TO COMMENT CLICK HERE
Payback
Dedicated to the Fools, Racists, and Ignorant
People who vote for the GOP and trump or don't vote because they claim it is not important
august 20, 2018
400 years and they have learned nothing
8 disturbing trends that reveal the South’s battered psyche
From Salon: Across red-state America, especially in the Deep South, the latest statistics show that the cycle of poverty, in its many manifestations, is unchanged and holding firm. Why is this? It’s easy to say this is how Republicans like to run states—cutting budgets, not raising the minimum wage, opposing labor unions. They let the poor and working class stew in their hardscrabble juices. Meanwhile, they distract voters by accusing liberals of waging war on the few sources of personal power in Southerners’ difficult lives: their religious beliefs and owning guns. But go back several decades when segregationist Democrats ruled; for the most part, they weren’t very different from today’s Republicans.
So what is it that perpetuates decades of poverty in the Deep South? What follows are eight bundles of statistics tracking this latest cycle of poverty. Could it be that people who historically have been treated badly, who have little money in their pockets but look to the sky and pray, expect less from others—including the public and private sector? Does that explain why red-staters cling to God, gun ownership and a “leave-me-alone” ferocity?
They expect politicians to defend their values and their pride and little more?
What’s going on here isn’t entirely political, even if it is used by red-state Republicans in their personal drive for power and influence. Look at what the following statistics reveal about red-staters trapped in deep cycles of poverty. What is the thread that connects lousy governance, bad health, evangelical religion and firearms fervor?
1. Southern states have the most poor people.
2. Deep South states have no minimum wage.
3. Deep South has lowest economic mobility.
4. South has lowest per capita spending sy state government.
5. Forget about decent preventative healthcare.
6. One result: people self-medicate in response.
7. Forget the lottery, just pray to Jesus.
8. And hold onto that gun!
So what is it that perpetuates decades of poverty in the Deep South? What follows are eight bundles of statistics tracking this latest cycle of poverty. Could it be that people who historically have been treated badly, who have little money in their pockets but look to the sky and pray, expect less from others—including the public and private sector? Does that explain why red-staters cling to God, gun ownership and a “leave-me-alone” ferocity?
They expect politicians to defend their values and their pride and little more?
What’s going on here isn’t entirely political, even if it is used by red-state Republicans in their personal drive for power and influence. Look at what the following statistics reveal about red-staters trapped in deep cycles of poverty. What is the thread that connects lousy governance, bad health, evangelical religion and firearms fervor?
1. Southern states have the most poor people.
2. Deep South states have no minimum wage.
3. Deep South has lowest economic mobility.
4. South has lowest per capita spending sy state government.
5. Forget about decent preventative healthcare.
6. One result: people self-medicate in response.
7. Forget the lottery, just pray to Jesus.
8. And hold onto that gun!
payback headlines - how you are screwed!!
*These three states that went for Trump in 2016 will be hardest hit by his auto tariffs: report(ARTICLE BELOW)
*‘He’s gonna kill us’: Nebraska farmers freak out as Trump’s trade war threatens their businesses(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Illinois manufacturer moving to Mexico over Trump tariffs
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Trump’s trade war just forced US soy farmers to take a massive financial hit
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*One map shows why Trump's trade war with China could be a disaster for average Americans(ARTICLE BELOW)
*"super conservative" Trump supporter - wife is deported. "I'm eating my words"
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*MORE TAXPAYERS WILL OWE THE IRS IN APRIL DUE TO UNDER-WITHHOLDING, REPORT SAYS
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*How Companies Are Making Customers Pay for Trump’s Trade War
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Agriculture secretary admits farm bailouts won’t cover losses from Trump’s trade war(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Whirlpool loved Trump's tariffs. Now it's struggling
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*How the Hospitals Serving Trump Voters Are Closing—And He’s Letting It Happen
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*The first casualties of the trade war are Trump supporters
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Trade war puts the hoof into U.S. pig part exports to China
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Strategic Safety Net Cuts Underway: White Hs. Claims WAR ON POVERTY 'LARGELY OVER'
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*North Dakota soybean processors hit hard by tariffs as China cancels orders
(ARTICLE BELOW)
PAYBACK FUNNIES(at the end)
GREEN PARTY FucK YOU! - THIS IS WHAT TRUMP HAS WROUGHT...SAME AS HILLARY
Cattledog - demo. underground
|
29 rules have been overturned
Flood building standards Proposed ban on a potentially harmful pesticide Freeze on new coal leases on public lands Methane reporting requirement Anti-dumping rule for coal companies Decision on Keystone XL pipeline Decision on Dakota Access pipeline Third-party settlement funds Offshore drilling ban in the Atlantic and Arctic Ban on seismic air gun testing in the Atlantic Northern Bering Sea climate resilience plan Royalty regulations for oil, gas and coal Inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews Permit-issuing process for new infrastructure projects Green Climate Fund contributions Mining restrictions in Bristol Bay, Alaska Endangered species listings Hunting ban on wolves and grizzly bears in Alaska Protections for whales and sea turtles Reusable water bottles rule for national parks National parks climate order Environmental mitigation for federal projects Calculation for “social cost” of carbon Planning rule for public lands Copper filter cake listing as hazardous waste Mine cleanup rule Sewage treatment pollution regulations Ban on use of lead ammunition on federal lands Restrictions on fishing |
24 rollbacks are in progress
Clean Power Plan Paris climate agreement Wetland and tributary protections Car and truck fuel-efficiency standards Status of 10 national monuments Status of 12 marine areas Limits on toxic discharge from power plants Coal ash discharge regulations Emissions standards for new, modified and reconstructed power plants Emissions rules for power plant start-up and shutdown Sage grouse habitat protections Fracking regulations on public lands Regulations on oil and gas drilling in some national parks Oil rig safety regulations Regulations for offshore oil and gas exploration by floating vessels Drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge Hunting method regulations in Alaska Requirement for tracking emissions on federal highways Emissions standards for trailers and glider kits Limits on methane emissions on public lands Permitting process for air-polluting plants Offshore oil and gas leasing Use of birds in subsistence handicrafts Coal dust rule |
7 rollbacks are in limbo
Methane emission limits at new oil and gas wells
Limits on landfill emissions
Mercury emission limits for power plants
Hazardous chemical facility regulations
Groundwater protections for uranium mines
Efficiency standards for federal buildings
Rule helping consumers buy fuel-efficient tires
Source:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/climate/trump-environment-rules-reversed.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur
Methane emission limits at new oil and gas wells
Limits on landfill emissions
Mercury emission limits for power plants
Hazardous chemical facility regulations
Groundwater protections for uranium mines
Efficiency standards for federal buildings
Rule helping consumers buy fuel-efficient tires
Source:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/climate/trump-environment-rules-reversed.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur
The True Cost of Voodoo Economics
The Reagan-Bush Debt is how much of the national debt of the United States is attributable to the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and
the Republican fiscal policy of Borrow-And-Spend.
As of Tuesday, August 07, 2018 at 2:30:11PM CT,
The Current ReaganBush Debt is:
$13,433,850,918,861.40
which means that in a total of 20 years,
these three presidents have led to the creation of
91.67%
of the entire national debt
in only 8.2645% of the 242 years of the existence of the United States of America.
@ReaganBushDebt.org
Here are the 66 Programs Trump eliminates in his budget - Soph0571 Demo Underground
These three states that went for Trump in 2016 will be hardest hit by his auto tariffs: report
Tom Boggioni - raw story
18 AUG 2018 AT 12:56 ET
According to an analysis by Business Insider, the three states that will be hardest hit by President Donald Trump’s trade war involving the auto industry are states that helped elevate him to the Oval Office.
In May of this year the president proposed a 25 percent tariff on imported cars and auto parts in retaliation for what he feels are unfair trade policies that he believes favor other nations.
While the tariffs have yet to go into effect, automakers are already reacting to possible lost business by proposing massive job cuts. Automaker Volvo has already announced that the 4,000 jobs planned for expanded production in South Carolina may not materialize if the tariffs are implemented.
Seeking to understand the impact on the industry, Business Insider looked at the percentage of each state’s workforce employed in the auto industry using data from the Center For Automotive Research.
What they found was Michigan — unsurprisingly — led the pack with 21.4 percent of the workers tied to the auto industry. Behind Michigan came Indiana (13.9 percent) and Ohio (11.7 percent) — with all three states combing to contribute 45 electoral votes to Trump’s 2015 total
Following those three are an additional three states that went for Trump: Kentucky (11 percent), Tennessee (9.6 percent), and Alabama (8.3 percent).
You can read the whole report — with graphics — here.
In May of this year the president proposed a 25 percent tariff on imported cars and auto parts in retaliation for what he feels are unfair trade policies that he believes favor other nations.
While the tariffs have yet to go into effect, automakers are already reacting to possible lost business by proposing massive job cuts. Automaker Volvo has already announced that the 4,000 jobs planned for expanded production in South Carolina may not materialize if the tariffs are implemented.
Seeking to understand the impact on the industry, Business Insider looked at the percentage of each state’s workforce employed in the auto industry using data from the Center For Automotive Research.
What they found was Michigan — unsurprisingly — led the pack with 21.4 percent of the workers tied to the auto industry. Behind Michigan came Indiana (13.9 percent) and Ohio (11.7 percent) — with all three states combing to contribute 45 electoral votes to Trump’s 2015 total
Following those three are an additional three states that went for Trump: Kentucky (11 percent), Tennessee (9.6 percent), and Alabama (8.3 percent).
