Please feel free to post anything in here, something you found that was made in USA, something you wish was USA. Pricing differences, etc. Anything. I virtually live my life searching out made in USA items and know that alot of things can be found and I personally find it very rewarding when you don't think you can find it and then you do.

Or the thread can be used for political trade talk also. Jobs, trade history, etc.

But I have a special photo for Bhawk...look what a trip to Target showed up today?

But yeah, sometimes buying American costs more. These were $1.49 compared to the $.75 China garlic your store had.

Mexico will not renegotiate nafta http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-37945913
And they are NOT paying for any f#cking wall.
😛

Well, yeah because they stand to lose...alot.

Thank you for that link. I take serious exception with one thing however:

The Congressional Research Service, which provides independent analysis, said in 2015: "In reality, Nafta did not cause the huge job losses feared by the critics or the large economic gains predicted by supporters." It also said: "The net overall effect of Nafta on the US economy appears to have been relatively modest, primarily because trade with Canada and Mexico accounts for a small percentage of US GDP."

Countless sources can be provided that state otherwise.

As to the wall...I always thought that Mexico would never pay for it directly and that an import tariff would in fact be the funding to build it. Trump has never said that though. The fact that he so emphatically said Mexico would pay for it and then said now "they will pay us back" is clearly a broken promise unless he somehow gets it paid for indirectly with a tariff on Mexican goods coming in.

[Edited on 1/23/2017 by nebish]

Will trump stop having his products made overseas?

He most certainly should have done that long ago.

Mexico will not renegotiate nafta http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-37945913
And they are NOT paying for any f#cking wall.
😛

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Wrong again numbnuts.

Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto said that he will visit President Trump soon along with the Canadia PM to discuss the renegotiation of NAFTA.

RIP TPP

President Trump protects U.S. businesses and workers and voids any and all TPP.
It is done.

i still withhold judgement for results.....which will take months to see

Changing trade law, a bipartisan issue! I sometimes wonder if Trump will have more Democrats or Republicans supporting him on trade renegotiation?

Sherrod Brown is not only one of my Senators, but was also a very strong supporter of Hillary Clinton in Ohio and at one time was rumored to be a VP candidate for her.

From Brown's website:

Today’s Action is Among Series of Steps Brown Outlined to Retool U.S. Trade Policy
Monday, January 23, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C. – After more than 30 years of fighting for a fair trade agenda that puts American workers first, U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) is applauding President Donald Trump’s executive order withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Brown reached out to Trump immediately following the election, offering to work with the President to renegotiate NAFTA and outlining specific steps Trump should take to fulfill his campaign promises on trade. Trump responded with a hand-written note.

“Throwing out TPP is the first necessary step in overhauling our trade policy to put American workers first,” said Brown. “I stand ready to support Ohio workers by working with the Trump Administration to renegotiate NAFTA, put American workers ahead of corporate profits, and create jobs.”

As a long-time advocate for fair trade, Brown has stood up to presidents of both parties against shortsighted trade agreements that ship U.S. jobs overseas. He led the bipartisan opposition to NAFTA in 1993 – as a freshman in the U.S. House of Representatives – and to CAFTA in 2005. He has been the leading opponent of TPP for several years and led opposition against fast-track authority in the Senate, which would have made it easier for Congress to approve TPP and other massive trade deals with limited debate.
https://www.brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/brown-applauds-executive-action-on-tpp-after-decades-fighting-for-fair-trade

There needs to be symmetry in these kinds of agreements. If Trump's style of negotiation is belligerent and his only goal is to enforce US interests, then he could force Mexico to accept conditions that impose hardship on its citizens. Trump's style of squeezing someone to get the best deal may not be in the best US interest.

Right now Mexico has turned over large amounts of land that used to be devoted to subsistence agriculture to cash cropping and these products are exported to the US and Canada. What if this land was turned back to subsistence cropping for the Mexican market and Mexican products disappeared from US stores? What would this do to the average household grocery budget? Food costs could easily increase 50% which would be devastating for low income Americans.

