Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cos dem

(903 posts)
Fri Jun 8, 2018, 10:20 PM Jun 2018

Navarro piece in NY Times: The Era of American Complacency on Trade Is Over

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/08/opinion/trump-trade-g7-russia-putin-navarro.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

I know Navarro is a tool. I'm not asking about the merits of his approach. But, to be accurate, I would like to understand if there's any truth to his claims, and what the reality is, without his spin.

Can anyone comment on whether there's any accuracy at all to what he claims?
I'm mostly asking about the tariff allegations. Are any of these tariff rates real? Is he twisting around some other levy (like the VAT) and trying to call that a tariff?
The claims of "non-tariff barriers" I kind of dismiss as some sort of whinging about "regulations". Like, Canada has regulations that ensure a safe product, and that causes a hardship for our regulation-free distopia, and thus it equates to a tariff.


1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Navarro piece in NY Times: The Era of American Complacency on Trade Is Over (Original Post) cos dem Jun 2018 OP
Of course we have had more open borders than many others, but... TreasonousBastard Jun 2018 #1

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
1. Of course we have had more open borders than many others, but...
Fri Jun 8, 2018, 11:17 PM
Jun 2018

a larger part of the problem is that we rally don't make enough stuff anyone else wants. Do we have a car to compete with Mercedes or BMW? Toyota and Honda didn't get so big by making clumsy rustbuckets-- they worked to build a reputation for reliability and value. Not everyone remembers when "made in Japan" meant cheap crap, but it doesn't mean that any more. Think about that when complaining about cheap Chinese crap.

We deliberately gave up on consumer electronics because RCA, Ampex, and others simply preferred not to bother competing for the consumer market.

Tariffs are usually considered acceptable when a country is trying to build an industry and doesn't want established outside industries to stop them in their tracks. None of the nations we are arguing with are in that position, but are simply being protectionist due to internal pressures. That's just life in the big leagues. If Offensheise GMbH has the juice with parliament to put American competing widgets at a disadvantage, it will use it. OTOH, GM discovered that for some reason Buicks are very popular in China, and found a way to sell them there.



Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Navarro piece in NY Times...