer auto manufacturing is not a national security issue. Let’s turn your attention back to Cole doctrine, which you failed to address let alone refute:

            The term national security is used in a definite and limited sense and relates only to those activities which are directly concerned with the nation’s safety, as distinguished from the general welfare. Cole v. Young, 351 U.S. 536 (U.S. 1956). You of all people should know damned well that using terms like national security comes with the cost of allowing executive power to be usurped from the legislative branch and ultimately from the People.

            I’m not deliberately trying to be a prick to you, but cut the crap and save your schtick for the less educated. It’s not conservative, it’s just embarrassing.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Israel has strict restrictions on poultry import. No chicken, dead or alive, nor egg, can enter the country. This is matter of national security.

  • avatar
    Sub-600

    The Big Three killed my baby.

  • avatar
    pdog_phatpat

    I think you should all cry about it some more.

  • avatar
    Astigmatism

    There are two issues here.

    Should tariffs on cars exported from the US to the EU be lowered to more closely match tariffs on cars imported into the US from the EU? Sure.

    Is the way to get there making fools of ourselves by blowing up the world trade system and threatening 25% tariffs under the false pretext of national security, when we already have mechanisms to solve these sorts of disputes without blowing it all up? Er, no.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Do you think begging and pleading with major importing nations to the US to please lower their tariffs (against US vehicles) to a fair level would actually work?

      Purdy Please?

      That doesn’t seem to be Trump’s style. A 25% tariff would no doubt get their attention.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      @ Astigmatism

      We’ve been begging since Bush. It’s not going to work. The G20 infiltrated the WTO a long time ago, and the Clintons gave China preferred nation status. We can’t even keep our NAFTA trading partners under control. TPP was only going to multiply the problem 600% by making us wrangle a dozen trading partners, who’d all be selling their allegiance to the highest bidder, usually China.

      The idea that the US is the sole belligerent in a global trade war is a nonsensical falsehood foisted upon Americans by a media that knows we’ve never felt the sting of bad trade policy because we always agree to print more money. They also know the average American is not sophisticated enough to realize that the “America Last” paradigm actually hurts other countries by misappropriating their capital. That’s why China doesn’t really seem that angry about Trump’s trade dictates, and it’s why they are considering dropping joint venture requirements and more.

      The international pillage of the United States has accelerated for nearly 20 years. We don’t have another 20 years for people to figure out what’s happening.

      • 0 avatar
        conundrum

        The international pillage of the US, carried out by US companies who abandoned their countrymen and set up factories in low wage countries to save a few bucks labor, has been going on for a quarter century or more.

        Those like you who appear to have no reasoning clue whatsoever, avoid reading history and love conspiracy theories, now wake up and decide it’s somehow logical to blame foreigners for the sins of your own corporate class. Trump applies the same logic – that is, none whatsoever.

        I for one refuse to accept such lack of fundamental reasoning or observation of what happened right in front of your face. If you were blind to it, well more fool you.

        Now build yourself a castle, surround it with a large moat, and fume all you want at perceived slights. Of course no red-blooded US company would screw its workers by relocating overseas. Impossible. It must have been a commie plot. Yeah, that’s it.

        • 0 avatar
          TW5

          @ conundrum

          US corporations moved overseas because they could import back into the United States’ open market with ease. They stayed overseas and refused to reinvest corporate profits in the US domestic market because the US government imposed strict repatriation taxes on foreign profits (already taxed in a foreign jurisdiction). It was easier for the Japanese automakers to invest in US factories and infrastructure than it was for US automakers to invest NAFTA profits in the US economy. Some companies were moving their HQ’s overseas to avoid US repatriation tax. These inversions were a commercial embarrassment for our country.

          Congress passed a tax reform bill that moves the US towards territorial corporate taxation with lower flatter rates, which means companies can’t hide behind tax policy when excusing their lack of investment in the US. They can’t beg for special credits and preferential treatment to offset ill-conceived worldwide taxation regulations. Corporations no longer need inversion to avoid repatriation tax. Perhaps you noticed the markets are trading much higher now than the were under the old regime? The Trump admin is also dealing with the unreasonably high import tariffs and trade barriers imposed on US goods by foreign countries.

          I would like to claim that you are merely clueless, but you are indoctrinated, recalcitrant, and a danger to our species.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            TW5,
            The reality is;
            1. You make it sound as if the US is the only country to off shore business. The reality is most EVERY nation does this on the same PLAYING FIELD.

