Trump's Trade War

[retread 2951]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/08/13/donald-trump-has-emasculated-american-farmer/

Quote

“It’s really, really getting bad out here,” said Bob Kuylen, who’s farmed for 35 years in North Dakota.

“Trump is ruining our markets. No one is buying our product no more, and we have no markets no more.”

Agriculture exports to China dropped by more than half last year. In 2017, China imported $19.5 billion in agricultural goods, making it the second-largest buyer overall for American farmers. In 2018, that dropped to $9.2 billion as the trade war escalated, according to the United States Department of Agriculture.

This year, China’s agricultural imports from the U.S are down roughly 20%, and U.S. grain, dairy and livestock farmers have seen their revenue evaporate as a result. Over the last 6 years, farm income has dropped 45% from $123.4 billion in 2013 to $63 billion last year, according to the USDA....

 

Quote

Trump’s damage to farmers has two prongs. The first has been his administration’s evisceration of the Department of Agriculture. As Michael Lewis documented in “The Fifth Risk,” Trump’s appointees had little respect for the scientific research performed by the department’s scientists. In 2018, Trump’s secretary of agriculture, Sonny Perdue, centralized control over USDA researchers in an effort to limit the publication of any research critical of administration policies. As a result the Department of Agriculture’s best and brightest began to exit government service. By 2019, non-retirement departures from USDA research agencies had more than doubled compared to the previous three-year average. That exodus will only increase after USDA scientists were given a short date to select whether to move with their agencies from D.C. to Kansas City. White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney celebrated the transparent ploy to purge the administration of scientists as “a wonderful way to streamline government.” One outside expert warned my Post colleague Ben Guarino, “This is the brain drain we all feared, possibly a destruction of the agencies.”

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

I would first like for the Senator to enumerate exactly how much and what pain he is going to be accepting prior to my acknowledging any such concession. As a matter of fact, the good Senator as a representative should be a proxy for any pain and suffering his constituents may feel and he should be bound by duty to ease their pain financially.

[F250 29199]

3 hours ago, retread said:

China's been screwing the US over for decades, and we had to pull the bandaid off at some point. I sure don't trust the Ds to do that. I'm sticking with Trump.

This attitude plus a lot of these people really do think they are doing their patriotic duty by sacrificing for the nation. It's fucking bizarre, it's basically economic Jonestown thinking.

 

[retread 2951]

That RushFoxHannity brainwashing is some powerful stuff.

[Asithappens 978]

Another peeve of mine wrt farmers and all the other Trump dumb shits:

so.. it's "ok" to go bankrupt for Trump b/c it's the right thing to do, the patriotic thing to do,  and we need to stop letting China push us around? To the tune of how much? We have effectively lost (or drastically reduced) our exports to THE WORLD'S MOST POPULOUS COUNTRY. Our ag exports to China were like $24 billion in 2014, and $9 billion in 2018.

Is this a business or not, farmers? Cuz you're really fucking stupid.

But back to my point.... So it's ok to shoot both your feet off for Trump and to stand up to China, but it's not ok to fund something like "medicare for all" b/c it's socialism?

Jesus Christ. This crop of farmers is the dumbest group of businesspeople in the history of the country.

[Huckleberry 34580]

7 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

But back to my point.... So it's ok to shoot both your feet off for Trump and to stand up to China, but it's not ok to fund something like "medicare for all" b/c it's socialism?

That's actually a better point. Sacrificing for the greater good is a noble thing. People can do that with their wallets. I, like most people, do not have a problem that some of my income is taken to fund programs for the less fortunate. I consider that a good thing.

Losing your generations-long family farm to stick it to the libs is a little bit different, though.

[Francisco 2.0 32586]

https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/3/20848383/dji-drones-price-raises-trump-china-tariffs-trade-war

 

Quote

Chinese drone juggernaut DJI has made substantial adjustments to pricing and availability on its product lineup in response to increased tariffs on Chinese goods imposed by the Trump administration. The price hikes were first reported by DroneDJ earlier today, and they represent perhaps the first reported case of a Chinese gadget manufacturer, or a brand that manufactures predominantly in China, passing the cost of Trump’s tariffs onto US consumers.

If you go looking for certain DJI products through the company’s US store, you’ll find price increases across the Mavic 2 line by about 13 percent, which is slightly under the 15 percent figure President Donald Trump announced on Twitter late last month and that went into effect over the weekend.

 

Quote

Due to the recent increase in tariffs, DJI has updated pricing for its products in the United States. We take many factors into account when recommending retail prices in different countries around the world, including tariff applications, tax rates and currency exchange fluctuations,” a DJI spokesperson tells The Verge. “We follow all applicable laws and regulations in the countries where we operate and will continue to work toward making drone and handheld products more accessible to the world while supporting the many existing customers that use DJI technology daily.”

 

Quote

The Mavic 2 Pro is now $1,729, up from $1,499. The DJI Mavic Air in Arctic White, the only available color option that is not out of stock, now costs $919, up from $799. On Amazon, the same products can be purchased at the lower, pre-tariff prices. DroneDJ notes that most of the Mavic 2 models became available again only this past weekend, timed to the September 1st tariffs going into effect, after weeks of being unavailable.

Switching your location using DJI’s built-in localization tool in the upper-righthand corner of its website will reveal the price differences based on region. In Canada, for instance, the Mavic 2 Pro remains $1,499. For EU countries like France and Germany, the price in Euros is in line with the old, pre-tariff USD pricing. For specialty products like the professional-grade Inspire and “industrial” purpose Matrice 600 Pro, the prices appear to be up by nearly 17 and 14 percent, respectively, compared to pricing in Canada.

 

 

[tx 3 putt 78672]

https://apple.news/Aedr7y4EASFyO4mq-JZfmCQ

 

#maga 

[JohnnyRage 1617]

Why are we fighting so hard to make China a better place for American company's to do business? It would seem to me that if we make China a more fair and desirable place for international corporations to set up shop...

 

Then?

Edited September 4, 2019 by JohnnyRage

[FondrenRoad 4378]

On 8/29/2019 at 12:54 PM, Asithappens said:

Another peeve of mine wrt farmers and all the other Trump dumb shits:

so.. it's "ok" to go bankrupt for Trump b/c it's the right thing to do, the patriotic thing to do,  and we need to stop letting China push us around? To the tune of how much? We have effectively lost (or drastically reduced) our exports to THE WORLD'S MOST POPULOUS COUNTRY. Our ag exports to China were like $24 billion in 2014, and $9 billion in 2018.

Is this a business or not, farmers? Cuz you're really fucking stupid.

But back to my point.... So it's ok to shoot both your feet off for Trump and to stand up to China, but it's not ok to fund something like "medicare for all" b/c it's socialism?

Jesus Christ. This crop of farmers is the dumbest group of businesspeople in the history of the country.

Soybeans may never recover. Brazil has been working to fill the void. There will be no reason at all for China to switch back to American soybeans when all this is finally over. 

[burntorangebongos 10826]

It is like they don't understand that the subsidized program to help them due to the lost trade has created a socialistic program that didn't exist before! It is wasting money we would have had to fix other issues like healthcare. For what reason?

Because of the massive harm this has caused in unrecoverable trade, it makes you wonder if some of the oligarchs from Russia and even from here are backing the groups winning the China contracts. I don't know but the amount of leverage this stupid trade war has cost us is massive.

There was a way to force China to change and it was to go at them with the rest of the world to demand they change their unfair practices and give them no other options. We blew that and I don't know that we can ever get that chance again.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4999]

7 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Soybeans may never recover. Brazil has been working to fill the void. There will be no reason at all for China to switch back to American soybeans when all this is finally over. 

