US breaks Int'l Trade Laws and NAFTA

[Easy Drifter]

The Democrat dominated Congress has passed a law that is illegal under both Int'l. Trade Law and NAFTA.
The requirement that all steel used in Govt. construction be produced in the US is illegal.
Will Obama sign the bill into law or will he demand it be altered to conform to NAFTA and Int'l. law?
Canada and the EU are protesting this provision.
Is the US reverting to their pre WW2 protectionist attitude?
With Obama visiting Canada in mid Feb. this is not a good start.
The last thing the world needs now is trade wars. Everybody loses in those.
The US politicians sometimes forget Canada is the largest trading partner the US has.

[donKey jote]

Is the US reverting to their pre WW2 protectionist attitude?

No, they may be reverting to Bush's 2002 steel wars though :)

[Roamy]

i don't know what the big problem is and why they had to pass a law. They could have just made it a condition of contract. At any event the world has far more problems than this. Maybe we could start with the 15 billion to africa. and the 38,000 military in Germany plus whatever we have in Korea.

[Easy Drifter]

The point is they did pass a law that breaks NAFTA and Int'l trade laws. Putting it in all Govt. contracts is the same thing.
It stops Cdn. and European steel companies from bidding on those jobs.

[Hondo]

It's not a law yet, merely a bill passed by the house of Pelosi, with no Republican votes. It still has to be approved by the house of Reid and the Exalted Transparent One should sign it, but they can pass it into law against his veto.

[schmenke]

i don't know what the big problem is and why they had to pass a law. They could have just made it a condition of contract....

That too would have been illeagal.

[anthonyvop]

Typical anti-corporate, populist rhetoric from the Dems.

[donKey jote]

Want to read some more on typical populist rhetoric, Tony ?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-steel-tariffs-can-win-crucial-rust-belt-votes-661533.html

[Hondo]

Want to read some more on typical populist rhetoric, Tony ?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-steel-tariffs-can-win-crucial-rust-belt-votes-661533.html

Anyone with half a brain knows that catch phrases like "free trade" and "public servant" are bullsnot.

That's nothing, try exporting rice to Japan!

[Hondo]

The Exalted Transparent One has heard your pleas and will "look into" those "buy American" clauses. Apparently, he isn't sure of exactly what is in "his" bailout package.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I do know this much. The ETO is due to make his first foreign visit to Canada in Febuary. He passes this bill and people up here make a big deal of the anti NAFTA bits..and that pom pom waving crowd of Canucks may turn on him like they waved to Dubya with only one of their fingers.

The point of all it of course is that the US gov't has a history of yapping about free trade and open borders until they are not doing too well. Which of course is fine I suppose until you realize your trading partner to the north is being led barely by sane normal people with the hounds of silliness and anti-American stupidity just waiting for something like this. IF Dubya had sanctioned this sort of stupidity, they would be burning his @ss in effigy on the streets of Toronto before going back to Yorkville to sip their latte's. Obama I knew was capable of endorsing protectionism, and I am glad that the pro-Obama Canuck, of which there are many will have his damned eyes opened.

[markabilly]

Most countries have been getting the far better half of deals than the USA. Foriegn trade has been one sided for over 100 years, and NAFTA is just a big joke.

Point of the stimulus package was to stimulate the USA economy, not canada, not mexico, and not europe.

Japan is about the only one industrialized nation whose official tarriff rates are lower than the USA (which has actually done away with such things for NAFTA and some other countries), but try exporting a car to Japan.....meat to japan or rice as Frieo points out.......they have what they call commondity taxes that are designed to hide as tarriffs without being tarriffs.......and then they have all these special regulations for processing and selling products...

Much like Canada, go there and try building something using american steel.....opps, sorry drifter.....

Canada wants jobs, then pass their own stimulus package!!!