You can read the whole report — with graphics — here.
‘He’s gonna kill us’: Nebraska farmers freak out as Trump’s trade war threatens their businesses
Brad Reed - raw story
16 AUG 2018 AT 13:23 ET
President Donald Trump’s trade war against multiple countries has been hammering the price of American soybeans, and many farmers say they’re seriously feeling the pinch.
The Los Angeles Times reports that soy farmers in Nebraska are increasingly anxious that Trump’s trade war could drag on into the fall, at which time they would suffer massive losses due to the low prices of their crops.
Data released by the Labor Department this week revealed that American agricultural export prices plunged by 5.3 percent last month, which marks the biggest drop in export prices since October 2011.
Soy bean farmers, which have been specifically targeted by China’s retaliatory tariffs against American imports, were particularly hard hit. According to Labor Department figures, U.S. soy export prices plunged by 14.1 percent in July, just after China slapped soy imports with 25 percent tariffs.
“He’s gonna kill us,” 81-year-old farmer Joel Samuleson told the Los Angeles Times, referring to the drop in soy prices.
Farmer Doug Saathoff, meanwhile, says that he likes the fact that Trump is a “businessman,” but he worries about the erratic nature of the president’s trade negotiations.
“How long can I hold out?” he asked the Los Angeles Times, referring to his own farm’s financial situation. “I don’t know.”
The Los Angeles Times reports that soy farmers in Nebraska are increasingly anxious that Trump’s trade war could drag on into the fall, at which time they would suffer massive losses due to the low prices of their crops.
Data released by the Labor Department this week revealed that American agricultural export prices plunged by 5.3 percent last month, which marks the biggest drop in export prices since October 2011.
Soy bean farmers, which have been specifically targeted by China’s retaliatory tariffs against American imports, were particularly hard hit. According to Labor Department figures, U.S. soy export prices plunged by 14.1 percent in July, just after China slapped soy imports with 25 percent tariffs.
“He’s gonna kill us,” 81-year-old farmer Joel Samuleson told the Los Angeles Times, referring to the drop in soy prices.
Farmer Doug Saathoff, meanwhile, says that he likes the fact that Trump is a “businessman,” but he worries about the erratic nature of the president’s trade negotiations.
“How long can I hold out?” he asked the Los Angeles Times, referring to his own farm’s financial situation. “I don’t know.”
Illinois manufacturer moving to Mexico over Trump tariffs
BY AVERY ANAPOL - the hill
08/15/18 11:49 AM EDT
A storage safe manufacturer is reportedly planning to shut down two Illinois factories and move to Mexico in response to President Trump’s tariffs on Chinese metal imports.
Stack-On Products will close its two Chicago-area plants in October and lay off 153 people, according to the Chicago Tribune.
Al Fletcher, human resources director for the manufacturer’s Las Vegas–based parent company, told the newspaper that the company decided to relocate the operations to Mexico after Trump announced tariffs on steel and aluminum, as well as other products, from China.
“The operation is really not profitable,” Fletcher said. “Mr. Trump is part of this.”
Stack-On has operated in Chicago — its only two U.S. plants — for four decades, according to the Tribune, which added that the company already has factories in Mexico and China.
Fletcher told the newspapers that some of the employees will be given the option to relocated to El Paso, Texas, across the border from its Stack-On factory.
The company is one of a growing list that has announced layoffs, closures or price increases as a result of Trump’s tariff disputes with other countries.
The president announced massive tariffs on aluminum and steel imports earlier this year, and has engaged in a back-and-forth with China, as well as angered key U.S. allies like Mexico, Canada and the European Union, over the taxes.
He has repeatedly complained that other countries are treating the U.S. as a “piggy bank” that’s being “robbed” by their trade policies.
But his decision to impose steep tariffs has prompted other nations to retaliate, and many U.S. industries have expressed concerns that the levies will destroy their market.
The Department of Agriculture last month announced a $12 billion plan to aid farmers hurt by Trump’s trade battles.
Stack-On Products will close its two Chicago-area plants in October and lay off 153 people, according to the Chicago Tribune.
Al Fletcher, human resources director for the manufacturer’s Las Vegas–based parent company, told the newspaper that the company decided to relocate the operations to Mexico after Trump announced tariffs on steel and aluminum, as well as other products, from China.
“The operation is really not profitable,” Fletcher said. “Mr. Trump is part of this.”
Stack-On has operated in Chicago — its only two U.S. plants — for four decades, according to the Tribune, which added that the company already has factories in Mexico and China.
Fletcher told the newspapers that some of the employees will be given the option to relocated to El Paso, Texas, across the border from its Stack-On factory.
The company is one of a growing list that has announced layoffs, closures or price increases as a result of Trump’s tariff disputes with other countries.
The president announced massive tariffs on aluminum and steel imports earlier this year, and has engaged in a back-and-forth with China, as well as angered key U.S. allies like Mexico, Canada and the European Union, over the taxes.
He has repeatedly complained that other countries are treating the U.S. as a “piggy bank” that’s being “robbed” by their trade policies.
But his decision to impose steep tariffs has prompted other nations to retaliate, and many U.S. industries have expressed concerns that the levies will destroy their market.
The Department of Agriculture last month announced a $12 billion plan to aid farmers hurt by Trump’s trade battles.
Trump’s trade war just forced US soy farmers to take a massive financial hit
Brad Reed - raw story
14 AUG 2018 AT 09:54 ET
President Donald Trump’s trade war forced American farmers to take a big hit financially last month, as prices for U.S. farm exports fell faster than they have at any time since 2011, when America was still recovering from the 2008 financial crisis.
Bloomberg reports that American agricultural export prices plunged by 5.3 percent month-over-month, which marks the biggest drop in export prices since October 2011.
Soy bean farmers, which have been specifically targeted by China’s retaliatory tariffs against American imports, were particularly hard hit. According to Labor Department figures, U.S. soy export prices plunged by 14.1 percent in July, just after China slapped soy imports with 25 percent tariffs.
Over the past two months, multiple reports have cropped up of Trump-backing soy farmers in the Midwest who say they have been significantly hurt by the president’s trade wars with China, Canada, Mexico and the European Union.
Michael Petefish, the President of the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association, told CNN last month that he and his fellow farmers are “hurting” and that he might not back Trump’s 2020 campaign if he didn’t fix his trade policies.
Some farmers getting hurt by Trump’s trade war are still sticking by the president, however. Soybean farmer Bill Beam, for instance, told CNBC that he’d still vote for Trump even though the president is costing him “a lot of money.”
Bloomberg reports that American agricultural export prices plunged by 5.3 percent month-over-month, which marks the biggest drop in export prices since October 2011.
Soy bean farmers, which have been specifically targeted by China’s retaliatory tariffs against American imports, were particularly hard hit. According to Labor Department figures, U.S. soy export prices plunged by 14.1 percent in July, just after China slapped soy imports with 25 percent tariffs.
Over the past two months, multiple reports have cropped up of Trump-backing soy farmers in the Midwest who say they have been significantly hurt by the president’s trade wars with China, Canada, Mexico and the European Union.
Michael Petefish, the President of the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association, told CNN last month that he and his fellow farmers are “hurting” and that he might not back Trump’s 2020 campaign if he didn’t fix his trade policies.
Some farmers getting hurt by Trump’s trade war are still sticking by the president, however. Soybean farmer Bill Beam, for instance, told CNBC that he’d still vote for Trump even though the president is costing him “a lot of money.”
One map shows why Trump's trade war with China could be a disaster for average Americans
Bob Bryan - business insider
Aug 9, 2018, 9:31 AM ET
- President Donald Trump's trade war with China is ongoing, with tariffs flying back and forth.
- While US tariffs currently apply to $34 billion worth of Chinese goods coming into the US, Trump has threatened to apply tariffs to every import from China.
- The trade war could have significant economic consequences, as China is the largest source of imports for 23 states and among the top five sources for 47.
- It could also have political consequences, as 15 of the 23 states that count China as their top import source voted for Trump in 2016.
The Trump administration on Tuesday announced a 25% tariff on $16 billion worth of Chinese exports to the US, adding to the $34 billion worth of Chinese goods already subject to tariffs. Trump has also begun to move forward with tariffs on another $200 billion worth of Chinese goods, and he has effectively threatened that every item from the country could eventually be subject to tariffs.
Tariffs act as a tax on goods coming into the country, meaning goods coming into the US from China would be hit with an additional 25% duty. That makes those goods more expensive, which, in theory, would drive US companies to buy non-Chinese products.
Given that Chinese goods represented just over 21% of all imports coming into the US in 2017, an escalation of the trade war could push up prices for many goods. While the disruptions are likely to be widespread, some states may face more problems than others.
According to data from the US Census Bureau, China is a key source of imports for many states:
- For 23 states, China is the top source of imports.
- For 45 states, China is in the top three.
- China is among the top five import sources for 47 states. (North Dakota, Louisiana, and Delaware are the only exceptions.)
- Of the 23 states that count China as their largest source of imports, Trump won 15 in the 2016 presidential election.
supported the racist and got burned!!!
"super conservative" Trump supporter - wife is deported. "I'm eating my words"
Demovictory9 - demo underground
8/8/18
Sgt. Temo Juarez was a Trump guy. An Iraq combat veteran who served as a Marine infantryman and then an Army National Guardsman, his friends called him a “super conservative.” With his wife, he brought up their two daughters in Central Florida. He supported Trump in 2016, eager for a change.
But now, “I am eating my words,” he told the military newspaper Stars and Stripes in an interview published last week.
On Friday, Juarez and his family became the latest victims of Trump’s zero-tolerance policy on immigration.
On that day, his wife, Alejandra, left the country under a deportation order. She had come to the United States from Mexico illegally as a teenager two decades ago and had until now being living undisturbed with Temo, a naturalized U.S. citizen, and daughters, both natural-born Americans. This week, Temo will fly to Mexico with his daughters, 9-year-old Estela and 16-year-old Pamela — and leave his younger daughter there, even though English is her first language. He can’t do his construction job and take care of her in Florida by himself.
Temo Juarez believed Trump would deport only illegal immigrants who were criminals, and his wife had no record.
Instead, as the family fought Alejandra’s deportation, young Estela, with unicorns on her T-shirt, wept as she spoke to TV cameras: “I really do want to stay with my mom and dad. I want us to be together and stay in my house. I don’t want to go to Mexico. I want to stay here.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-veteran-supported-trump-until-trump-deported-his-wife/2018/08/06/33083252-99bc-11e8-b60b-1c897f17e185_story.html?utm_term=.359d4bba9251
But now, “I am eating my words,” he told the military newspaper Stars and Stripes in an interview published last week.
On Friday, Juarez and his family became the latest victims of Trump’s zero-tolerance policy on immigration.
On that day, his wife, Alejandra, left the country under a deportation order. She had come to the United States from Mexico illegally as a teenager two decades ago and had until now being living undisturbed with Temo, a naturalized U.S. citizen, and daughters, both natural-born Americans. This week, Temo will fly to Mexico with his daughters, 9-year-old Estela and 16-year-old Pamela — and leave his younger daughter there, even though English is her first language. He can’t do his construction job and take care of her in Florida by himself.
Temo Juarez believed Trump would deport only illegal immigrants who were criminals, and his wife had no record.
Instead, as the family fought Alejandra’s deportation, young Estela, with unicorns on her T-shirt, wept as she spoke to TV cameras: “I really do want to stay with my mom and dad. I want us to be together and stay in my house. I don’t want to go to Mexico. I want to stay here.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-veteran-supported-trump-until-trump-deported-his-wife/2018/08/06/33083252-99bc-11e8-b60b-1c897f17e185_story.html?utm_term=.359d4bba9251
More Taxpayers Will Owe The IRS In April Due To Under-Withholding, Report Says
SCOTT NEUMAN - npr
August 1, 20188:53 AM ET
More Americans will be writing a check to the IRS in April because their employers are not withholding enough from their paychecks following the new tax law, the Government Accountability Office says in a new report.
Based on simulations run by the Treasury Department, the GAO says taxes for 30 million Americans – 21 percent of taxpayers — are being under-withheld by their employers, meaning they are getting a larger check this year, but will owe at tax time in April. According to the simulations, 73 percent of taxpayers will be over-withheld and receive a refund from the Internal Revenue Service.
When the simulation was run as if there had been no change in the tax law, 18 percent of taxpayers, or about 27 million, would have experienced under-withholding and 76 percent would have been over-withheld. In both scenarios, just 6 percent of taxpayers would have the correct amount of withholding.
Who should be concerned? According to the GAO, a hypothetical taxpayer who is married with two children, earning $180,000 annually, $20,000 of which comes from non-wage income and who itemizes deductions.
As The Associated Press notes, "Millions of American workers started getting fatter paychecks early this year, as employers withheld less money in anticipation of lower income taxes under the law. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a middle-income household should on average get a $930 tax cut this year, lifting its after-tax income by 1.6 percent."
The report by the independent GAO was requested in January by senior Democrats on the Senate and House tax-writing committees who asked for an analysis of withholding tables under the new Republican tax law, according to AP.
The GAO acknowledges that the IRS has cautioned taxpayers that they may need to review and update their withholding as a result of the new law.
The Treasury Department and the IRS are responsible for updating the tax withholding tables each year, but their roles and responsibilities are not spelled out in writing. The GAO recommends that the secretary of the Treasury work with the IRS commissioner to sort that out.
Based on simulations run by the Treasury Department, the GAO says taxes for 30 million Americans – 21 percent of taxpayers — are being under-withheld by their employers, meaning they are getting a larger check this year, but will owe at tax time in April. According to the simulations, 73 percent of taxpayers will be over-withheld and receive a refund from the Internal Revenue Service.
When the simulation was run as if there had been no change in the tax law, 18 percent of taxpayers, or about 27 million, would have experienced under-withholding and 76 percent would have been over-withheld. In both scenarios, just 6 percent of taxpayers would have the correct amount of withholding.
Who should be concerned? According to the GAO, a hypothetical taxpayer who is married with two children, earning $180,000 annually, $20,000 of which comes from non-wage income and who itemizes deductions.
As The Associated Press notes, "Millions of American workers started getting fatter paychecks early this year, as employers withheld less money in anticipation of lower income taxes under the law. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a middle-income household should on average get a $930 tax cut this year, lifting its after-tax income by 1.6 percent."
The report by the independent GAO was requested in January by senior Democrats on the Senate and House tax-writing committees who asked for an analysis of withholding tables under the new Republican tax law, according to AP.
The GAO acknowledges that the IRS has cautioned taxpayers that they may need to review and update their withholding as a result of the new law.
The Treasury Department and the IRS are responsible for updating the tax withholding tables each year, but their roles and responsibilities are not spelled out in writing. The GAO recommends that the secretary of the Treasury work with the IRS commissioner to sort that out.
How Companies Are Making Customers Pay for Trump’s Trade War
By Peter Eavis - ny times
July 30, 2018
President Trump’s trade war is making life uncomfortable for some large American corporations, but they have found a way to reduce the pain: Pass it on to customers.
The Trump administration’s tariffs have pushed up the prices of steel and aluminum and have raised costs for companies that make everything from cars and tractors to dishwashers. These companies face a choice. They can bear the higher costs themselves and report weaker profits, which might crater their stocks. Or they can charge more for their products, in effect making their customers bear much of the financial burden of the tariffs, at least for a while.
Many companies are opting for the latter.
As they report second-quarter earnings, they are going out of their way to let their shareholders know that it is customers who are paying.
Caterpillar, while reporting record profits on Monday, predicted that tariffs would add as much $200 million to its costs in the second half of this year. The company added, however, that it would try to partly offset the hit by increasing the prices of its products. Whirlpool, which uses steel and aluminum in its dishwashers and washing machines, said it had hoisted its prices this year. Coca-Cola said last week that it had increased prices in the United States in part because of tariff-related cost increases.
“It’s been very hard for companies to pass costs through to prices for many years,” said Ed Yardeni, chief investment strategist at Yardeni Research. “The thing about tariffs is that they make a very good excuse: Blame it on Trump.”
The impact of the tariffs, and who bears their brunt, could have big implications for the wider economy. The tariffs are raising expenses at a time when companies are paying more for other materials and labor. If most of these costs are passed on to consumers, inflation, already rising after being dormant for years, could accelerate. What is more, since the metals tariffs have been in effect only since the start of June, their full impact has not been felt.
Some companies can’t foist higher prices on their customers because of the risk to their sales. General Motors, for instance, slashed its profit forecast last week in part because of higher steel prices.
And telling investors that customers will pay up does not mean they will believe you.
Still, some economists say companies may be able to get away with charging more for a while longer. With the economy buoyant, there may be enough customers who can afford the increases. David Rosenberg, chief economist at Gluskin Sheff, noted that a deeper dig into wage data showed strong rates of growth, and, he added, a recent survey showed that consumers appeared to be stepping up purchases of big-ticket items in anticipation of price increases.
The Federal Reserve is raising interest rates to prevent the economy from overheating. But the tariffs, along with other pressures, could prompt the Fed to tap the brakes more firmly, which could spook the stock market.
“We are seeing tariffs adding to classic late-cycle inflation pressures,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “This may force the Fed to do more than the market has priced in.”
Much depends on whether President Trump follows through on his proposed trade policies. To some extent, the strength of corporate earnings has bolstered America’s position in its trade fights. Profit margins for companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index are at their highest in many years, in part because of Mr. Trump’s tax cuts, Mr. Yardeni noted. But the longer the trade war drags on, the harder it will be for corporate America’s bottom line to hold up.
“Trump gave companies a record profit margin, and now he might take some of that away,” Mr. Yardeni said.
The Trump administration’s tariffs have pushed up the prices of steel and aluminum and have raised costs for companies that make everything from cars and tractors to dishwashers. These companies face a choice. They can bear the higher costs themselves and report weaker profits, which might crater their stocks. Or they can charge more for their products, in effect making their customers bear much of the financial burden of the tariffs, at least for a while.
Many companies are opting for the latter.
As they report second-quarter earnings, they are going out of their way to let their shareholders know that it is customers who are paying.
Caterpillar, while reporting record profits on Monday, predicted that tariffs would add as much $200 million to its costs in the second half of this year. The company added, however, that it would try to partly offset the hit by increasing the prices of its products. Whirlpool, which uses steel and aluminum in its dishwashers and washing machines, said it had hoisted its prices this year. Coca-Cola said last week that it had increased prices in the United States in part because of tariff-related cost increases.
“It’s been very hard for companies to pass costs through to prices for many years,” said Ed Yardeni, chief investment strategist at Yardeni Research. “The thing about tariffs is that they make a very good excuse: Blame it on Trump.”
The impact of the tariffs, and who bears their brunt, could have big implications for the wider economy. The tariffs are raising expenses at a time when companies are paying more for other materials and labor. If most of these costs are passed on to consumers, inflation, already rising after being dormant for years, could accelerate. What is more, since the metals tariffs have been in effect only since the start of June, their full impact has not been felt.