It's not like that rainforest they burned down to grow that food is going to grow back. Might as well keep buying from Brazil...

[XYZ 2154]

7 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Soybeans may never recover. Brazil has been working to fill the void. There will be no reason at all for China to switch back to American soybeans when all this is finally over. 

Since 2016 Brazil soybean production has been pretty flat. If Brazil sells more soybeans to China, then the US can sell more soybeans to whoever was buying from Brazil before.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

7 hours ago, XYZ said:

Since 2016 Brazil soybean production has been pretty flat. If Brazil sells more soybeans to China, then the US can sell more soybeans to whoever was buying from Brazil before.

They bumped production up by 20% in 2016.  Nobody was buying that non-existent 20% prior to 2016.  Its a new production floor.  2019 will be a record crop for them also.  There is no new soy market for our farmers to jump to.  Brazil took the available international soy market since we left it sitting there.

Although, I imagine that many Brazilian farmers are using unsustainable farming methods, so that production will probably drop back down at some point.  Destroying rainforest to make arable land which will be destroyed also.

We are playing the trade war like we are the only ones that can produce anything.  We aren't just taking our ball, going home, and everything stops until we bring our ball back.  The game is being played without us.  They don't need our ball.  When we try to rebuild the bridges we are burning, both with China and our allies, they may very well be satisfied with the trade relationships they are making right now instead of getting back in bed with us.  We are unstable and prone to wild foreign policy changes every 4 years.

[Asithappens 978]

On 8/27/2019 at 8:17 PM, Fudge Nuggets said:

Fine, let’s start by clawing back all the farmer welfare.

Exactly. 

Farmers are probably the biggest welfare queens on the planet.

 

[Loco 3754]

1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

Exactly. 

Farmers are probably the biggest welfare queens on the planet.

 

I feel this way, but it's strongly countered by the simple fact that food production is a strategic asset of the US. (we can feed ourselves and troops and everyone else can fuck off if need be) So we pay farmers to make sure we have adequate supply.  However as companies dominate this space I do wonder if the American people would be beneficiaries if food shortages happen, or if for profit companies would just sell their heavily subsidized food abroad to the highest bidder in the name of profit.

 

With all the money we provide to farmers/massive agro corps combined with the crop yields well beyond our domestic consumption, it's amazing to me that anyone in the US goes hungry or even fucking close to hungry.   It's shameful and grotesque.

[Asithappens 978]

3 minutes ago, Loco said:

I feel this way, but it's strongly countered by the simple fact that food

That may have been the case. It is no more.

40% of US corn production goes to ethanol. There's really nothing vitally strategic about that, other than being another government handout to the farm bloc. Another 30% of corn goes to feeding animals (cattle). We don't need to consume that much meat. Overproducing high fructose corn syrup doesn't ensure everyone has something to eat.

The farmers are complicit with all this shit going on. They brought it on themselves. Maybe they need to do their "patriotic" duty, go bankrupt, so we can get farmers who aren't such dumb shits. 

Our ag exports to China were about $24 Billion in 2014; last year? $9 Billion. We have lost, as a market, the most populous country on the planet. And you're talking about strategy? Come down from the ivory tower and look and how Trump and the farmers are fucking themselves over. There is absolutely no strategy at all going on here from the Republicans. 

[Loco 3754]

3 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

That may have been the case. It is no more.

40% of US corn production goes to ethanol. There's really nothing vitally strategic about that, other than being another government handout to the farm bloc. Another 30% of corn goes to feeding animals (cattle). We don't need to consume that much meat. Overproducing high fructose corn syrup doesn't ensure everyone has something to eat.

The farmers are complicit with all this shit going on. They brought it on themselves. Maybe they need to do their "patriotic" duty, go bankrupt, so we can get farmers who aren't such dumb shits. 

Our ag exports to China were about $24 Billion in 2014; last year? $9 Billion. We have lost, as a market, the most populous country on the planet. And you're talking about strategy? Come down from the ivory tower and look and how Trump and the farmers are fucking themselves over. There is absolutely no strategy at all going on here from the Republicans. 

I take your points about the final uses of crops.  You won't get a lot of argument from me.  Sugar is INSANELY subsidized and that helps skyrocket healthcare costs...  so yeah, not the best use of our tax dollars or agricultural output.  I thought that I was clear expressing dissatisfaction with how the subsidized agricultural production was sold for profit instead of being leveraged to the benefit of taxpayers. 

But you miss my point.  China cannot feed itself, Russia cannot feed itself....  We can feed ourselves.  Easily.  That is a huge strategic advantage.  Are we using that advantage properly? ... nope.  Can we do better absolutely.  But lets not pretend that advantage/capability is not important/valuable.

An army marches on its....

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Loco said:

I take your points about the final uses of crops.  You won't get a lot of argument from me.  Sugar is INSANELY subsidized and that helps skyrocket healthcare costs...  so yeah, not the best use of our tax dollars or agricultural output.  I thought that I was clear expressing dissatisfaction with how the subsidized agricultural production was sold for profit instead of being leveraged to the benefit of taxpayers. 

But you miss my point.  China cannot feed itself, Russia cannot feed itself....  We can feed ourselves.  Easily.  That is a huge strategic advantage.  Are we using that advantage properly? ... nope.  Can we do better absolutely.  But lets not pretend that advantage/capability is not important/valuable.

An army marches on its....

But would we not be able to feed ourselves if we cut off the subsidies? 

[Loco 3754]

12 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

But would we not be able to feed ourselves if we cut off the subsidies? 

I have no idea.  Gas companies collude to make fuel supplies low in high demand periods, why wouldn't any other for profit company without a soul?  My point is that I am conflicted because the money we pay for subsidies is not JUST a hand out. It's kinda like insurance that you can eat.  It's weird to think that way but the more you study history the more you realize just how important food and food production is.  

And to be perfectly clear... Trump is a horrible embarrassing simpleton and his GOP sycophants suck balls.   They are fucking us all over.   I was trying to discuss a tangential thought that has been in my head for a while, not support those fucking morons in any way.

Edited September 4, 2019 by Loco

[FondrenRoad 4378]

7 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

But would we not be able to feed ourselves if we cut off the subsidies? 

Of course we could. We pay farmers to burn crops as it is. We are way past the point of strategic sustenance. 

We could feed all of Mexico with the extra corn we produce. Cheaper than the wall too. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

7 hours ago, Loco said:

I have no idea.  Gas companies collude to make fuel supplies low in high demand periods, why wouldn't any other for profit company without a soul?  My point is that I am conflicted because the money we pay for subsidies is not JUST a hand out. It's kinda like insurance that you can eat.  It's weird to think that way but the more you study history the more you realize just how important food and food production is.  

And to be perfectly clear... Trump is a horrible embarrassing simpleton and his GOP sycophants suck balls.   They are fucking us all over.   I was trying to discuss a tangential thought that has been in my head for a while, not support those fucking morons in any way.

If gas companies were colluding to control price, it would be a slam dunk antitrust case. That isn't happening though. 

Farms aren't colluding either. Margins are razor thin. 

[Loco 3754]

4 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

If gas companies were colluding to control price, it would be a slam dunk antitrust case. That isn't happening though. 

Farms aren't colluding either. Margins are razor thin. 

1) Look at refinery maintenance schedules and supply during peak driving season.  1 Supply, 2 Demand, 3 scheduled maintenance, 4 profit.  Yes the industry has some ready made excuses and a really fat lobby, so much for that slam dunk case.    

2) I don't know anything about "Farm" economics but I'm not sure how a business working on a "razor thin" margin would have less incentive to maximize profits, quite the opposite.  

If you read my post that you quoted, my point was that farmers (large agricultural corps beholden to shareholders) might choose to sell subsidized crops overseas for profit rather than domestically for the benefit of the American citizenry.  I used the example of gas companies working to maximize profit over consumer benefit.  I admit to being completely ignorant on the market making process for agricultural products with the exception of watching Trading Places 20+ years ago.

 

(am I the only one who can't read the word sustenance without hearing Daffy Duck saying it?)

[Post Oak 20555]

56 minutes ago, Loco said:

1) Look at refinery maintenance schedules and supply during peak driving season.  1 Supply, 2 Demand, 3 scheduled maintenance, 4 profit.  Yes the industry has some ready made excuses and a really fat lobby, so much for that slam dunk case.    

2) I don't know anything about "Farm" economics but I'm not sure how a business working on a "razor thin" margin would have less incentive to maximize profits, quite the opposite.  

If you read my post that you quoted, my point was that farmers (large agricultural corps beholden to shareholders) might choose to sell subsidized crops overseas for profit rather than domestically for the benefit of the American citizenry.  I used the example of gas companies working to maximize profit over consumer benefit.  I admit to being completely ignorant on the market making process for agricultural products with the exception of watching Trading Places 20+ years ago.

 

(am I the only one who can't read the word sustenance without hearing Daffy Duck saying it?)

Well now you're not

[SquishMitten 10496]

Those farmers knowingly voted for an incompetent failed businessman. What did they expect?

Dude, Fox News touted bankruptcy as “a smart business strategy.” That is true in the sense that when your business fails, bankruptcy may be the only way to survive. But the morons skipped over the obvious fact that bankruptcy only becomes “a smart business strategy” AFTER you have royally fucked up at running your business. Thus, they still believe he is a good business man.

[Pig Bellmont 8884]

 

[Hornius Emeritus 12796]

3 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

When he put tariffs on agricultural products, I said nothing, for I am not a farmer.  When he put tariffs on Iphones and toys, I said nothing, for I am not an Apple enthusiast or a child.  Then he announced tariffs on single-malt scotch, and there was nobody left to speak for me ....

[F250 29199]

5 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

And the MAGA crowd cheers.

[F250 29199]

Manti Te'o's fake girlfriend was a bigger story. The bar has been set so low nothing is ludicrous anymore with this administration.

 

 

[HenryJames 67326]

 

[bolverk 30320]

I think we had one, two, and three with TPP.

[Captainant 28517]

2 hours ago, bolverk said:

I think we had one, two, and three with TPP.

Nevermind that TPP also enshrined corporate IP rights as absolute and internationally binding. TPP was a dogshit deal for average joe's, but wonderful for massive, multi-national corporations that wanted to put people in jail for downloading movies, music, or really anything that can be classified as "IP"

[Doc Sam Beckett 5902]

 

Wapo 

Even for an industry that annually receives several billion dollars worth of public backing — for crop insurance, income and price support payments — the latest financial safety net has been remarkable.

Over the past two years, Trump secured congressional approval of $28 billion to help farmers suffering from what USDA called “unjustified foreign retaliatory tariffs, resulting in the loss of traditional export markets.”

Last month, lawmakers provided an additional $19 billion to offset the economic damage caused by the pandemic. A further $14 billion will become available in July for the Commodity Credit Corporation to give farmers additional help.

 years of unusual help could harden into something more permanent.

“There’s a genuine concern that these additional moneys might get embedded as part of the baseline spending for the next year,” said Vincent Smith, an agricultural economist at Montana State University. “Does that make the agriculture sector more dependent on the federal government for revenue? Yes.”

[LABEVO 928]

 

[Royalfan5 2384]

10 minutes ago, LABEVO said:

 

We also have multi-year highs in corn, soybeans, and wheat now, and should have strong prices through 2021. 

[tx 3 putt 78672]

so Trump is PRO socialism ?

[Biff Tannen 46154]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

so Trump is PRO socialism ?