            2. How is the US or the people in the US disadvantaged by having improved living standards created by the opportunities of cheaper goods and services created via competitive forces?

            3. How is it an embarassment to the US to have it’s business and companies move to a more profitable environment?

            4. Do you know the difference between headline taxation take and real taxation income?
            a. What is the headline tax company tax rate in the US?
            b. What is the real tax income as a percentage with company tax in the US?

            5. What import tariffs does the US confront that other nations don’t confront? Really TW5, your arguments are full of holes.

            Why don’t you present less porous arguments with salient points?

            You’ll need to improve if you want to sway others with your far right crap.

            I’m right wing, but you are unbelievably uneducated or brainwashed.

            Or, you fear, fear. You are insecure to spruik the nonsense you put forward.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @ Big Al from Oz

            1. Untrue. The US faces unique forex headwinds
            2. Non sequitur, particularly considering US deficit spending and interest rate policy.
            3. You don’t understand the mechanics of corporate inversion
            4a. Varied by income
            4b. Varied widely depending on industry and business configuration, which is precisely why the gap between statutory rate and effective rate was slashed with tax reform.
            5. Use google. You’ll find a plethora of articles about imbalanced tariffs, mercantile tariffs, and non-tariff-barriers. As a general rule, it is not a great idea to pretend a problem doesn’t exist when complaints are ubiquitous on this website and elsewhere. TTAC has covered the auto import tariff imbalances extensively.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            TW5,
            Judging by your response it seems US industry and business needs to transition (restructure) to the new World order where US business for the very fact of the dominance of US influence needs to change.

            Taxation is not the answer to change. Regulatory minimisation is the answer to operate in a freer global economy where multilateral relationships are paramount.

            The US under it’s current Junta moving towards isolationalism only shows the US incapable of making the necessary changes in a more competitive environment where the US doesn’t have the dominance and influence it once had.

            I do believe those who support the isolationalist stance are the ones who fear someone might have more than you or more control.

            And, this control is what you fear. The US is becoming more mainstream, like Australia, Japan, Germany and on and on in the way it must manage itself on the global stage.

            The current Trump stance of treating friends in such an adversarial fashion and with the gumption to blame all but yourselves for the paranoia and the highly suspicious state of the US economy is pure bullsh!t. The US is faring quite well at the moment.

            The trade imbalances or more accurately the percieved trade imbalances are across the globe, this is not a US only challenge.

            Even China has lost over 30 million manufacturing jobs.

            The US operates in a World no differently than any other nation. As a matter of fact the nations with the freest economies are faring better at the moment than those with more closed economies like the US and EU.

            I do think you beliefs or paradigms are driven by fear of loss of control.

            The US is losing influence and will need to consider how it does business in the future where it doesn’t have the upper hand it once had.

            This is called a level playing field, the US can’t create all the rules now, especially when you have 3 other equally compeitive regions in the World, it isn’t just the US anymore.

            The US now is not in the position to provide what can’t be provided for. There is plenty of competition. It seems the competition is where the US is having issues.

            Learn to compete and restructure US business and industry. The US still has significant infuence across the globe in business. US influence via business and industry interest in most all nations is highest. Don’t forget this. It’s now there are plenty of other businesses and industry globally that is giving the US a run for it’s money.

            This is the American way. Compete or lose out. When you can’t compete don’t whine and cry. Get off your asses and do something competitive.

            Tariffs and other imposts isn’t winning, it show how poor a loser you are.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Truth bomb for all.

          youtube.com/watch?v=wwmOkaKh3-s

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Astigmatism,
      There is also the argument from the “other” side that the US has the most non tariff barriers of any nation in the world.

      Add to this the US Big 3, UAW and government refusal to remove the 25% chicken tax which in fact subsidises more than pickup trucks/commercials. It also subsidises the pickup truck station wagons that are popular.

      The other area of contention I have with this argument (not generate by you) is countries that have no or low tax on US (Big 3) vehicles have a low importation rate of their product.

      The Big 3 had to close GMH production, sold Opel and Vauxhall, is having problems with profitability in Korea, etc.

      This indicates the Big 3 have internal structural issues in the management of their businesses. Why is it all other global manufacturers don’t have the same issues as the Big 3? They all operate in the same environment and believe it or not the US isn’t the freest economy in the world as many allude to on this site. The US is in fact quite regulated, just look at your auto manufacturing. Everyone uses the same standards globally to facilitate trade.

      The US (Big 3) are addicted to the protection they have been given for the past 50-60 years. The US auto industry needs to modernise and restructure so it can produce more product worthy of export, not F-150s as there is not a huge market for them in other nations.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        @BAFO – US “technical barriers” were just normal “regulations” until UNECE regulators crafted their own “regs”, slightly differing from US regs, after the fact.

        You’ll notice Europe didn’t require catalytic converter until 1992, and still don’t require passive airbags.

        So now the US should chase UNECE regs? But in the end, if the FCA can make the Fiat 500 to go either way, the actual “technical” differences are negligible.

        The Chicken tax stays in place to leverage the European Chicken tax. Even then the Chicken tax does zero to benefit the Big 3. There’s nothing available globally that would cannibalize Big 3 fullsize pickups.

        Name these global pickups that would strike fear and rock the foundation of Big 3 pickups…

        Such phantom, ghost pickups from around the world would barely cannibalize midsize pickups in the US, if at all (if they really existed).
        They would also compete against CUVs, midsize SUVs, boxy utilities, Cubes and Pilots too.

        But there is no Chicken tax on “station wagons”, regardless if truck based, car based, Toyota based, just only cargo vans and pickups. Learn it. Know it.

        The Tundra and Titan are just as “Protected” btw. And the whole Mini-Truck-Craze of the ’80s never happened in your mind, since the Chicken tax would’ve prevented it, if your theories are correct.

        Your ad nauseam rants are pure craziness. If anything, the Chicken tax costs the Big 3 a few dollars while importing their global vans.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Stop fncking trolling moron!
          THE WORLD – :Check dates 1952

          “The World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations is a working party (WP.29)[1] of the Sustainable Transport Division of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). It is tasked with creating a uniform system of regulations, called UN Regulations, for vehicle design to facilitate international trade.
          WP.29 was established in June 1952 as the “Working Party of experts on technical requirement of vehicles”, while its current name was adopted in 2000.”

          ———————————————–

          USA – Check dates 1966

          “FMVSS are currently codified at 49 C.F.R. 571. FMVSS are developed and enforced by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) pursuant to statutory authorization in the form of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, which is now codified at 49 U.S.C. ch. 301”

          ———————————————–

          Link to FMVSS

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Motor_Vehicle_Safety_Standards

          ———————————————–

          First para from article; Hence the US is in a more uncompetitive position now in vehicle manufacturing.

          “Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) are U.S. federal regulations specifying design, construction, performance, and durability requirements for motor vehicles and regulated Automobile safety-related components, systems, and design features. They are the U.S. counterpart to the UN Regulations developed by the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations and recognized to varying degree by most countries except the United States. Canada has a system of analogous rules called the Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (CMVSS), which overlap substantially but not completely in content and structure with the FMVSS. The FMVSS/CMVSS requirements differ significantly from the international UN requirements, so private import of foreign vehicles not originally manufactured to North American specifications is difficult or impossible.”

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @BAF0 – You’ve officially lost your mind. Those early Euro harmonization “regs” had zero to do with crash safety, mpg or emissions.

            They were to set uniformity for all region automakers to avoid a clusterfuk finding replacement parts, if every brand had unique, brand/model specific tire sizing, headlights, bulbs, batteries, fluids, oils, etc.

            Some how North American automakers figured these things out for themselves.

            But no, American regulators pioneered automotive emissions and safety regs.

            UNECE regs came after, and basically zig everywhere US regs “zag” as just another form of EU protectionism.

  • avatar
    "scarey"

    @[Redacted]49-” Take your line of putrid bullchit and stick it where the sun don’t shine. You’re full of crap and you know it. / I’m not deliberately trying to be a prick to you, but cut the crap and save your schtick for the less educated. It’s not conservative, it’s just embarrassing.”

    First- I’m not going to respond to your emotional outburst.
    Second- I am not a CONSERVATIVE. So-called Conservatives have done very little or nothing for our country since Reagan left office in 1989.
    Third- Despite any formal schooling that you may have had, YOU and your kind are the uneducated.

    • 0 avatar
      Maxb49

      Emotional your ass, you lying sack. All right, bozo, you have effectively conceded the point. Consumer auto manufacturing is not a national security issue. Now go slither back under that rock.