Some companies can’t foist higher prices on their customers because of the risk to their sales. General Motors, for instance, slashed its profit forecast last week in part because of higher steel prices.
And telling investors that customers will pay up does not mean they will believe you.
Still, some economists say companies may be able to get away with charging more for a while longer. With the economy buoyant, there may be enough customers who can afford the increases. David Rosenberg, chief economist at Gluskin Sheff, noted that a deeper dig into wage data showed strong rates of growth, and, he added, a recent survey showed that consumers appeared to be stepping up purchases of big-ticket items in anticipation of price increases.
The Federal Reserve is raising interest rates to prevent the economy from overheating. But the tariffs, along with other pressures, could prompt the Fed to tap the brakes more firmly, which could spook the stock market.
“We are seeing tariffs adding to classic late-cycle inflation pressures,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “This may force the Fed to do more than the market has priced in.”
Much depends on whether President Trump follows through on his proposed trade policies. To some extent, the strength of corporate earnings has bolstered America’s position in its trade fights. Profit margins for companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index are at their highest in many years, in part because of Mr. Trump’s tax cuts, Mr. Yardeni noted. But the longer the trade war drags on, the harder it will be for corporate America’s bottom line to hold up.
“Trump gave companies a record profit margin, and now he might take some of that away,” Mr. Yardeni said.
Agriculture secretary admits farm bailouts won’t cover losses from Trump’s trade war
Martin Cizmar - raw story
28 JUL 2018 AT 17:26 ET
Pr*sident Donald Trump’s own agriculture secretary said Saturday that planned bailout payments will not fully compensate farmers for the losses of Trump’s trade war.
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue spoke with Reuters about the matter at a G20 meeting in Buenos Aires, and made it clear that Trump’s welfare payments will not cover the losses farmers will endure.
“Obviously this is not going to make farmers whole,” Perdue said of the payments, which will come through as soon as September. “We expect the checks to go out in late September or October. As soon as they prove their yields,” Perdue said. “They will be based on actual production, not historical averages.”
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue spoke with Reuters about the matter at a G20 meeting in Buenos Aires, and made it clear that Trump’s welfare payments will not cover the losses farmers will endure.
“Obviously this is not going to make farmers whole,” Perdue said of the payments, which will come through as soon as September. “We expect the checks to go out in late September or October. As soon as they prove their yields,” Perdue said. “They will be based on actual production, not historical averages.”
Whirlpool loved Trump's tariffs. Now it's struggling
by Nathaniel Meyersohn @CNNMoney
July 24, 2018
"Tariffs are the greatest!" President Donald Trump said on Twitter Tuesday morning. Whirlpool used to agree.
In January, when Trump announced tariffs on imported washing machines, CEO Marc Bitzer told analysts, "This is, without any doubt, a positive catalyst for Whirlpool."
But the Trump administration didn't stop there. It imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum, sending raw material prices skyrocketing. Steel prices in the United States are 60% higher than the rest of the world, Bitzer told analysts on Tuesday. That has raised costs for Whirlpool by $350 million and squeezed its profit margins.
Now Whirlpool is backtracking on its protectionist cheerleading.
The company on Monday slashed its profit outlook for 2018 in part due to a "very challenging cost environment." Whirlpool's (WHR) stock tanked 12% on Tuesday after it missed Wall Street's expectations.
"The global steel costs have risen substantially, and in particular, in the US, they have reached unexplainable levels," Bitzer told analysts. "Uncertainty" around additional tariffs and global trade had disrupted Whirlpool's supply chain, he said.
Whirlpool and rivals, such as LG and Samsung, have increased prices on washing machines since the tariffs went into effect. That led some people to pass up a new purchase. Washing machine prices in June were up close to 20% from a year prior, according to the Labor Department.
Whirlpool's sales in the United States fell 2.2% last quarter from "very slow market demand." In Europe, the Middle East and Africa, the company's second biggest market, sales tumbled 12%.
Whirlpool hinted that it planned to continue raising prices to offset raw material inflation, which means that consumers holding out for a cheaper washing machine might have to wait a while.
In January, when Trump announced tariffs on imported washing machines, CEO Marc Bitzer told analysts, "This is, without any doubt, a positive catalyst for Whirlpool."
But the Trump administration didn't stop there. It imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum, sending raw material prices skyrocketing. Steel prices in the United States are 60% higher than the rest of the world, Bitzer told analysts on Tuesday. That has raised costs for Whirlpool by $350 million and squeezed its profit margins.
Now Whirlpool is backtracking on its protectionist cheerleading.
The company on Monday slashed its profit outlook for 2018 in part due to a "very challenging cost environment." Whirlpool's (WHR) stock tanked 12% on Tuesday after it missed Wall Street's expectations.
"The global steel costs have risen substantially, and in particular, in the US, they have reached unexplainable levels," Bitzer told analysts. "Uncertainty" around additional tariffs and global trade had disrupted Whirlpool's supply chain, he said.
Whirlpool and rivals, such as LG and Samsung, have increased prices on washing machines since the tariffs went into effect. That led some people to pass up a new purchase. Washing machine prices in June were up close to 20% from a year prior, according to the Labor Department.
Whirlpool's sales in the United States fell 2.2% last quarter from "very slow market demand." In Europe, the Middle East and Africa, the company's second biggest market, sales tumbled 12%.
Whirlpool hinted that it planned to continue raising prices to offset raw material inflation, which means that consumers holding out for a cheaper washing machine might have to wait a while.
How the Hospitals Serving Trump Voters Are Closing—And He’s Letting It Happen
More than 80 rural hospitals have shuttered over the last eight years. So why hasn’t the government stepped in to help?
BECCA ANDREWS - mother jones
JULY/AUGUST 2018 ISSUE
By the time Copper Basin Medical Center launched a GoFundMe campaign in May last year, the hospital in the Appalachian foothills was buried in debt. It had been forced to suspend inpatient operations; many of its nurses and staffers had gone weeks without paychecks.
The campaign aimed to raise $100,000, but when only $5,559 came in, Copper Basin closed its doors on October 1. It was a major blow to the citizens of Polk County, Tennessee, many of whom are poor and elderly and rely on Medicaid. Hospitals are shutting their doors rapidly across the state—eight have closed since 2013.
My home state of Tennessee is not alone. Since 2010, more than 80 rural hospitals have shuttered across the country, according to the Rural Health Research Program at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. Nationwide, in communities like the one I grew up in, more than a third of rural hospitals are at risk of closure, and 41 percent are operating in the red. In 2016, the Kaiser Family Foundation examined three rural hospital closures in Kentucky, Kansas, and South Carolina. In each case, the next closest hospital was within 15 miles, but transportation still posed a significant barrier, particularly for elderly citizens who could not drive. A study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that people in rural areas are 50 percent more likely than city dwellers to die from unintentional injuries like car crashes and drug overdoses, in part because of greater distances to emergency care.
What’s more, rural communities tend to be both poorer and sicker than their urban counterparts. According to US census data from 2016, 46 percent of the country’s rural population uses a form of government insurance, compared with 36 percent of the urban population. CDC data shows that rural areas have higher death rates from cancer, heart disease, unintentional injuries, chronic lower respiratory disease, and stroke than urban areas do. Infant mortality rates are roughly 20 percent higher in rural counties than they are in large urban counties.
But there’s another crisis linked to hospital closings: job losses. In many rural communities, the hospital is the largest employer. Brad Gibbens, a researcher at the University of North Dakota, estimates that when one shuts its doors, up to 25 percent of the surrounding region’s economy disappears. A cascading shortage of physicians and other health care professionals soon follows.
So why are so many hospitals closing? Carole Myers, an associate professor at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville who studies health care policy, says medical facilities in rural areas have long struggled thanks to sparse populations and high poverty rates. But the situation is significantly worse in the 17 states that have not joined Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, most of them heavily rural. Those states have a higher rate of uninsured people, which means hospitals—which can’t turn anyone away from the emergency room—have to provide more uncompensated care.
According to a recent study from the Colorado School of Public Health, hospitals in states that did not expand Medicaid are six times more likely to close than hospitals in states that did, because they see more uninsured patients and provide more free care. “Not to say Medicaid in and of itself is profitable, but something’s better than nothing,” Richard Lindrooth, the lead author of the study, told Mother Jones. “It still pays better than uncompensated care.”
Most closures have happened in places where people came out in droves to vote for Donald Trump—and yet his administration hasn’t done much to turn the tide. Legislation sponsored by Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) would expand funding and create more protections for rural hospitals. But the bill hasn’t gained much momentum: It has sat dormant in the House since 2015, though it was reintroduced last year. Meanwhile, in January, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reduced the reimbursements for a program that allows rural hospitals to buy drugs at significant discounts. And Republicans have suggested turning Medicaid into a block grant—a fixed amount of money doled out to states. Critics argue this system would just lead to more funding cuts as politicians wrestle over who gets what, potentially leaving hospitals worse off than before.
Three months after Copper Basin Medical Center shut down, the commissioners of Decatur County, Tennessee, voted to close their hospital. The nearest hospitals are almost 20 miles away in rural West Tennessee, which has lost four other major medical centers since 2014. This closure will further strain the already overburdened hospitals left in the region, including the two in Jackson, where my parents live. As they get older, I can only hope those hospitals stay open—and up to the task of taking care of them.
