Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday July 03 2018, @06:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the He-Who-Smelt-It dept.

The Trump administration has crafted a draft bill — ordered by the president — that would declare America's abandonment of World Trade Organization rules, according to Axios. The bill essentially provides President Donald Trump — who has argued for a better position for the U.S. in big trade pacts — a license to raise U.S. tariffs at will, without congressional consent and largely outside of the international rules governed by the WTO. The bill, titled the "United States Fair and Reciprocal Tariff Act," would give Trump unilateral power to ignore the two most basic principles of the WTO and negotiate one-on-one with any country.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Tuesday July 03 2018, @08:36AM (31 children)

    by bradley13 (3053) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @08:36AM (#701799) Homepage Journal

    Listen, either you believe that global, tariff-free trade is a good thing. Or you believe that tariffs and subsidies make sense, and trade agreements are something to be handled individually. I can argue for either of those positions, and sometimes do.

    The think is: the current situation is purest hypocrisy. Here I am, sitting in the middle of Europe. Free trade zone? Bzzzzt...wrong. Every country still has its subsidies and import barriers. These are especially visible in the agricultural sector, but they are also present in other places. One minor example: If you would like a tablet of Tadalafil in Switzerland, it will cost you $30. Cross the border into Germany, they allow generics for that medication, and the price is $5.

    So everyone is "free trade" all day, until it comes to the home market. Suddently, it's "our milk industry needs protection", or "our poor pharma industry", or whatever else gets the politicians the money.

    So is Trump being selfish? Or is he merely being honest?

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Informative=1, Overrated=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @08:49AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @08:49AM (#701805)

    "So is Trump being selfish? Or is he merely being honest?"
    They are not exclusive.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by c0lo on Tuesday July 03 2018, @08:51AM (3 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 03 2018, @08:51AM (#701807) Journal

    Switzerland - bad example to illustrate your point. Not an EU member.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:07AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:07AM (#701824)

      Switzerland - bad example to illustrate your point. Not an EU member.

      But using Switzerland as an example is very Trumpian - use a false example that somehow bolsters the lies you are telling.

      BTW, what's wrong with Switzerland? Their immigrants are nice people; wonderful people. Can't get much whiter, or less resistant, than those wonderful Swiss people.

    • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:27AM (1 child)

      by bradley13 (3053) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:27AM (#701830) Homepage Journal

      Not in the EU, no, but we still have all the various trade agreements. The example I gave would be the same across the French-German border.

      --
      Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:37AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:37AM (#701834) Journal

        The example I gave would be the same across the French-German border.

        You sure? At least in regards with the generic drugs, my googlefu indicate that is pedalling hard on them [globaldata.com]

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:25AM (1 child)

    by shrewdsheep (5215) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:25AM (#701829)

    Free trade zone? Bzzzzt...wrong. Every country still has its subsidies and import barriers.

    Where are the import barriers? You can drive freely through Europe (Shengen) and sell your stuff where-ever you like without paying any tariffs. Subsidies in the agricultural sector are harmonized on the European level (and actually paid by Europe). There are certainly other national subsidies, but those must comply with European rules (my knowledge ends here as to what those would be exactly).

    • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @12:43PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @12:43PM (#701864)

      You can drive freely through Europe

      Not for much longer. [nytimes.com] A single country refusing to enforce it's external borders should have been enough for the rest of the EU to expel that country. Now we have Germany building internment camps, an area in which they've previously demonstrated considerable expertise. Merkel should be in prison.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @12:24PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @12:24PM (#701858)

    He is being naive just like normal American citizens. Or shall I call him dumb just as Americans are called outside of USA. For decades and decades USA through heavy funding of UN (~50%) and by direct interference forced countries to open their markets so USA could sell its shit - countries where it became impossible to compete with Made in USA because they didn't have the technology because it was funded by DARPA and trivial things like VCR were apparently of important to national security, and couldn't say NO because they would suffer trade embargoes. If you wanted to survive you became part of NATO and let USA run your country as it wished. Mostly it worked out well as long as your country didn't held any strategic importance, such as Japan and Germany (remember Made in Japan of 80s?), otherwise you became Pakistan.