      • 0 avatar
        "scarey"

        @[Redacted]49- Dream on, Drama Queen !

      • 0 avatar
        TW5

        @ Maxb49

        Did you miss the news that Kobe Steel has been falsifying quality reports for decades? Do you understand that our military infrastructure requires extensive use of steel?

        It is a national security issue. The ability to produce war machines (if necessary) is directly related to a country’s industrial capacity, which includes steel production and other critical resources.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          TW5,
          Again, another overstatement.

          So,
          1. what percentage of Kobe steel made into US military equipement?

          2. What type of metal product and where is Kobe steel used?

          3. What impact did this have on US National Security?

          4. What percentage of US metals are used for military and police applications?

          Answer; 3%

          So, how can steel and aluminium production be made a National Security issue? Maybe 3% of all metal used in the US is of National Security and the majority of this metal comes from NATO and/or NATO aligned nations.

          These are called Allies. Do you understand the concept of Allies, collaboration, enterprise, etc.

          By the sounds of it you don’t.

          I do believe Kobe steel should be dealt with, but no differently than Takata, Toyota, VW and even any US company.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            So you’re okay with collapsing interstate overpasses, skyscrapers, bridges, tunnels, etc? You don’t consider these issues to be a threat to the security of the nation nor are you concerned about the prospect of the US being cutoff during a time of conflict?

            Besides spreading inane talking points and non sequiturs, all of which serve to protect the status quo of US deficit spending, unsustainably low rates, and American middle class decline, what is your function?

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            TW5,
            Overstating aren’t you?

            You use fear and paranoia to generate support.

            What a sad individual you are to prey on others’ fears.

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            Big A,

            you’re wrong about national security. Everything is national security. Imagine that we run out of something important. Soon people will start fighting for this and may start stealing it somewhere, from private and gov property. Firefights, civil war, end of USA. National security. We the people are main keeper of national security. Feds may fight external enemy but they can be destroyed from within. And as long as people get all they need for comfy life, NS is strong. As soon as masses start to shake the foundation, the country is done.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            slavuta,
            I laugh when I hear you guys who support the large vehicles in the US cry national security and then use the excuse “run out of something”.

            Then why do you support full size pickups and other vehicles?

            What about conservation, you “national security” guys should be the first to cry foul play with the abuse of excessive fuel and energy use by the US.

            Please, give me a break.

            It’s about control, not “running out of something”.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @ Big Al from Oz

            National security is threat assessment, prioritization and mitigation. Steel goes into our infrastructure. Infrastructure was built, in part, to satisfy national security objectives. We can’t risk our infrastructure to be politically correct, nor can we let our steel industry fall further into disrepair.

            Do you think the US military might have strategic reserves of critical resources beyond what is publicly disclosed? Protecting the capacity to develop these reserves is critical.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            TW5,
            Your comments are flawed. You speak of national security, but have little clue on what makes security.

            You lack security within yourself or you would have trust and faith in others.

            The best security for any country is to have reliable Allies and the best way to form these relationships is via trade and business. Interaction.

            As the US loses influence and power it will need to rely more and more on multilateral relationships for it’s very existence and lifestyle.

            You tend to make irrational statements based on fear to justify your stance.

            I think you need to sit down and have a good look at your paradigms in relation to the how and where the US really is in this point in history and with your diminishing relationships you have with your Allies.

            The US can’t improve without others. This is economically, militarily and politically.

            You need us, but the US doesn’t make the rules, you just don’t have the dominance and influence anymore.

            Learn to live with this as this is your future.

            The US needs to use more soft power, but to do this Donald Trump needs to be removed with a decent person of moral standing the World will listen to.

            Just having a bigger gun or button will not MAGA. Collaboration and enterprise between countries will MAGA.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @ Big Al from Oz

            The problem is not me. The problem is that you don’t have the foggiest idea how anything works.

            When the US runs a $750B trade deficit (BoP basis), it controls the world. That is precisely why bad people in the United States insist that the US run such a large trade deficit. They get to use the wealth of American citizens, which would ordinarily only allow them to govern 330M people, and they use it to put the other 6B people on trade welfare. Besides gaining leverage over foreign governments, which allows US officials like Hillary Clinton to demand tens of millions in donations from Australia to the Clinton Foundation, people like Hillary Clinton also get lavish kickbacks and campaign financing from banks and corporations that benefit from outsourcing and capital account surplus.