USA has been subsiding the world not only with trade but all sorts of aid packages, food, health, military and everything else. For years a major part of germany's econmy was based on the presence of american troops to protect them from the Ruskies....Japan does not need an army because they got the USA, Korea has got the USA....

meanwhile as crazy ole Ross Perot said, pass Nafta and you will hear a great sucking sound as all those jobs go to Mexico where people are paid slave wages and the doors on factories in the USA close......while he is crazy he was right, except it has happenned slower than he said...

[Easy Drifter]

Not only is the US as a whole Canada's biggest trading partner it is the largest for 38 individual states.
Maybe we should put a energy 'surcharge' of say 25% on energy exports to the US. Note surcharge, not tarriff or duty.
The NE states get a large % of their electric power from Canada.
The US imports more oil from Canada than any other country.
The US imports most of its natural gas from Canada.
Much of that natural gas is used to produce electric power.
That income would probably keep us from going into deficit financing.
Of course it would cause even higher energy costs for everyone and every business in the US but hey that is a trade war for you.
Our economies are very intertwined and a trade war is the last thing either country needs.
I expect Senators and Congressmen will be getting an earful from many of their constituents in the states that have a large amount of trade with Canada.
Oh by the way Markabilly, the Cdn. Govt. has a large 'stimulus' package on the go that is going to put our Govt. into deficit financing for the first time in 10 years.

[Roamy]

That too would have been illeagal.

Well then just run all the contract through Wall Street. They get to doe whatever they want.

[Roamy]

Not only is the US as a whole Canada's biggest trading partner it is the largest for 38 individual states.
Maybe we should put a energy 'surcharge' of say 25% on energy exports to the US. Note surcharge, not tarriff or duty.
The NE states get a large % of their electric power from Canada.
The US imports more oil from Canada than any other country.
The US imports most of its natural gas from Canada.
Much of that natural gas is used to produce electric power.
That income would probably keep us from going into deficit financing.
Of course it would cause even higher energy costs for everyone and every business in the US but hey that is a trade war for you.
Our economies are very intertwined and a trade war is the last thing either country needs.
I expect Senators and Congressmen will be getting an earful from many of their constituents in the states that have a large amount of trade with Canada.
Oh by the way Markabilly, the Cdn. Govt. has a large 'stimulus' package on the go that is going to put our Govt. into deficit financing for the first time in 10 years.

Well seeing how you are heading down this street lets see some numbers if you can.
how much we export to canada and how much we import. the following suggests a trade war would not be in the best interest of Canada. I don't know why we have a tarriff on Canadian timber. We import quite a bit and just light our own on fire.

Trade accounts for roughly a third of GDP. Canada has signed two agreements with US- 1989 US-Canada Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) (which includes Mexico), which has brought a trade boom for Canada.


The relationship, which Canada enjoys with US, is a major defining factor for Canada's dramatic increase in trade. The US and Canada have the world's largest trading relationship and US absorbs more than 85% of Canadian exports.

Main exports include motor vehicles and parts, industrial machinery, aircraft, telecommunications equipment; chemicals, plastics, fertilizers; wood pulp, timber, crude petroleum, natural gas, electricity and aluminum.

And machinery and equipment, motor vehicles and parts, crude oil, chemicals, electricity, durable consumer goods are Canada's main imports. However, some problematic issues often relating to the issues of subsidies continues to thrive between the US and Canada. American moves, which impact on Canadian exports - in the form of tariffs on Canadian timber and increased subsidies for US farmers - have created particular tension.

CHALLENGES FACING CANADA
Despite being an affluent, high-tech industrial society, there are some issues, which can't be overlooked in the current scenario. As a result of globalization, Canadian enterprises are going to face even stronger competition from rivals in emerging economies in coming years. Despite some calls from business for a lower dollar or for government inducements to keep production in Canada, the most appropriate response is for domestic policy makers to redouble their focus on enhancing productivity growth and innovation in high and low technology sectors alike.

Globalization of competition, technological advances, and changes in the demographic structure of the workforce continue are three threats to the labour markets in Canada.