The campaign aimed to raise $100,000, but when only $5,559 came in, Copper Basin closed its doors on October 1. It was a major blow to the citizens of Polk County, Tennessee, many of whom are poor and elderly and rely on Medicaid. Hospitals are shutting their doors rapidly across the state—eight have closed since 2013.
My home state of Tennessee is not alone. Since 2010, more than 80 rural hospitals have shuttered across the country, according to the Rural Health Research Program at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. Nationwide, in communities like the one I grew up in, more than a third of rural hospitals are at risk of closure, and 41 percent are operating in the red. In 2016, the Kaiser Family Foundation examined three rural hospital closures in Kentucky, Kansas, and South Carolina. In each case, the next closest hospital was within 15 miles, but transportation still posed a significant barrier, particularly for elderly citizens who could not drive. A study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that people in rural areas are 50 percent more likely than city dwellers to die from unintentional injuries like car crashes and drug overdoses, in part because of greater distances to emergency care.
What’s more, rural communities tend to be both poorer and sicker than their urban counterparts. According to US census data from 2016, 46 percent of the country’s rural population uses a form of government insurance, compared with 36 percent of the urban population. CDC data shows that rural areas have higher death rates from cancer, heart disease, unintentional injuries, chronic lower respiratory disease, and stroke than urban areas do. Infant mortality rates are roughly 20 percent higher in rural counties than they are in large urban counties.
But there’s another crisis linked to hospital closings: job losses. In many rural communities, the hospital is the largest employer. Brad Gibbens, a researcher at the University of North Dakota, estimates that when one shuts its doors, up to 25 percent of the surrounding region’s economy disappears. A cascading shortage of physicians and other health care professionals soon follows.
So why are so many hospitals closing? Carole Myers, an associate professor at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville who studies health care policy, says medical facilities in rural areas have long struggled thanks to sparse populations and high poverty rates. But the situation is significantly worse in the 17 states that have not joined Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, most of them heavily rural. Those states have a higher rate of uninsured people, which means hospitals—which can’t turn anyone away from the emergency room—have to provide more uncompensated care.
According to a recent study from the Colorado School of Public Health, hospitals in states that did not expand Medicaid are six times more likely to close than hospitals in states that did, because they see more uninsured patients and provide more free care. “Not to say Medicaid in and of itself is profitable, but something’s better than nothing,” Richard Lindrooth, the lead author of the study, told Mother Jones. “It still pays better than uncompensated care.”
Most closures have happened in places where people came out in droves to vote for Donald Trump—and yet his administration hasn’t done much to turn the tide. Legislation sponsored by Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) would expand funding and create more protections for rural hospitals. But the bill hasn’t gained much momentum: It has sat dormant in the House since 2015, though it was reintroduced last year. Meanwhile, in January, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reduced the reimbursements for a program that allows rural hospitals to buy drugs at significant discounts. And Republicans have suggested turning Medicaid into a block grant—a fixed amount of money doled out to states. Critics argue this system would just lead to more funding cuts as politicians wrestle over who gets what, potentially leaving hospitals worse off than before.
Three months after Copper Basin Medical Center shut down, the commissioners of Decatur County, Tennessee, voted to close their hospital. The nearest hospitals are almost 20 miles away in rural West Tennessee, which has lost four other major medical centers since 2014. This closure will further strain the already overburdened hospitals left in the region, including the two in Jackson, where my parents live. As they get older, I can only hope those hospitals stay open—and up to the task of taking care of them.
The first casualties of the trade war are Trump supporters
The coming red state ruination is no accident, our partners are making a point, economic aggression affects us all
SAM NATAPOFF - salon
JULY 21, 2018 2:00PM (UTC)
For President Trump, all questions have simple answers: US “immigration laws are the weakest and worst anywhere in the world”, the Mueller investigation is a “Rigged Witch Hunt”, and “trade wars are good, and easy to win”. While many of Trump’s presidential actions will have negative consequences over time, for his burgeoning trade wars, the bills are already beginning to come due. They are high, they are primarily hurting states that voted for him, and they are harming business people who want to succeed as he did.
International trade is central to the US economy. In 2014 (the latest data available), trade represented an estimated 30 percent of US GDP and supported 41 million US jobs, up 300 percent from 1992. In 2016, US exports alone supported an estimated 10.7 million U.S. jobs. Small entrepreneurs play an outsized role in US trade, exactly the people businessman Donald Trump says he respects. In 2014 (the most recent available figures), small- and medium-sized US firms (SMEs) made up 98 percent of US exporters, 97 percent of US importers, and concluded one-third of all US merchandise trade. In fact, in 2014 US companies with 0-9 employees exported $190 billion, 161 percent more than its closest G-7 competitor’s companies of the same size.
Donald Trump disrupted global trade for three reasons. First, he made a key campaign promise to bring jobs back home by renegotiating America’s trade deals. Second, because he could: unlike immigration, taxation, and health care, President Trump has full control over US trade policy without requiring Congressional approval. Third, gleefully unconstrained, he offered a confrontational and catastrophically simplistic solution to a complex issue.
He stated that the US was “losing” in trade because it had large bilateral trade deficits, particularly a $375 billion goods deficit with China. Trade deficits occur for many reasons and economists generally can’t agree on any of them, but for Donald Trump, trade deficits were bad, he could fix them by himself, and he was spoiling for a fight.
On June 1, Trump first imposed steel and aluminum tariffs affecting countries including Canada, Mexico, and Germany, alienating America’s NAFTA and EU partners over less than two percent of America’s total imports. They responded with their own tariffs. Then, on July 6th, Trump installed $34 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, China retaliated with $34 billion of its own tariffs, whereupon Trump threatened a further $200 billion. Approximately $75 billion of US goods are now subject to retaliatory, and completely unnecessary, tariffs, which fall heavily on the Rust Belt and the Farm Belt, both areas of strong Trump support.
The economic damage from these decisions is considerable. Estimates project that Trump’s tariffs will reduce US economic growth by between 0.3 to 1.3 percent — economists expect 2.4 percent growth next year. The US Chamber of Commerce, America’s business voice, states that these actions threaten 2.6 million U.S. jobs. 468,790 US jobs are estimated to be lost from the steel and aluminum tariffs alone. Over 41 percent of clothes, 72 percent of shoes, and 54 percent of non-leather handbags sold in the US are made in China and will likely now be more expensive.As a result of the EU’s retaliatory tariffs, Harley Davidson is moving some production of its iconic American motorcycle out of the US to the EU, which it says “is not the company’s preference”.
Trump’s trade wars promise both immediate and longer-term economic effects. BlackRock’s CEO Larry Fink stated that intensifying trade tensions could reduce stock prices by 10 to 15 percent, spur a broad market downturn and slow down the U.S. economy. In June, investors withdrew $12.4 billion from global stocks, the fastest withdrawal since the 2008 financial crisis. That same month, the market values of US corn, soybeans, and wheat crops dropped $13 billion, about 10 percent. Reflecting a 25 percent Chinese tariff, US soybean prices fell by 16 percent to their lowest level in ten years, after having exported some $12 billion to China last year (56 percent of all US soybean exports).
According to Mr. Rusty Smith, a corn and soybean farmer in Cotton Plant, Arkansas, this price drop is “like $100,000 that has disappeared into thin air. We were already in the red, and now it’s even worse.” Bloomberg Economics estimates that all these tariffs could cost the global economy $470 billion, reduce global trade by 3.7 percent, and shrink the US economy by 0.9 percent by 2020.
In the US, who will be most affected? The emerging conclusion is Republican states, Trump voters, and small business people. Moody’s Analytics projects that China’s tariffs will significantly affect 20 percent of the counties that voted for Trump (with a total population of eight million Americans), as opposed to only three percent of the counties that voted for Hillary Clinton (1.1 million total population). Soybean farmers in the Great Plains, car manufacturers in the Midwest, and oil producers in the Dakotas and Texas have all been hit by China’s tariffs, and they are predominantly from red states.
Finally, 59 percent of small- and medium-sized firms export to only a single market, compared to 75 percent of large firms that export to multiple countries, leaving smaller firms exceptionally vulnerable to international trade turmoil. They are the most exposed to the costs of Trump’s frenzied policies and often live in red states.
This Red State ruination is not accidental. Donald Trump brought his belligerent brand of politics to trade, insisting that he could force US trading partners to submit. With their responses, the EU and other countries have made a different point — that in an interdependent global economy, economic aggression affects everyone, even the perpetrator, so that reasonable compromise is manifestly preferable to conflict.
To drive this home, these countries intend to punish Trump’s supporters in the US. Many of these retaliatory tariffs have been targeted with malice aforethought, to send a message to Donald Trump and to those who put him in office. Several countries have aimed their fire at both Kentucky and Wisconsin, homes of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, levying tariffs on specific local products such as whiskey, cheese, and Harley Davidson motorcycles.
Trump’s tariffs have created a coalition of conservatives who would never normally oppose a Republican President. The CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said, “Tariffs are simply taxes that raise prices for everyone… that will cost American jobs and economic growth.” Republican farmers and agribusiness groups have implored Congress to restrain Trump’s trade policies. Even members of Trump’s own party are rebelling. Republican Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn) said “I believe the president is abusing his authorities. I believe it is a massive abuse of his authorities.” Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said, “We risk having American products locked out of new markets, jobs moved overseas, and a decline in American influence.”
In his lust for simplicity and confrontation, Donald Trump has created anarchy in the global trading order. In trade, he suffers no restraints, no dearth of targets, and apparently no interest in shielding those who raised him to power. Einstein’s definition of genius was to take the complex and make it simple. Donald Trump’s trade policy has demonstrated his anti-genius, as he has taken something complex and made it chaotic.