Mexico has also stepped up security on its southern border and this has stopped the flow of Central Americans coming to the US. The majority of illegals in the US with criminal records are Central Americans. Obama has been deporting them and Trump wants to continue deporting them. The problem is that they have not just accepted their fate and gotten jobs, mainly because there are no jobs and many don't speak Spanish. Instead they join gangs and these are very large violent gangs. If Mexico provides Central Americans an open route back to the US many of them would come back. A wall is not going to stop them from coming back to the US where the authorities would have to chase them down again. This pattern could get very expensive.

What about the drug cartels in northern Mexico? If any trade deal displaces laborers in central Mexico then more will join the labor hungry drug gangs. More labor means more tunnels and more drugs crossing the border. This will require more border surveillance and security. It will be even more difficult to control if Central Americans are employed as mules.

Renegotiating NAFTA is a lot more complicated than slapping tariffs on products and getting jobs back to the US. Destabilizing Mexico could have nightmarish consequences in the US.

There is also a big cultural divide between the Trump camp and Mexicans. Trump has figured out how to appeal to blue collar Americans but to do this he had to trash Mexicans. I really doubt Mexicans are going to treat him royally and this will piss him off and then his ego will erupt.

There needs to be symmetry in these kinds of agreements. If Trump's style of negotiation is belligerent and his only goal is to enforce US interests, then he could force Mexico to accept conditions that impose hardship on its citizens. Trump's style of squeezing someone to get the best deal may not be in the best US interest.

Right now Mexico has turned over large amounts of land that used to be devoted to subsistence agriculture to cash cropping and these products are exported to the US and Canada. What if this land was turned back to subsistence cropping for the Mexican market and Mexican products disappeared from US stores? What would this do to the average household grocery budget? Food costs could easily increase 50% which would be devastating for low income Americans.

Mexico has also stepped up security on its southern border and this has stopped the flow of Central Americans coming to the US. The majority of illegals in the US with criminal records are Central Americans. Obama has been deporting them and Trump wants to continue deporting them. The problem is that they have not just accepted their fate and gotten jobs, mainly because there are no jobs and many don't speak Spanish. Instead they join gangs and these are very large violent gangs. If Mexico provides Central Americans an open route back to the US many of them would come back. A wall is not going to stop them from coming back to the US where the authorities would have to chase them down again. This pattern could get very expensive.

What about the drug cartels in northern Mexico? If any trade deal displaces laborers in central Mexico then more will join the labor hungry drug gangs. More labor means more tunnels and more drugs crossing the border. This will require more border surveillance and security. It will be even more difficult to control if Central Americans are employed as mules.

Renegotiating NAFTA is a lot more complicated than slapping tariffs on products and getting jobs back to the US. Destabilizing Mexico could have nightmarish consequences in the US.

There is also a big cultural divide between the Trump camp and Mexicans. Trump has figured out how to appeal to blue collar Americans but to do this he had to trash Mexicans. I really doubt Mexicans are going to treat him royally and this will piss him off and then his ego will erupt.

Good points Swifty. As I said, Mexico has a lot to lose, I do have a hard time seeing what Trump could give them that would leave them with a favorable feeling on a new NAFTA. Canada on the other hand, I've read there are things that they would like modernized and updated which would favor them more in certain ways than it does now, and depending what is negotiated on the other end that might be a win-win perhaps.

I think we need to be careful when predicting both winning and losing scenarios coming out of a renegotiated or trade with Mexico involving tariffs simply because most of which we were told leading up to the passage of NAFTA has not taken root, or in fact the opposite happened. Speaking to illegal immigration, NAFTA was seen as a way to boost the economy in Mexico and stem illegal immigration flows from their country. But the opposite happened, illegal immigration from Mexico soared.

Lately, it has been my understanding that there were more Central Americans coming into our country illegally than Mexicans, certainly not stopped it. I'd be happy to read something supporting your claim that Central American illegal immigration to the US has "stopped".