[Easy Drifter]

My main point was that the last thing either country needs is a trade war.
We import a huge amount of goods from the US. Fresh vegtables and fruit are just one big import.
There really is no point in who imports/exports what though.
The thing is a trade war would hurt the economies of both countries.
The US exports more goods to Canada than it does to any other country.
We export more goods to the US than to any other country.
Any sort of a tit for tat trade war would end up hurting everyone in both countries as the cost of goods goes up when the last thing needed is an increase in the cost of living for anyone.

[Hondo]

I like Canada and I like all the Canadians I've ever met. If anything, Canada and the USA should partner up in as many things beneficial to each other as they can.

[Jag_Warrior]

meanwhile as crazy ole Ross Perot said, pass Nafta and you will hear a great sucking sound as all those jobs go to Mexico where people are paid slave wages and the doors on factories in the USA close......while he is crazy he was right, except it has happenned slower than he said...

In his "Great Sucking Sound" speech during the Pres. debate, Perot said this would happen over 12-15 years. That was in 1992. By the late 90's/early 21st century, certain U.S. industries had been decimated: furniture and wood working, textiles, consumer electronics, etc. Seems he was spot on. He never said every manufacturing job would leave the U.S. He merely pointed out that there was no way to compete, from a labor cost standpoint, when the labor rates in Mexico were less than 1/8th of what they were in the U.S. around that time. Throw in the lack of labor laws, environmental regulations and almost nonexistent healthcare costs in these third world countries and it amazes me that any American, with less than $10 million in net worth (not in a position to take advantage of the NAFTA advantages), would not be ready to put a dagger in the heart of any Congressman(woman) who voted in favor of this legislation.

The last time I checked, the minimum wage in Mexico was approximately $4.70 per day (certainly much less now because the peso is down versus the dollar). I believe the minimum wage in the U.S. is $6.55 per hour. Mexico is about the cheapest place to buy labor in all of North and South America. What's left of my former company is shutting down facilities and laying off workers in the U.S. left and right. As the economy recovers, expansion will take place south of the border. My current company is shutting down its oldest facility in the north east and is expanding operations in Mexico.

Only a fool or a liar could not have seen where this would go. Bill Clinton had no problem with that reality. Neither did W. Bush. And while Obama might say that he has a problem with it, there is nothing that he or his union backers can do about it. They might find ways to slow it down a slight amount or introduce some sparkling bills that make people feel like progress is being made, but the genie is out of the bottle. No reduction in captial gains taxes or $3000/American worker tax credit can make up for the $12,000 per worker per year delta between a Mexican worker and an American worker, both being paid at the minimum wage.

I spent my years in college studying a conservative branch of economics. Whether it's the GOP or the Democrats, fiscal conservatism is a completely forgotten term now. So much of what I learned and believed now seems obsolete. The one thing that I learned that still holds true: those in power only surrender that amount of power which allows them to remain in power.

What the executive management class now seems to believe in is socializing losses while keeping profits private. Shareholders don't matter. Their country of origin or residence doesn't matter. Money and power are close cousins. So the management class sends its minions and lobbyists to Capitol Hill to secure whatever deals which best ensure that they can hold onto the greatest amount of money and power. As for what it means for the future of the U.S. and its citizens? Screw the U.S. and its citizens. These executive management class boys and girls have houses in Switzerland and on the French Riveria. Just like the attention wh*re Sarah Palin now wanting to break bread and chew the fat with Obama, as long as the POTUS is willing and able to do something for them, they're with him.

But the (true) manufacturing base in the U.S. is now broken to the point that it won't/can't be repaired, IMO.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Jag. Perot was right for sure. I always think Free Trade agreements between nations only work when the nations have a somewhat equal standard of living, or at least somewhat comparable.

That is why the Canada/US agreement worked (inspite of the narrow minded lefties up here, it was passed and has been a boon that people don't want to admit because they hated the guy who brought it in). That said, a lot of the problems in the US manufacturing sector are because of the jobs going to Mexico, and that is fine. What I and Drifter are ticked about is Obama is going to sign off on some of the anti-Canada provisions in the trade bill.

Markabilly says this isn't about making jobs anywhere but the USA. That's fine...do your own thing but when you go against an international treaty and go back on your word, you lose a TON of credability. Second you better not whine when the country you are giving a screwing over to puts on a tariff on something YOU want. Like Natural Gas. Canada fights over stuff like timber tariffs because of these left wing dingbat Democrats in certain states getting some little provision in a bill to protect their back yard and then it takes YEARS to get things reversed. The forest products coming out of Canada were taxed because some congressman in Oregon or some such place got some provision in a bill for a tariff. Never mind it was against NAFTA, it somehow slipped in to law back when Clinton was running the shop and it took a DECADE for Bush to get it out. It was more hurtful to Canada in jobs than people realize and it did nothing but drive up the cost of lumber in the US, slowing economic growth. It didn't do anything for the US forest product sector since the enviro nazi's are making life so miserable for anyone to actually cut down trees in the US. In short, it was a total waste of time and the consumer paid more for a product it needed.

Now that's all done and over with, this stimulus package has tariffs and anti-competition legislation designed to keep foreign (mainly Canadian in reality)products out of the US. So us Canadians are mad and we should be. It wasn't our banking system that was lending money to people who couldn't pay it back. It wasn't our legislators not doing their jobs and making sure this didn't happen (Hello Barney Frank? Are you in the tank or just corrupt?) and it isn't OUR fault the US economic system is in a tail spin. Our Auto industry is an off shoot of yours, but dummies in Detroit are taking my hometown down the toilet with their incompetance. I can accept this...but I am mad as hell when some "saviour" allows the US to start playing games in protectionist crap that will help no one.

The USA wants out of the recession? How about they quit spending government money on crap that wont work. Quit saving banks that are run by morons. Quit giving money to politically correct boondoggles. Quit putting tariffs and restrictions on trade against NAFTA. Do all of that and you might be surprised how resilent capitalism is. Oh wait a minute....Obama is going to revert to form and be a socialist.....

[Mark in Oshawa]

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2009/01/30/it-s-up-to-obama-to-avert-trade-war.aspx

This little column hear states where Obama is going ifhe isn't careful.

[markabilly]

Not only is the US as a whole Canada's biggest trading partner it is the largest for 38 individual states.
Maybe we should put a energy 'surcharge' of say 25% on energy exports to the US. Note surcharge, not tarriff or duty.
The NE states get a large % of their electric power from Canada.
The US imports more oil from Canada than any other country.
The US imports most of its natural gas from Canada.
Much of that natural gas is used to produce electric power.
That income would probably keep us from going into deficit financing.
Of course it would cause even higher energy costs for everyone and every business in the US but hey that is a trade war for you.
Our economies are very intertwined and a trade war is the last thing either country needs.
I expect Senators and Congressmen will be getting an earful from many of their constituents in the states that have a large amount of trade with Canada.
Oh by the way Markabilly, the Cdn. Govt. has a large 'stimulus' package on the go that is going to put our Govt. into deficit financing for the first time in 10 years.


Esay there Easy, upon further reflection you do have a point, so exception should be made for Canada!!!!

happy NOW??

Me, I dunno what I was thinking, cause it really don't matter......For example, let us keep where it must all be USA companies.....it don't matter and this is why we be screwed (BTW same applies to Canada and its big stimulus)

Construction company gets big contract to construct some big roads and build some big buildings, first thing it does is hire a bunch of USA workers and buy new equipment to replace the old and add to the inventory...cranes, tractors, graders and such as Komato.......of course it all comes from Korea and China, but it does buy some Dell computers, great big USA Texas company, except all the parts and such come from china, singapore, korea or whereever....and the others come from HP, who is the leader in shipping jobs to India......In the process, construction company gets some fiancing from Citi-Bank (who for the last two years has been shipping as much financial services work and jobs to India as possible)

And those new workers just hired? Well they want to buy a decent, not too expensive LCD for their family especially since that TV from 1995 can not get digital signals and tv, and it is starting to flicker, so it is probably days away from dying, so they go buy an LCD made by Polaroid, a great old american compnay, never noticing the small print says made in china

And they need a new Toaster a new microwave, and some new clothes as the old ones all wore out, and of course, all made in China and sold by walmart...