    Remember USA was called global police? Were its rulers really so naive that they worried about well being of women and children in oil-rich countries? No, right? They sold it back at home as such.

    Some can argue that 9/11 might have caused this, some may say Iraq war did it. I don't know, but Trump obviously doesn't understand that the whole system of "allies" and "open market" was devised by Americans themselves. The only problem is that Made in USA isn't a big thing anymore because the industry has moved into software and software is not that difficult to compete with (so far). Manufacturing has moved to China, and open market isn't bringing much benefits to it anymore. I dare to wonder what the world is going to look like...

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @02:27PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @02:27PM (#701906)

      Trump obviously doesn't understand that the whole system of "allies" and "open market" was devised by Americans themselves

      This fits well with my other post here about how there seems to be a group of people who are constantly confused by Trump. I'm pretty sure he does understand that, he just thinks the americans who devised it were incompetent/etc:

      Today, we import nearly $800 billion more in goods than we export. We can’t continue to do that. This is not some natural disaster, it’s a political and politician-made disaster. Very simple.

      [...]
      I’ll do it. No doubt about it. Not even a little doubt. It also means reversing two of the worst legacies of the Clinton years. America has lost nearly 1/3 of its manufacturing jobs since 1997. Even as the country has increased its population, think of this, by 50 million people. At the center of this catastrophe are two trade deals pushed by Bill and Hillary Clinton.

      First, the North American Free Trade Agreement, or the disaster called NAFTA. Second, China’s entry into the World Trade Organization. NAFTA was the worst trade deal in the history – it’s like – the history of this country. And China’s entrance into the World Trade Organization has enabled the greatest job theft in the history of our country.

      It was Bill Clinton who signed NAFTA. People don’t remember. In 1993. And Hillary Clinton who supported it. And the havoc that it wreaked after he left office was unbelievable. It was also Bill Clinton who lobbied for China’s disastrous entry into the World Trade Organization, and Hillary Clinton who backed that terrible, terrible agreement.

      http://time.com/4386335/donald-trump-trade-speech-transcript/ [time.com]

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday July 03 2018, @03:51PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @03:51PM (#701966) Journal

        For 99% of issues you can find quotes of Trump directly contradicting himself and taking both sides of the issue.

        On this one issue, to be fair, that is not the case.

        And on this one issue, we're not confused by Trump at all. We're confused by Republicans.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:33AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:33AM (#702377)

        I'm pretty sure he does understand that, he just thinks the americans who devised it were incompetent

        Also called Dunning–Kruger effect [wikipedia.org] which is why he is naive/dumb.

        You think North Korea is bad having a nuclear bomb? Think USA being north korea. You know it is going to happen - bringing manufacturing back involves doing everything the republican "economists" don't want to do. It worked out well for Mr. Kim, it will work out well for Trump too.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @12:50PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @12:50PM (#701867)

    What's funny (in a hypocritical sense) is that the people who would most complain about dropping the wto are the same ones who've been fighting against the same organization for decades.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @07:25PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @07:25PM (#702115)

      Occupy/Anti-WTO types are a fringe within the Dem tent.

  • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Tuesday July 03 2018, @02:10PM (13 children)

    by meustrus (4961) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @02:10PM (#701899)

    When did something as academic as economics become a matter of "belief"? Shouldn't we try to do what we know works instead of picking an economic God like there's no way to know what actually happens in the afterlife?

    --
    If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
    • (Score: 2) by suburbanitemediocrity on Tuesday July 03 2018, @02:51PM (10 children)

      by suburbanitemediocrity (6844) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @02:51PM (#701916)

      In post modernism, everything is a belief and there are no "truths".

      • (Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday July 03 2018, @03:08PM (6 children)

        Except that fundamental premise, of course.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 03 2018, @09:07PM (5 children)

          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @09:07PM (#702173) Journal

          Any time I hear someone say "postmodernism means there's no truth herpaderp hurr how did they come to that conclusion they're stealing the concept durk-a-derrhhhh" I immediately do a mount /dev/hazuki/face /mnt/desk.