            For over 30 years Trump has said this is a debauched form of civics, and rather than helping the US gain leverage over other countries around the world, it will eventually destroy the American citizenry. Trump is fighting to make the rest of the world less dependent.

            Your comments would be a lot less pathetic if your weren’t advocating maintenance of the status quo, which has led to $20T public debt, sagging real wages, and poor labor force participation. You have no point and no argument. You are either clueless or malevolent.

  • avatar

    This should have happened 20 years ago. It no longer matters now. To simplify things just walk away from NAFTA.

  • avatar

    Soviet Union was fully self-dependent. Everything was designed and made internally even computer chips and personal computers (which suck BTW and rarely worked). Soviet Union had unlimited resources – that’s how it won the war with Germany. After WWII SU was very strong and consolidated country with unbeatable victorious army. Nevertheless SU collapsed in just 40 years after WWII.

    In contrast America was always divided country in permanent state of civil war cold or hot except of short period of national unity after WWII and 9/11. All Americans care about is mighty $ and happy to sell out everything and lay off all countrymen and send all jobs abroad. Half of Americans at any given moment hate political system, president and party in power. American companies has very short life cycle and grow and die fast – take “mighty” iconic Xerox for example which is in process to be taken over by Fujifilm. Eventually American companies die and have after life in China, Japan or Europe. Nevertheless America somehow not only survived but exported American way of life all over the world including Europe and Asia and totally dominates the world. Germany’s and Japan’s world domination did not materialize as well as Chinese will not. If some country or axis try to blackmail America or declare war on America America will simply eliminate that country one way or another. Only naive people may think US will never use WMD or overwhelming deadly sanctions or cyber warfare (where America dominates) or assassination using drones or satellites. As a matter of fact US used WMD against civilian population, as well as firebombing, regime change, assassinations of foreign leaders. Just ask Saddam who dared to threaten US and sitting president or Qaddafi who annoyed US. Or watch Kim who dares to challenge US with nuclear weapon (big mistake) to be gone in few years along with his ridiculous and failed regime. And same with Iranian regime which is on death throes already – no need to negotiate with them.

    So outsourcing less productive job does not threaten national security, but waking the sleeping tiger with overwhelming economic power does and we are not talking about US national security here. Regarding Trump I think it is just negotiation tactics.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Inside Looking Out,
      I agree with you regarding the tumultuous history the USA has had. I also agree with you that the US will still be around in the future and still have influence. The amount I don’t quite agree or with your scenario.

      The scenario you present is too rosy. The US will decline, but in a similar fashion to Great Brittan. It will take several decades of gradual loss of influence.

      Economically the US will gradually wind back a little, just like the UK had done. It doesn’t mean living standards will not rise, but will not rise a quickly as other nations.

      On the global stage you will see a unified EU, China, Japan and even Russia have more input into the resolution of geopolitical issues, ie, Iran, North Korea, etc. This has already begun since the US is dropping out of multilateral agreements of late.

      As the US dismisses and disagrees with outcomes in the rest of the World it will become more isolated and it will find it harder to do business and influence.

      The US now doesn’t have the global coverage militarily it had only 50 years ago.

      I essentially see a gradual winding back of US influence, militarily, politically and economically as other nations rise. For the US to become what it once was is near on impossible.

      I think the US needs to work and collaborate a little more closely with other nations to maintain maximum global influence.

      As for Donald Trump, he’s blown significant opportunities for US influence, ie, Trans Pacific Trade Pact, Paris Accord, Iran, even his recent Korea issue. With Korea he’s let in the EU, China, Japan and South Korea to find a resolution. All Trump can do now is go for the ride. Military action against North Korea will be out, as the “rest” of the World will come to a decision on how to manage North Korea.

      He’s blown it on so many fronts and p!ssed off many friends and Allies with his ridiculous stance on trade. Trump is a liability to the US.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Inside Looking Out: No worries, there is always “sporty” Corolla available in your friendly Toyota...
  • SPPPP: Wow, I don’t remember ever hearing about that Pro-Tec option. Odd.
  • SPPPP: Did the steel beds get a lifetime warranty? I don’t remember that happening.
  • Bigazfordtruck: Agreed, however the local push seems to be for the boulevard option which will push more traffic onto...
  • SPPPP: For context, FCA’s gross revenue in 2018 was 110 billion dollars (billion with a B), but still, nearly a...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States