And so, while such stimulus packages would work in the 1930's, 40's, indeed, right on up to around the 1980's or so, :confused: it ain't gonna do much anymore in 2008.....

Same is true for Canada :( and its package :mad:

many years ago, I loved traditional views of history, but a story changed my perspective on what makes history really happen....it was about the year 1492 and why it was special. It was not about Columbus sailing the ocean blue, but how the Christian Spanish defeated the last non-european invaders of Europe (the Moors) at Grenada, a battle that had been going on for a couple of hundred years. In the process of competition, the Spanish had stolen many great ideas and technogy in areas of navigation, steel making, medicine and you name it, from the Moors (who unlike the christain europe had preserved and encouraged such,many of such things that originated in Ancient Greece), and this is what made such trips as Columbus possible.

In the process, steel made in Toledo Spain was used to make superior swords, weapons and so forth. The craftmen and factories of Spain were extremely superior to anything else in Christain Europe....

With the new world discovery, all the gold gradually turned Spain from a nation of craftsman and hard workers to a financial service capital....a hundred years later what was really important was not that the Spainsh Armada was defeated, but that all the ships, weapons etc, were made in Holland and France, bought by spain with new world gold......as such industries no longer existed in Spain....and the rest is history as to who went where.

The other day I was at a used bookstore, and saw a history textbook for public school. On the inside cover, I saw something that at first I thought it said "printed in Chinese" but then finally realized it said "Printed in China".....

[donKey jote]

it was about the year 1492 and why it was special. It was not about Columbus sailing the ocean blue, but how the Christian Spanish defeated the last non-european invaders of Europe (the Moors) at Grenada, a battle that had been going on for a couple of hundred years.

closer to 800 years :)
Except it wasn't really a battle. For a long period all lived together, moors christians and jews. Toledo at one stage was a true multi-culti capital, with temples of all 3 faiths. A bit like Jerusalem except without the blood and hate.
1492 was the year the Catholic kings, who had "united" Spain from the Kingdoms of Castille and Aragon 20 years earlier, "ethnically cleansed" all the remaining "foreigners" who wouldn't convert to christianity... some moors and jews stayed, most were forced to leave. Spanish Inquisition and all that ;)

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alhambra_Decree :

Beginning in the 8th century, Muslims had occupied and settled most of the Iberian Peninsula. Jews who had lived in these regions since Roman times, considered 'people of the Book', were given special status, and thus thrived under Muslim rule. During persecutions by Iberian Christians, such as the pogroms in Cordoba(1011) and Granada (1066), they were assisted by Muslims. Therefore Jews supported and sometimes even assisted their Muslim rulers never forgetting the harsh treatment they had suffered under the Visagothic rulers of the Iberian Peninsula prior to the arrival of Muslims to Spain[citation needed]. The tolerance of the Muslim rulers attracted Jewish immigration, and Jewish enclaves in Muslim Spanish cities flourished as places of learning and commerce. Progressively, however, living conditions for Jews in Muslim Spain became harsher, especially after the fall of the Omayyad Caliphate to Catholic monarchs.
Bloody Christians :p :dozey:


In the process of competition, the Spanish had stolen many great ideas and technogy in areas of navigation, steel making, medicine and you name it, from the Moors (who unlike the christain europe had preserved and encouraged such,many of such things that originated in Ancient Greece), and this is what made such trips as Columbus possible.
Quite true, except your choice of the word "stolen". The Moors "left behind" many great ideas and technology, and the "remaining" Spanish continued using this knowledge. :)

[Mark in Oshawa]

For those wanting an update on the Canadian response to the protectionist congress, the Canadian Ambassador wrote a letter to both leaders in the Senate (Reid and McConnell) pointing out that protectionism in the 30's made the depression worse ( can anyone say "Smoot Hawley" without laughing? They didn't laugh in the 30's as a result of it)and that it was counterintuitive of the US Congress to be advocating this sort of policy now.