          Postmodernism, as distinguished from the modernism that came before it, simply implies a rejection of a teleological impulse behind human history. That is, ideas like Marxism's dialectical materialism, which every illiterate RWNJ pig jackoff on this site would peg as "postmodern" due to not knowing what the hell they're talking about. Postmodernism proper only means that there's no concrete end goal in sight, that we have to make it up as we go along.

          It does *not* even imply, let alone explicitly call for, epistemological scepticism. Now that this has been made clear, I expect not to see that sort of laziness out of you or anyone else who could reasonably have been expected to read this again. Let's be less wrong, shall wel? And incidentally, I'm not a postmodernist; you can perhaps call me a neo-Modernist, if there is such a thing.

          --
          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 4, Informative) by suburbanitemediocrity on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:04PM (1 child)

            by suburbanitemediocrity (6844) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:04PM (#702207)

            Postmodernists do not attempt to refine their thoughts about what is right or wrong, true or false, good or evil. They believe that there isn’t such a thing as absolute truth.

            https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/postmodernism.htm [allaboutphilosophy.org]

            Is there a better source that you would recommend as everything that I've read seems to agree with this including wikipedia:

            common targets of postmodern critique include universalist notions of objective reality,...truth...

            1. There is an objective natural reality, a reality whose existence and properties are logically independent of human beings

            2. The descriptive and explanatory statements of scientists and historians can, in principle, be objectively true or false. The postmodern denial of this viewpoint—which follows from the rejection of an objective natural reality—is sometimes expressed by saying that there is no such thing as Truth.

            Some go so far as to say that science and technology—and even reason and logic—are inherently destructive and oppressive

            For postmodernists, reason and logic too are merely conceptual constructs and are therefore valid only within the established intellectual traditions in which they are used.

            https://www.britannica.com/topic/postmodernism-philosophy [britannica.com]

            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday July 04 2018, @03:41AM

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @03:41AM (#702356) Journal

              If they truly don't believe there is a such thing as absolute truth, they have rather neatly torpedoed their justification for believing this in the first place. Gotta have an axiom *somewhere* yanno...

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday July 04 2018, @01:26AM

            by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @01:26AM (#702288) Journal

            Sorry to disagree, but what you state is one possible implication of postmodernism, but certainly not the only one. I've known many academics in many field who would identify with the "postmodern" movement, and many of them believe strongly in relativism of various degrees. The most hardcore definitely believe constructs like "truth" and "logic" are merely products of one possible Western rationalist philosophy (particularly analytic philosophy), and "deconstructing" truth and even notions of single concepts of "fact" are very commonly accepted as part of the methodology for escaping the legacy of a narrow-minded perspective (often also characterized by such folks as Eurocentric, imperialist, and colonialist).

            When I first encountered hardcore relativism in the academy a couple decades ago (and it was around for decades before that), I was worried about the implications, one of which was the deconstructing of truth that could ultimately be used by fascist political movements. Alas, the rhetoric and methodologies of the far left academics has now been appropriated by right-wing forces as we now have entered a "post-truth" era in broader culture... The vision of the late 60s deconstructionists has now finally come to fruition, just used for political purposes they never acknowledged could happen.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @02:34AM (1 child)

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @02:34AM (#702318) Homepage Journal

            You're ruining a perfectly serviceable joke by taking it seriously.

            ...I expect not to see that sort of laziness out of you...

            Are you kidding? That my favorite activities are fishing and napping is widely known. In the past eighteen years or so I've turned down far more work than I've done. Laziness isn't just a trait with me, it's my life's ambition.

            Okay, okay. I know you meant intellectual laziness. I don't really put any serious thought into postmodernists because I view them as absurd but mostly harmless as long as they don't go trying to proselytize it out to the general population. So I don't have much to say about them unless someone drops me an easy setup for a joke.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Tuesday July 03 2018, @03:42PM (2 children)

        by meustrus (4961) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @03:42PM (#701960)

        No "truths" doesn't mean no "facts". We figured out how to address the bias of human belief by relying on facts in the 17th-18th centuries; it's called Rationalism. And while I'd be the first to complain about the lack of the Scientific Method in the squishier fields like economics, it's a hell of a lot less subjective than mere "belief".

        --
        If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
        • (Score: 2) by suburbanitemediocrity on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:26PM (1 child)

          by suburbanitemediocrity (6844) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @10:26PM (#702212)

          All facts are subjective as there is no objective reality. My truth is different than your truth.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @11:56PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @11:56PM (#702252)

            All facts are subjective as there is no objective reality. My truth is different than your truth.

            And my truth is that your truth sucks monkey balls.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 03 2018, @09:19PM (1 child)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @09:19PM (#702183) Journal

      Economics was never that much more rigorous than religion to begin with, mostly because, like most or all organized religion, it's based on false assumptions. The idea of the rational actor and the possibility of limitless growth, exponential or otherwise, are the two chief culprits here. The assumption that all economics is a zero-sum game or worse is a plausible third. All of these are effectively idols.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 4, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday July 03 2018, @11:59PM

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @11:59PM (#702254)

        That's more or less what I came here to say.

        I was somewhat shocked when a friend's son applied for an economics job in our national Reserve Bank and was not even given an interview, because his master's degree in economics was from the "wrong" university.

        It turns out they only accept economics grads from one particular university, because they have learnt the "correct" things.

        From what I understand there are various high priests in economics and there have been schisms over the years, so he was excommunicated.

        Don't worry though. He works as a builder, and is doing very well for himself.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday July 03 2018, @03:07PM

    Listen, either you believe that global, tariff-free trade is a good thing. Or you believe that tariffs and subsidies make sense, and trade agreements are something to be handled individually.

    Not necessarily. It's quite possible to think that neither are a good answer. That I don't care to put the thought in to find a better one is another matter but saying one must be correct is like saying either the Democrats or Republicans must be correct.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 03 2018, @09:17PM (2 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @09:17PM (#702179) Journal

    Tariffs and such have their place, but like violence, they need to be wielded intelligently like a scalpel, not like a sledgehammer. And they're an admission, in my opinion, that globalization on its own, that naked laissez-faire capitalism, *does not work.* They're the affirmative action of economics, and like AA, they're a bolt-on solution to a problem of our own making.

    I am holding out what little hope I have for technologies of abundance to take over and people to stop thinking in terms of zero-sum scarcity or worse. I think it'll happen, too. Eventually. But at the rate things are going, most of the human race will die off first, and the remaining civilization will likely look like something out of Warhammer 30,000 for a good while. Maybe even forever if we're unlucky.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @02:47AM (1 child)

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @02:47AM (#702323) Homepage Journal

      I'm not a fan of them in general either and most certainly not a fan of them being poorly used. They're mostly an admission that when you have extreme economic differences between nations, it's going to cause problems that need addressing though. That and an admission that nationally subsidized industries are dirty pool and can tank an entire global economic sector if allowed free reign.

      I really wish people would stop thinking in terms of zero-sum scarcity as well. Wealth is not remotely zero-sum. Every effort a human being takes that betters someone's life (including their own) has created wealth from nothing but said effort. Torvalds, for instance, has created insane amounts of wealth with money barely even entering into the equation.

      As for post-scarcity, you and I won't live to see it. I doubt my nephews and nieces will either. Being able to dip into an unlimited well sounds really appealing but we haven't even figured out where the well is or what it would look like yet.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Friday July 06 2018, @01:12PM

        by acid andy (1683) on Friday July 06 2018, @01:12PM (#703466) Homepage Journal

        Every effort a human being takes that betters someone's life (including their own) has created wealth from nothing but said effort. Torvalds, for instance, has created insane amounts of wealth with money barely even entering into the equation.

        I'm not so sure. If the customer gains more in terms of value than they pay for the good or service it seems to me that that is approaching charity rather than capitalism. Giving value away for free means you lose out on potential profits and end up less wealthy than you otherwise would have been.

        --
        If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?