International trade is central to the US economy. In 2014 (the latest data available), trade represented an estimated 30 percent of US GDP and supported 41 million US jobs, up 300 percent from 1992. In 2016, US exports alone supported an estimated 10.7 million U.S. jobs. Small entrepreneurs play an outsized role in US trade, exactly the people businessman Donald Trump says he respects. In 2014 (the most recent available figures), small- and medium-sized US firms (SMEs) made up 98 percent of US exporters, 97 percent of US importers, and concluded one-third of all US merchandise trade. In fact, in 2014 US companies with 0-9 employees exported $190 billion, 161 percent more than its closest G-7 competitor’s companies of the same size.
Donald Trump disrupted global trade for three reasons. First, he made a key campaign promise to bring jobs back home by renegotiating America’s trade deals. Second, because he could: unlike immigration, taxation, and health care, President Trump has full control over US trade policy without requiring Congressional approval. Third, gleefully unconstrained, he offered a confrontational and catastrophically simplistic solution to a complex issue.
He stated that the US was “losing” in trade because it had large bilateral trade deficits, particularly a $375 billion goods deficit with China. Trade deficits occur for many reasons and economists generally can’t agree on any of them, but for Donald Trump, trade deficits were bad, he could fix them by himself, and he was spoiling for a fight.
On June 1, Trump first imposed steel and aluminum tariffs affecting countries including Canada, Mexico, and Germany, alienating America’s NAFTA and EU partners over less than two percent of America’s total imports. They responded with their own tariffs. Then, on July 6th, Trump installed $34 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, China retaliated with $34 billion of its own tariffs, whereupon Trump threatened a further $200 billion. Approximately $75 billion of US goods are now subject to retaliatory, and completely unnecessary, tariffs, which fall heavily on the Rust Belt and the Farm Belt, both areas of strong Trump support.
The economic damage from these decisions is considerable. Estimates project that Trump’s tariffs will reduce US economic growth by between 0.3 to 1.3 percent — economists expect 2.4 percent growth next year. The US Chamber of Commerce, America’s business voice, states that these actions threaten 2.6 million U.S. jobs. 468,790 US jobs are estimated to be lost from the steel and aluminum tariffs alone. Over 41 percent of clothes, 72 percent of shoes, and 54 percent of non-leather handbags sold in the US are made in China and will likely now be more expensive.As a result of the EU’s retaliatory tariffs, Harley Davidson is moving some production of its iconic American motorcycle out of the US to the EU, which it says “is not the company’s preference”.
Trump’s trade wars promise both immediate and longer-term economic effects. BlackRock’s CEO Larry Fink stated that intensifying trade tensions could reduce stock prices by 10 to 15 percent, spur a broad market downturn and slow down the U.S. economy. In June, investors withdrew $12.4 billion from global stocks, the fastest withdrawal since the 2008 financial crisis. That same month, the market values of US corn, soybeans, and wheat crops dropped $13 billion, about 10 percent. Reflecting a 25 percent Chinese tariff, US soybean prices fell by 16 percent to their lowest level in ten years, after having exported some $12 billion to China last year (56 percent of all US soybean exports).
According to Mr. Rusty Smith, a corn and soybean farmer in Cotton Plant, Arkansas, this price drop is “like $100,000 that has disappeared into thin air. We were already in the red, and now it’s even worse.” Bloomberg Economics estimates that all these tariffs could cost the global economy $470 billion, reduce global trade by 3.7 percent, and shrink the US economy by 0.9 percent by 2020.
In the US, who will be most affected? The emerging conclusion is Republican states, Trump voters, and small business people. Moody’s Analytics projects that China’s tariffs will significantly affect 20 percent of the counties that voted for Trump (with a total population of eight million Americans), as opposed to only three percent of the counties that voted for Hillary Clinton (1.1 million total population). Soybean farmers in the Great Plains, car manufacturers in the Midwest, and oil producers in the Dakotas and Texas have all been hit by China’s tariffs, and they are predominantly from red states.
Finally, 59 percent of small- and medium-sized firms export to only a single market, compared to 75 percent of large firms that export to multiple countries, leaving smaller firms exceptionally vulnerable to international trade turmoil. They are the most exposed to the costs of Trump’s frenzied policies and often live in red states.
This Red State ruination is not accidental. Donald Trump brought his belligerent brand of politics to trade, insisting that he could force US trading partners to submit. With their responses, the EU and other countries have made a different point — that in an interdependent global economy, economic aggression affects everyone, even the perpetrator, so that reasonable compromise is manifestly preferable to conflict.
To drive this home, these countries intend to punish Trump’s supporters in the US. Many of these retaliatory tariffs have been targeted with malice aforethought, to send a message to Donald Trump and to those who put him in office. Several countries have aimed their fire at both Kentucky and Wisconsin, homes of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, levying tariffs on specific local products such as whiskey, cheese, and Harley Davidson motorcycles.
Trump’s tariffs have created a coalition of conservatives who would never normally oppose a Republican President. The CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said, “Tariffs are simply taxes that raise prices for everyone… that will cost American jobs and economic growth.” Republican farmers and agribusiness groups have implored Congress to restrain Trump’s trade policies. Even members of Trump’s own party are rebelling. Republican Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn) said “I believe the president is abusing his authorities. I believe it is a massive abuse of his authorities.” Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said, “We risk having American products locked out of new markets, jobs moved overseas, and a decline in American influence.”
In his lust for simplicity and confrontation, Donald Trump has created anarchy in the global trading order. In trade, he suffers no restraints, no dearth of targets, and apparently no interest in shielding those who raised him to power. Einstein’s definition of genius was to take the complex and make it simple. Donald Trump’s trade policy has demonstrated his anti-genius, as he has taken something complex and made it chaotic.
Trade war puts the hoof into U.S. pig part exports to China
Tom Polansek - reuters
JULY 17, 2018 / 5:05 AM
CHICAGO (Reuters) - Before the U.S.-China trade war, American pig processors exported nine out of every 10 pigs’ feet and heads they shipped overseas to China and Hong Kong - for prices higher than they would fetch anywhere else.
Those parts and others that most Americans won’t eat - hearts, tongues, stomachs, entrails - have a special place in Chinese culinary culture and, consequently, in the profit margins of U.S. pork exporters.
“You often hear that the products are what keep the plants running,” said Erin Borror, economist for U.S. Meat Export Federation, a trade group.
The pipeline for these profitable pig parts, known collectively as offal, is closing fast after China slapped two tariffs on U.S. pork totaling 50 percent.
That’s forcing U.S. processors to sell an increasing amount of such parts for pennies to be rendered into food for pets and livestock.
U.S. shipments of byproducts affected by the duties fell by about a third in April and May combined, after China imposed the first 25 percent tariff on American pork in April, according to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
On July 6, Beijing implemented an additional 25 percent duty as the world’s two largest economies slapped tariffs on $34 billion worth of each others’ goods.
U.S. President Donald Trump has said the U.S. tariffs - which have provoked equivalent Chinese retaliation - aim to close the $335 billion annual U.S. trade deficit with China.
The USDA declined to comment on the drop in offal exports.
Exporting pig offal to China has been a money-maker because consumers there enjoy its strong flavor. Stewed pigs’ feet with white beans, for instance, is a famous dish from Sichuan province, one of the country’s culinary capitals.
At least one product exported to China has almost zero value anywhere else: hind pigs’ feet. Rear feet are nearly impossible to sell elsewhere because they have holes in them from where hogs are hung upside down in packing houses, which turns off consumers in other countries, said Dermot Hayes, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University.
“They go from zero value outside of China to a significant value when the Chinese market is fully open,” Hayes said.
ALTERNATIVE SUPPLIES OF STOMACHS, LIVERS
China will likely have little trouble finding supplies to replace U.S. pig offal, analysts said.
An expansion of its domestic hog industry had already made buyers less dependent on American pork before the trade tensions.
Chinese buyers could also import more from Europe, where hog prices have been trading at their lowest levels in at least two years, analysts said.
“The Chinese aren’t going to get hurt by this,” said Ken Maschhoff, chairman of The Maschhoffs, the largest family-owned U.S. pork producer. “Chile or Europe or somebody else is going to say, ‘Well, we’ve got a bunch of stomachs or livers or feet that we’re not using...’”
The slowdown hurts major processors in the United States, such as WH Group Ltd’s (0288.HK) Smithfield Foods Inc; Seaboard Foods, a division of Seaboard Corp (SEB.A); and the JBS USA unit of Brazil’s JBS SA (JBSS3.SA). Such companies benefited from record total U.S. offal sales of more than $1.1 billion in 2017.
Smithfield, the biggest U.S. pork processor and exporter to China, declined to comment. The company, owned by China-based WH Group, sells offal, jowls and lard, according to its website.
Meat processor Tyson Foods Inc (TSN.N) also declined to comment. Seaboard and JBS did not respond to requests for comment.
Margins for U.S. pork processors are under pressure due to the impact of the trade fight and last month slipped to their lowest level in three years.
WH Group’s stock price has tumbled 28 percent so far this year. Tyson shares are down 19 percent and Seaboard shares have dropped 13 percent.
$860 MILLION IN LOSSES
The average value of U.S. offal exports to China was about 76 cents per pound in 2017, according to the U.S. Meat Export Federation.
If packers do not sell them elsewhere for human consumption, the byproducts will be rendered in the United States for about 18 cents per pound - a decrease equating to a loss of $1.55 per hog for the volume exported to China, the federation said.