Obama hits Ottawa for his first outside the country visit on Feb. 19. If he doesn't wade into this mess he will find Prime Minister Harper pointing out the reality more trade flows across the Canadian/US border than the 27 nations of the EC and the US COMBINED. This sort of crap is why people hate the US outside the US and it surprises me little that it is the Democratic party advocating this crap. They haven't learned a damned thing in 80 years when it comes to the economy.

[Tazio]

closer to 800 years :)
Except it wasn't really a battle. For a long period all lived together, moors christians and jews. Toledo at one stage was a true multi-culti capital, with temples of all 3 faiths. A bit like Jerusalem except without the blood and hate.
1492 was the year the Catholic kings, who had "united" Spain from the Kingdoms of Castille and Aragon 20 years earlier, "ethnically cleansed" all the remaining "foreigners" who wouldn't convert to christianity... some moors and jews stayed, most were forced to leave. Spanish Inquisition and all that ;)

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alhambra_Decree :

Bloody Christians :p :dozey:


Quite true, except your choice of the word "stolen". The Moors "left behind" many great ideas and technology, and the "remaining" Spanish continued using this knowledge. :) But Donk's isn't it true that the famous Spainiard "El Cid" was in fact a mercenary! Fighting for Catholics, Moors, and even having his own little Fifedom?

[schmenke]

... exception should be made for Canada!!!!
.....

No, Mexico too.
The economies of the U.S., Canada and Mexico are so intermingled that a policy change in either country directly affects the other two. Trade wars do nothing but put up barriers, restricting resources, thereby driving up the price of goods and labour. Not exactly what we want to be doing right about now... :mark:

[donKey jote]

But Donk's isn't it true that the famous Spainiard "El Cid" was in fact a mercenary! Fighting for Catholics, Moors, and even having his own little Fifedom?

err sort of... Spain didn't exist as such at that time yet (11th Century), but was rather a bundle of kingdoms and taifas (http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/spain/taifas.html).
He was Castillian, and I wouldn't say a mercenary but more a warlord :p
At that time it wasn't really all out "the Christians" vs "the Moors", but rather skirmishes and constantly changing alliances between different "warlords" of different faiths.
So much for my rather free interpretation of "the glorious campion Cid" and those times... of course the official Spanish nationalistic or Hollywood picture is quite different :)

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[Mark in Oshawa]

No, Mexico too.
The economies of the U.S., Canada and Mexico are so intermingled that a policy change in either country directly affects the other two. Trade wars do nothing but put up barriers, restricting resources, thereby driving up the price of goods and labour. Not exactly what we want to be doing right about now... :mark:

Schmenke...the only real fly in the ointment is Mexico. I am still trying to figure out the benefits of having them in NAFTA. When you have one partner of the 3 with labour costs about one tenth of the other two and a lot less (read non-existent) regulations for health and safety, you basically are creating an economic trade treaty that is tailor made to export jobs from the richer two nations to the unregulated third. If you are a multinational, this is a GREAT deal, but if you are some poor schmo in the rust belt, this sucks. I mean I know unions have probably gone too far in a few industries (hello you Autoworkers!) but shipping their jobs to Mexico to be done by people making 2 bucks an hour with no safety reg's or protection doesn't really do much when you realize the cars built there still cost what the same cars built in Ohio or Ontario would cost.

A trade war would be a BAD idea still...because now that NAFTA is in place...it would behoove someone who graduated from Harvard Law School in his first week on the job to have READ the damned treaty....

[Roamy]

Hey fuch it - we just need to declare bankruptcy.
Print new money and move on.
If you really want to spurn the US economy allow foreign real estate investors without worrying about where the money came from. Duh - Hello Colombia form your REITS; Now!!

