Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 4 of 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1214
Reputation: 120.4
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And lets add this...
Quote:
Congressional Republicans slammed President Trump’s decision to impose steep tariffs on aluminum and steel imports arguing that the move could kill jobs, damage the U.S. economy and hurt national defense.

Republican lawmakers have been outspoken in trying to convince Trump that he should narrow the tariffs if not outright scrap them over broader concerns that moving forward could spark a global trade war.


Trump decided to exempt Canada and Mexico, two major allies and leading importers of steel and aluminum, from the sweeping action that will levy 25 percent tariffs on all imported steel and 10 percent on imported aluminum.

"Today, I am defending America’s national security by placing tariffs on foreign imports of steel and aluminum," Trump said at the White House.

He said the domestic steel and aluminum industry has been “ravaged by aggressive foreign trade practices."

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who sent a letter to Trump this week, called the move “a tax hike on American manufacturers, workers and consumers.”

“Slapping aluminum and steel imports with tariffs of this magnitude is misguided,” Hatch said.

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who has been urging caution on the tariffs, said he is worried Trump's decision will have "unintended consequences."

"We will continue to urge the administration to narrow this policy so that it is focused only on those countries and practices that violate trade law," Ryan said.

Since the tariffs will take effect in 15 days, major trading partners and allies such as the European Union, United Kingdom, Australia and South Korea will have to scramble for an exemption.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Texas) said while "exempting Canada and Mexico is a good first step, I urge the White House to go further to narrow these tariffs so they hit the intended target, and not U.S. workers, businesses and families."

Many Republicans argue the tariffs won’t do anything to achieve a major objective: curtailing China’s overcapacity of steel.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who has recently patched up his relationship with Trump, blasted the president's approach to solving the overcapacity problem.

"A better way to level the playing field for American companies would be to rally our friends and allies to advance a robust, targeted effort to ensure that only those responsible for excess global capacity pay a price," Corker said.

The United States already has more than 160 duties targeted at specific Chinese steel products.

But problems remain and a glut of global steel has caused prices to drop, hurting U.S. producers.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), a former U.S. Trade Representative who has expressed support for using the 232 provision (which allows the president to unilaterally impose tariffs for national security reasons), said that "action is needed to address the worldwide overcapacity of steel, but I believe we should take a more targeted approach.”

“We should focus on countries that distort markets and repeatedly violate trade laws, and on the steel and aluminum products that are most at risk from a national security perspective," Portman said.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who is battling brain cancer, accused Trump of trying to use the tariffs "as an excuse for protectionism" that could harm national defense by raising costs for the military.

"President Trump’s decision to impose steep tariffs on steel and aluminum imports will not protect America,” McCain said.

Instead, McCain said the United States "should confront China's unfair trade practices, including its attempts to circumvent existing antidumping tariffs and its pilfering of American invention and innovation through coercion and outright theft."

Under the tariffs plan, the president will have the discretion to add or subtract countries and raise and lower the tariffs at any time, a senior administration official said.
http://thehill.com/policy/fina.....riffs-plan


And then this...ya know, to educate someone....LOL ...as if he will read this...
Quote:

Senators are moving forward with legislation that would curb President Trump's authority on tariffs, despite opposition from the White House.

"If the president truly believes invoking Section 232 is necessary to protect the United States from a genuine threat, he should make the case to Congress and to the American people and do the hard work necessary to secure congressional approval," Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said in a statement announcing the bill.


In addition to Corker, Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) are supporting the bill.

"There is no real national security threat that these tariffs are a response to. They are an effort to impose a protectionist policy for economic purposes," Toomey said in a floor speech blasting the administration's decisions.

The bill would require Trump to submit tariffs implemented under Section 232 of the trade law for approval to Congress. Any approval legislation would then be fast-tracked through both chambers.

Senators are introducing the legislation despite receiving pushback from Trump, who earlier on Wednesday privately urged Corker not to file his bill.