Overall, it estimated lower offal prices could translate into losses of $860 million for the U.S. pork industry over the next year. Processors will try to pass on losses to farmers by paying less for live hogs, Hayes said.
“It is the pork farmer who suffers,” he said.
Lower demand also has processors rendering more offal into animal feed, according to the federation. Prices in that segment could come under pressure, however, as more processors try to grab market share.
Ohio-based JH Routh Packing Company sells most of its offal to feed animals at less than 20 cents per pound, sales manager Tony Stearns said.
“Everybody who can sell the stuff,” he said about offal, “they’re pretty much selling everything they can.”
Pet food makers could use more offal in their products in response to an increase of supply, said Dana Brooks, president of the Pet Food Institute, an industry group that represents the pet units of companies including Nestle SA (NESN.S), which sells Purina, and Mars Inc, which sells the Pedigree and Whiskas brands.
“The parts that we don’t eat here in America for pork often have nutritional value to our pets,” Brooks said.
Those parts and others that most Americans won’t eat - hearts, tongues, stomachs, entrails - have a special place in Chinese culinary culture and, consequently, in the profit margins of U.S. pork exporters.
“You often hear that the products are what keep the plants running,” said Erin Borror, economist for U.S. Meat Export Federation, a trade group.
The pipeline for these profitable pig parts, known collectively as offal, is closing fast after China slapped two tariffs on U.S. pork totaling 50 percent.
That’s forcing U.S. processors to sell an increasing amount of such parts for pennies to be rendered into food for pets and livestock.
U.S. shipments of byproducts affected by the duties fell by about a third in April and May combined, after China imposed the first 25 percent tariff on American pork in April, according to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
On July 6, Beijing implemented an additional 25 percent duty as the world’s two largest economies slapped tariffs on $34 billion worth of each others’ goods.
U.S. President Donald Trump has said the U.S. tariffs - which have provoked equivalent Chinese retaliation - aim to close the $335 billion annual U.S. trade deficit with China.
The USDA declined to comment on the drop in offal exports.
Exporting pig offal to China has been a money-maker because consumers there enjoy its strong flavor. Stewed pigs’ feet with white beans, for instance, is a famous dish from Sichuan province, one of the country’s culinary capitals.
At least one product exported to China has almost zero value anywhere else: hind pigs’ feet. Rear feet are nearly impossible to sell elsewhere because they have holes in them from where hogs are hung upside down in packing houses, which turns off consumers in other countries, said Dermot Hayes, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University.
“They go from zero value outside of China to a significant value when the Chinese market is fully open,” Hayes said.
ALTERNATIVE SUPPLIES OF STOMACHS, LIVERS
China will likely have little trouble finding supplies to replace U.S. pig offal, analysts said.
An expansion of its domestic hog industry had already made buyers less dependent on American pork before the trade tensions.
Chinese buyers could also import more from Europe, where hog prices have been trading at their lowest levels in at least two years, analysts said.
“The Chinese aren’t going to get hurt by this,” said Ken Maschhoff, chairman of The Maschhoffs, the largest family-owned U.S. pork producer. “Chile or Europe or somebody else is going to say, ‘Well, we’ve got a bunch of stomachs or livers or feet that we’re not using...’”
The slowdown hurts major processors in the United States, such as WH Group Ltd’s (0288.HK) Smithfield Foods Inc; Seaboard Foods, a division of Seaboard Corp (SEB.A); and the JBS USA unit of Brazil’s JBS SA (JBSS3.SA). Such companies benefited from record total U.S. offal sales of more than $1.1 billion in 2017.
Smithfield, the biggest U.S. pork processor and exporter to China, declined to comment. The company, owned by China-based WH Group, sells offal, jowls and lard, according to its website.
Meat processor Tyson Foods Inc (TSN.N) also declined to comment. Seaboard and JBS did not respond to requests for comment.
Margins for U.S. pork processors are under pressure due to the impact of the trade fight and last month slipped to their lowest level in three years.
WH Group’s stock price has tumbled 28 percent so far this year. Tyson shares are down 19 percent and Seaboard shares have dropped 13 percent.
$860 MILLION IN LOSSES
The average value of U.S. offal exports to China was about 76 cents per pound in 2017, according to the U.S. Meat Export Federation.
If packers do not sell them elsewhere for human consumption, the byproducts will be rendered in the United States for about 18 cents per pound - a decrease equating to a loss of $1.55 per hog for the volume exported to China, the federation said.
Overall, it estimated lower offal prices could translate into losses of $860 million for the U.S. pork industry over the next year. Processors will try to pass on losses to farmers by paying less for live hogs, Hayes said.
“It is the pork farmer who suffers,” he said.
Lower demand also has processors rendering more offal into animal feed, according to the federation. Prices in that segment could come under pressure, however, as more processors try to grab market share.
Ohio-based JH Routh Packing Company sells most of its offal to feed animals at less than 20 cents per pound, sales manager Tony Stearns said.
“Everybody who can sell the stuff,” he said about offal, “they’re pretty much selling everything they can.”
Pet food makers could use more offal in their products in response to an increase of supply, said Dana Brooks, president of the Pet Food Institute, an industry group that represents the pet units of companies including Nestle SA (NESN.S), which sells Purina, and Mars Inc, which sells the Pedigree and Whiskas brands.
“The parts that we don’t eat here in America for pork often have nutritional value to our pets,” Brooks said.
*Strategic Safety Net Cuts Underway: White Hs. Claims WAR ON POVERTY 'LARGELY OVER'
appalachiablue - demo underground
7/14/18
"With 'Carefully Calculated Strategy' to Slash Safety Net Underway, White House Claims War on Poverty 'Largely Over,'" New Trump administration report calls for imposing work requirements for federal benefits programs, which anti-poverty advocates warn would harm poor Americans, By Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams, July 13, 2018. -EXCERPTS:
Anti-poverty advocates are rejecting a new Trump administration report that ridiculously declares the "WAR ON POVERTY IS LARGELY OVER AND A SUCESS." In the words of Rebecca Vallas at the Center for American Progress, it is "part of a carefully calculated strategy to reinforce myths about the people these programs help" and "to smear these programs with a dog-whistle of welfare, in order to make them easier to cut." Emphasizing the absurdity of the report's claims, AJ+ noted that NEARLY 41 MILLION Americans are living in poverty- a figure that some analyses suggest is even higher.
Although the report and Republican politicians allege that imposing work requirements for social safety net programs would "IMPROVE SELF-SUFFICIENCY," poverty experts highlight analyses that those who are able to work typically do, and warn that such measures cause low-income Americans to lose necessities such as healthcare and housing. And, as the New York Times outlined, the report's figures for the number of people working fewer than 20 hours per week are likely overestimates, particularly for Medicaid. The unemployment rate has declined substantially since 2013.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculated this year that three-quarters of food stamp recipients work within a year of participating in the program.
Vallas tweeted: As president, Trump has encouraged and enabled work requirements for benefits programs. In January, his administration issued a guidance for state Medicaid directors, aimed at allowing them to impose requirements, and in April he signed an executive order directing federal agencies to strengthen existing requirements and develop new ones.
The executive order, as Vallas wrote as the time, was also part of Trump and Republicans' "DIVIDE AND CONQUER" strategy to rebrand the programs as "WELFARE," and thus, "tap into racial animus and ugly myths about aid programs in order to pit struggling workers against one other."
Republicans' efforts to implement work requirements aren't contained to the White House- GOP members of Congress are also pursuing them. While House Republicans are trying to force through a work requirements provision in the Farm Bill, the Senate's version of the bill includes no such provision. As lawmakers prepare to reconcile the legislation, some Republicans are pressuring Trump to refuse to sign the bill without the House measure.
>While the GOP works to destroy safety net programs, the international community is growing increasingly alarmed by the high rates of inequality, poverty, and infant mortality in the United States, which were recently detailed in a "scathing" UNITED NATIONS EXPOSE that explored how *"Trump & the GOP-controlled Congress are 'deliberately' working to make these already devastating crises worse by waging war on the poor while lavishing the rich with massive tax cuts."
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/07/13/carefully-calculated-strategy-slash-safety-net-underway-white-house-claims-war
Anti-poverty advocates are rejecting a new Trump administration report that ridiculously declares the "WAR ON POVERTY IS LARGELY OVER AND A SUCESS." In the words of Rebecca Vallas at the Center for American Progress, it is "part of a carefully calculated strategy to reinforce myths about the people these programs help" and "to smear these programs with a dog-whistle of welfare, in order to make them easier to cut." Emphasizing the absurdity of the report's claims, AJ+ noted that NEARLY 41 MILLION Americans are living in poverty- a figure that some analyses suggest is even higher.
Although the report and Republican politicians allege that imposing work requirements for social safety net programs would "IMPROVE SELF-SUFFICIENCY," poverty experts highlight analyses that those who are able to work typically do, and warn that such measures cause low-income Americans to lose necessities such as healthcare and housing. And, as the New York Times outlined, the report's figures for the number of people working fewer than 20 hours per week are likely overestimates, particularly for Medicaid. The unemployment rate has declined substantially since 2013.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculated this year that three-quarters of food stamp recipients work within a year of participating in the program.
Vallas tweeted: As president, Trump has encouraged and enabled work requirements for benefits programs. In January, his administration issued a guidance for state Medicaid directors, aimed at allowing them to impose requirements, and in April he signed an executive order directing federal agencies to strengthen existing requirements and develop new ones.
The executive order, as Vallas wrote as the time, was also part of Trump and Republicans' "DIVIDE AND CONQUER" strategy to rebrand the programs as "WELFARE," and thus, "tap into racial animus and ugly myths about aid programs in order to pit struggling workers against one other."
Republicans' efforts to implement work requirements aren't contained to the White House- GOP members of Congress are also pursuing them. While House Republicans are trying to force through a work requirements provision in the Farm Bill, the Senate's version of the bill includes no such provision. As lawmakers prepare to reconcile the legislation, some Republicans are pressuring Trump to refuse to sign the bill without the House measure.
>While the GOP works to destroy safety net programs, the international community is growing increasingly alarmed by the high rates of inequality, poverty, and infant mortality in the United States, which were recently detailed in a "scathing" UNITED NATIONS EXPOSE that explored how *"Trump & the GOP-controlled Congress are 'deliberately' working to make these already devastating crises worse by waging war on the poor while lavishing the rich with massive tax cuts."
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/07/13/carefully-calculated-strategy-slash-safety-net-underway-white-house-claims-war
thank trump for you going broke!!!
North Dakota soybean processors hit hard by tariffs as China cancels orders
China has cancelled all orders of North Dakota's specialty food-grade soybeans.
According to the North Dakota's trade office, food-grade soybeans represent 6 percent of foreign sales, with China being the largest buyer.
With another round of tariffs imposed on China Tuesday evening, processors worry that China fill their orders from other producing countries.
Lori Ann LaRocco - cnbc
7/11/18
As the trade war between the U.S. and China heats up, North Dakota soybean processors are watching their selling season go to ruin.
The head of the North Dakota Trade Office says Chinese buyers have killed all of their firm orders for food-grade soybeans, valued at $1.2 to $1.5 million. The cancellations happened just prior to and immediately after tariffs went into effect in July.
North Dakota processors usually sell $30 million to $35 million in food-grade beans to China annually - with most of those contracts finalized in the summer months. They get those beans from farmers who they contract with before seeds are planted.
“Our food grade processors are normally working between July and August to lock in contracts with foreign customers,” says Simon Wilson, Executive Director of the North Dakota Trade office. “With China now on the sidelines they are working other Asian countries to see where they can sell the product."
He adds that even if they find new buyers, sales would be less profitable, "as moving to new customers drives lower margins than established ones.”
According to the state’s trade office, food-grade soybeans represent 6 percent of total foreign sales, with China being the largest buyer.
China does have a choice
“That leaves around 230,000 acres of premium soybeans without a buyer,” said Simon Wilson, executive director of the North Dakota Trade Office. “We are in a trade war and the farmer and processors are taking the brunt” of it.
Even though some observers say Chinese buyers have no choice but to deal with the U.S. eventually, with another round of tariffs imposed on China Tuesday evening, Wilson says that Chinese customers are sure to look to Canada and other growers to fill their needs for food-grade soybeans.
And, if processors can't replace those sales with other buyers, they will be forced to store the food-grade soybeans, an unappetizing prospect. “This is for human consumption so the quality and freshness of the bean is first and foremost,” said Wilson.
Simon tells CNBC the next 30 to 45 days are critical for farmers in the state as they start to lock down contracts for next year’s crop. Reduced demand now could force farmers to move to less lucrative crops next year, he added, further hurting their bottom lines.
Responding to these concerns, a U.S. Department of Agriculture spokesperson said in a statement, “The President is standing up to protect our national interests, including holding China accountable for unfair trade practices and theft of intellectual property. Because of the trade disruptions, there is understandable anxiety in the agriculture sector. The President has directed Secretary Perdue to use the tools at his disposal to ensure that American agriculture does not bear the brunt of retaliation from foreign nations.”
However, the spokesperson declined to elaborate on what those tools might be: “It would be unwise to unveil the playbook while other nations are watching, but if conditions warrant, USDA will quickly begin fulfilling that promise to support producers who become casualties of these disputes.”
One-sided trade war
Curt Petrich, president of the Northern Food Grade Soybean Association acknowledges that the global trade imbalance should be managed, but said “there is a better way of addressing our partners than starting a trade war.”
The pain of this tariff war is one-sided according to some agriculture experts and the Chinese will not feel a pricing pinch. Blake Hurst, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau explained the Chinese tariff on soybeans is acting as a pro-Chinese price wedge. “With prices of soybeans depressed because of trade war fears, the 25 percent tariff only raises the price of U.S. soybeans to 2017 levels.
The Chinese are not impacted at all,” said Hurst. “The soybean farmers across the country are the ones feeling the pain. Long-term, this is not good for the farmers.”
What’s more, steel tariffs are raising the price of equipment, adding to farmers’ pain, Wilson said. “There have been comments that the farmers will be taken care of but they are anxious to see what that means. There are fears of bankers calling at the end of the year not renewing lines of credit,” he added.
Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), member of the Agriculture committee who helped pass the bipartisan farm bill four years ago tells CNBC, the timing of these tariffs and the pressure it is having on farmers couldn’t come at a worse time.
“The Farm Bill is set to expire in September and NAFTA renegotiations continue. There is so much uncertainty. North Dakota farmers are rightfully concerned. The United States’ trade war with China, as well as with some of our key allies, is already directly hurting them. We need to use trade enforcement to rein in China’s unfair trade practices, but this isn’t the way to do it. This administration cannot play chicken with our farmers.”
“Given the latest round of tariffs, the soybean processors fear this trade war will be long-term,” said Wilson. “No one is talking to each other and public comments still have to be submitted and heard. It’s going to take a while."
The head of the North Dakota Trade Office says Chinese buyers have killed all of their firm orders for food-grade soybeans, valued at $1.2 to $1.5 million. The cancellations happened just prior to and immediately after tariffs went into effect in July.
North Dakota processors usually sell $30 million to $35 million in food-grade beans to China annually - with most of those contracts finalized in the summer months. They get those beans from farmers who they contract with before seeds are planted.
“Our food grade processors are normally working between July and August to lock in contracts with foreign customers,” says Simon Wilson, Executive Director of the North Dakota Trade office. “With China now on the sidelines they are working other Asian countries to see where they can sell the product."
He adds that even if they find new buyers, sales would be less profitable, "as moving to new customers drives lower margins than established ones.”
According to the state’s trade office, food-grade soybeans represent 6 percent of total foreign sales, with China being the largest buyer.
China does have a choice
“That leaves around 230,000 acres of premium soybeans without a buyer,” said Simon Wilson, executive director of the North Dakota Trade Office. “We are in a trade war and the farmer and processors are taking the brunt” of it.
Even though some observers say Chinese buyers have no choice but to deal with the U.S. eventually, with another round of tariffs imposed on China Tuesday evening, Wilson says that Chinese customers are sure to look to Canada and other growers to fill their needs for food-grade soybeans.
And, if processors can't replace those sales with other buyers, they will be forced to store the food-grade soybeans, an unappetizing prospect. “This is for human consumption so the quality and freshness of the bean is first and foremost,” said Wilson.
Simon tells CNBC the next 30 to 45 days are critical for farmers in the state as they start to lock down contracts for next year’s crop. Reduced demand now could force farmers to move to less lucrative crops next year, he added, further hurting their bottom lines.
Responding to these concerns, a U.S. Department of Agriculture spokesperson said in a statement, “The President is standing up to protect our national interests, including holding China accountable for unfair trade practices and theft of intellectual property. Because of the trade disruptions, there is understandable anxiety in the agriculture sector. The President has directed Secretary Perdue to use the tools at his disposal to ensure that American agriculture does not bear the brunt of retaliation from foreign nations.”
However, the spokesperson declined to elaborate on what those tools might be: “It would be unwise to unveil the playbook while other nations are watching, but if conditions warrant, USDA will quickly begin fulfilling that promise to support producers who become casualties of these disputes.”
One-sided trade war
Curt Petrich, president of the Northern Food Grade Soybean Association acknowledges that the global trade imbalance should be managed, but said “there is a better way of addressing our partners than starting a trade war.”
The pain of this tariff war is one-sided according to some agriculture experts and the Chinese will not feel a pricing pinch. Blake Hurst, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau explained the Chinese tariff on soybeans is acting as a pro-Chinese price wedge. “With prices of soybeans depressed because of trade war fears, the 25 percent tariff only raises the price of U.S. soybeans to 2017 levels.
The Chinese are not impacted at all,” said Hurst. “The soybean farmers across the country are the ones feeling the pain. Long-term, this is not good for the farmers.”
What’s more, steel tariffs are raising the price of equipment, adding to farmers’ pain, Wilson said. “There have been comments that the farmers will be taken care of but they are anxious to see what that means. There are fears of bankers calling at the end of the year not renewing lines of credit,” he added.
Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), member of the Agriculture committee who helped pass the bipartisan farm bill four years ago tells CNBC, the timing of these tariffs and the pressure it is having on farmers couldn’t come at a worse time.
“The Farm Bill is set to expire in September and NAFTA renegotiations continue. There is so much uncertainty. North Dakota farmers are rightfully concerned. The United States’ trade war with China, as well as with some of our key allies, is already directly hurting them. We need to use trade enforcement to rein in China’s unfair trade practices, but this isn’t the way to do it. This administration cannot play chicken with our farmers.”
“Given the latest round of tariffs, the soybean processors fear this trade war will be long-term,” said Wilson. “No one is talking to each other and public comments still have to be submitted and heard. It’s going to take a while."
payback funnies
|
|
what you see is what you get!!!
your share, idiot!!!!