[markabilly]

For those wanting an update on the Canadian response to the protectionist congress, the Canadian Ambassador wrote a letter to both leaders in the Senate (Reid and McConnell) pointing out that protectionism in the 30's made the depression worse ( can anyone say "Smoot Hawley" without laughing? They didn't laugh in the 30's as a result of it)and that it was counterintuitive of the US Congress to be advocating this sort of policy now.

Obama hits Ottawa for his first outside the country visit on Feb. 19. If he doesn't wade into this mess he will find Prime Minister Harper pointing out the reality more trade flows across the Canadian/US border than the 27 nations of the EC and the US COMBINED. This sort of crap is why people hate the US outside the US and it surprises me little that it is the Democratic party advocating this crap. They haven't learned a damned thing in 80 years when it comes to the economy.



"Smoot Hawley" as contributing to the depression is a myth, advocated by those very rich traders who profit from lopsided international trade, especailly those who wanted NAFTA. Pure nonsense.

The first big tarriff increase was NOT Smoot Hawley, it was Fordney McCumber in 1920, motivated in part, to push USA tarriffs closer to european tarriffs---I guess one could say that increasing tarriffs must have caused the Great Boom of the Roaring Twenties.....

Smoot came after the world was already in a great depression and continued for almost 7 to ten years after it was clearly over, into the 1950's when most of the rates were reduced.

Guess you might as well say Smoot Hawley brought the the world out of the great depression...

At its peak, it was 19.6% (average was about 14% which was equal to the average of 40 of the industrialized countries) compared to the Untied Kingdom's rate of 25.6% throughout the 1920'2 through 1950's

weeelll opps!!!!
Ding dong, avon calling

This myth is sort of like the immigration, "let us legalize illegal aliens"......why do repubes join demes in pushing for this??

Because the repubes know that the cheap foreign labor inflow keeps wages down and breaks unions, so all the demes are doing is hurting the workers they claim to support....when they advocate for legalizing illegals....






" They haven't learned a damned thing in 80 years when it comes to the economy"

True, but you needed to say instead : "the demes AND REPUBLICANS and those other idiots who keep thinking Smoot caused or contributed to the great depression, haven't learned a damned thing....."

[Mark in Oshawa]

Markabilly...I have been told Smoot was a cause for it didn't encourage anyone to want to trade with the US either. I am not enough of an economist to know but I do think it is a huge myth that FDR solved the depression. The only thing that solved that was WW2....let us hope there is no war at the end of this one....

[markabilly]

Markabilly...I have been told Smoot was a cause for it didn't encourage anyone to want to trade with the US either. I am not enough of an economist to know but I do think it is a huge myth that FDR solved the depression. The only thing that solved that was WW2....let us hope there is no war at the end of this one....


The problem is really ascertaining cause and effect--very diffcult to do in economics.
When I started college the absolute rule was you could have high unemeployment or high inflation, but not both at same time, yet that was what was happenning in the early 80's BOTH.

If some heavy tarrif was passed about a year ago, everyone would be saying, well look at us now, and what happenned to demand and the price of oil, down to nearly thirty-five a barrell and put the economy in the tank...

[Mark in Oshawa]

The early 80's was the hangover from the Jimmy Carter administration. Reagan changed the direction of things and that first term of his was the greatest transition almost in American history.....

[gloomyDAY]

Wait, I thought America already did this in 1930.

Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act

America's economy rebounded and every citizen prospered.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Gloomy, Markabilly said Smoot didn't do any damage. I agree, they brought it in and things didn't get better.

I also think there is some huge differences in how this all started and how trade effects things anyhow. I do know that much of the issue in the US is the lack of actual money in the market, that liquidity, which was true in the 30's but trade is SO much more important to the US economy now than it was. To start a trade war now would make things MUCH worse. Of course, that didn't stop some morons in Congress from thinking it would work.....