“I talked at length with the president about it today. He's obviously not pleased with this effort,” Corker separately told reporters.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor.....-authority


But yeah.... :roll: :roll: :roll: whos the fool ?

My gawd this is fun.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6009
Reputation: 290.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So what? The president is acting within his authority. The Senate can cobble together a bill, if they like ... though how they get the time, with the August recess already threatened? But does anyone imagine the President will sign it? Hmmm?

And John McCain took shots at Trump, surprise, surprise!

This is political masturbation. It's what Justin does -- it's meaningless posturing.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////

The larger point is that the Stunned One is bungling worse even than when he was in India. His empty-headed 'posturing is taking us further and further away from where we want to go.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1214
Reputation: 120.4
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
So what? The president is acting within his authority. The Senate can cobble together a bill, if they like ... though how they get the time, with the August recess already threatened? But does anyone imagine the President will sign it? Hmmm?


LOL! oh my.

Quote:


The larger point is that the Stunned One is bungling worse

I know, that orange hair must be pulling on the last cells he has.

You are an incredibly partisan low hanging fruit hack .

I now understand your lack of any reality. If someone told you the sun rises in the east you'd lie through your teeth and tell them "no, in the west'

If you have an honest bone in your body, stop the ignorance and come back to the table with something tangible, not your ignorant and idiotic rants lacking in any reality.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6009
Reputation: 290.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TC should be specific.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuzmOQvPLWQ

It's escalating ...
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1214
Reputation: 120.4
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
TC should be specific.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuzmOQvPLWQ

It's escalating ...

Stop...stop. You are an embarrassment to this.

Fact:
Both Navarro and Kudlow have walked back their comments and apologized.
Fact:
The PM only repeated what was said earlier, thus no taunts from PM, just measured speech.

Go ahead and ignore the overwhelming lack of support the tRump has .

Enough already.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6009
Reputation: 290.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well time will tell ... you are saying, I suppose, that you expect Trump's favourable ratings to go down. Well, we'll know about that soon enough ...
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6009
Reputation: 290.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the meantime, a few giggles at the Stunned One ...

Quote:
Trudeau wants to include a gender chapter in the new NAFTA
By JOANNA SMITHThe Canadian Press
Sun., Nov. 26, 2017

OTTAWA—The Trudeau government knows other countries are raising their eyebrows at the thought of feminist trade deals, but the Liberals are convinced the idea will one day be as obvious as labour and environmental standards are today.

That is one of the messages Canadian negotiators have been using to try to convince the United States and Mexico to include a gender chapter in the new North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), newly released briefing materials show.

The Liberal government, led by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, says it remains committed to including gender in the new NAFTA.
The Liberal government, led by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, says it remains committed to including gender in the new NAFTA. (MARK SCHIEFELBEIN / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS)

“Think back 20 years and remember the early discussions of labour and environment in the context of trade agreements,” said talking points prepared for senior bureaucrats at Global Affairs Canada ahead of negotiations that began Aug. 16 in Washington, D.C.

“Some recognized a link and a need to address some issues inside trade agreements. Others didn’t,” said the document. “The creation of co-operative mechanisms increased our understanding of these issues and demonstrated the need for appropriate obligation in trade agreements.”

The Canadian Press obtained the records through the Access to Information Act.

Even Canadian officials were skeptical at first, the documents suggest.

“Our first reflex was to say that (free trade agreements) are gender-neutral,” said the document. “But are the effects gender-neutral? We began to realize that not all are.”

Only one in five exporting firms is led by a female entrepreneur, the document points out, along with research from the World Bank that showed a vast number of countries do not give women the same legal rights as they do men when it comes to doing business. [....]
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/11/26/gender-chapters-in-trade-deals-could-become-standard-canadians-argue-in-nafta-negotiations.html


We certainly should make sure our soy-bean exports go 50-50 to females? Can any better illustation of incompetence be found? Probably ...
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 4 of 4

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


NAFTA negotiations set-back

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB