Cheaper steel and aluminum means more American jobs in everything from machining to to electronics manufacturing. Those lower input prices have ripple effects throughout every corner of the American economy and can ultimately affect gas prices, food prices, the housing market, medical costs and much more.
If China wants to send us cheap goods and materials at the expense of their own taxpayers and simultaneously allow us to conserve our own natural resources, why should our government stand in the way of that? I see these tariffs as a heavy-handed, authoritarian infringement on the right of American citizens to make decisions about how they want to spend their own money.
This situation is short term while Trump negotiates a better deal. I have confidence in Trump. Just give him some time.
American steel sounds good to me
World market means we have 200 other countries.
America has a short memory... other countries do not.
"Sure, US steel tariffs also make foreign steel producers unhappy, but the happiness or unhappiness of foreign producers is not a useful goal for US economic policy".
If the goal of US economic policy is to compel a foreign government to open it's markets to actual free trade, the unhappiness of a foreign producer in that nation does become a useful goal to US Foreign Policy.
Additionally, if having a Domestic Steel Industry with reconfigured and revitalized modern American Steel plants is of value to National Security, making sure America could produce steel in the face of war or economic calamity, than that benefit is ignored in this analysis.
"But the higher prices are part of higher revenue for steel companies, which maybe used for purposes ranging from robots and automation to research and development"
If revenue is used for research and development and automation, then none of that's importance on future lowered prices and steel quality is considered as a benefit in this analysis.
Beside offering no evidence of how the (assumed) supply chain's total cost rises by 650,000 dollars / 'steel user' (whatever that means), or explaining if the 10,000 now working steel workers can become 'steel users' themselves because they have jobs, and if other workers who support the new expenditures of the now working steel workers also can be 'steel users' this year because they also have jobs, this analysis omits too much to be convincing to me
Leave your comments
Post comment as a guest