Quickly I just found this from fall 2016

For the second time in three years, the U.S. Border Patrol is apprehending more non-Mexicans than Mexicans along the southwest border, reflecting a renewed surge of Central American migrants fleeing violence and gang warfare in their home countries.

And

Through August of this year, there were a total of 369,411 apprehensions on the U.S.-Mexico border. More than half of those were of non-Mexicans, the statistics show. As of July, the border patrol had apprehended 57,344 people from El Salvador, 58,337 from Guatemala and 41,042 from Honduras compared to 160,193 from Mexico.

Apprehensions of non-Mexicans first outnumbered those from Mexico in 2014, according to an analysis by the Pew Research Center. Faye Hipsman, policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C., says the trend isn’t fading.

link - https://www.texastribune.org/2016/09/15/central-american-illegal-immigration-us-border-loo/

I agree it is a very complicated issue and you raise points that many may not be considering, all things need considered. My position on the complicated nature of it is that so many US and foreign companies have invested and positioned themselves to export goods from Mexico into the US that really anything would have to be phased in because drastic shock to the system really could have a detrimental effect on both countries.

Trump's focus may just be on new investments and new production. So then any new construction of plants or expansion at existing plants would have to be done in the US or they face that border tax. That seems like a much easier issue to grapple with, although from my point of view it wouldn't be ideal, however it may satisfy some of your concerns while also balancing the needs of large companies like the auto industry and their supporting businesses.

[Edited on 1/24/2017 by nebish]

RIP TPP

President Trump protects U.S. businesses and workers and voids any and all TPP.
It is done.

You were for the TPP 18 months ago, and told us it was passed back then??? 😛

______________________________________________________________________________________

Wrong again son.
I never supported and actively posted against the TPP piece of crap.
Now of course, Hillary Clinton was all for TPP and called it "the gold standard" until she was running for President. Donald Trump campaigned against TPP and enjoyed the support of the Unions.
Hillary immediately changed her position.

Try to keep up pops.

RIP TPP

President Trump protects U.S. businesses and workers and voids any and all TPP.
It is done.

Actually Congress never ratified the treaty and thus it has never been in effect. His recent executive order was redundant and so he killed an already dead horse....Unless Congress wants to ratify it...But it's a good photo opt. for his supporters who don't understand the nuances of trade agreements and how they're ratified. I wonder if any of these folks visit this forum?

[Edited on 1/24/2017 by Chain]

[Edited on 1/24/2017 by Chain]

RIP TPP

President Trump protects U.S. businesses and workers and voids any and all TPP.
It is done.

Actually Congress never ratified the treaty and thus it has never been in effect. His recent executive order was redundant and so he killed an already dead horse....Unless Congress wants to ratify it...But it's a good photo opt. for his supporters who don't understand the nuances of trade agreements and how they're ratified. I wonder if any of these folks visit this forum?

[Edited on 1/24/2017 by Chain]

[Edited on 1/24/2017 by Chain]

______________________________________________________________________________________

Congress will never see the "treaty" now that it is dead.
The Union Leadership is very happy the TPP piece of crap is dead too:

UNION LEADERS APPLAUD PRESIDENT TRUMP During Meeting at White House (VIDEO)
Trump told the union leaders the US withdrew from TPP and they all cheered and applauded him.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/union-leaders-applaud-president-trump-meeting-white-house-video/

Union leaders and their members are even happier today:

• Two orders reviving the Keystone XL pipeline and Dakota Access piplines. He also signed three other related orders that would: expedite the environmental permitting process for infrastructure projects related to the pipelines; direct the Commerce Department to streamline the manufacturing permitting process; and give the Commerce Department 180 days to maximize the use of U.S. steel in the pipeline.

RIP TPP

President Trump protects U.S. businesses and workers and voids any and all TPP.
It is done.

You were for the TPP 18 months ago, and told us it was passed back then??? 😛

______________________________________________________________________________________

Wrong again son.
I never supported and actively posted against the TPP piece of crap.
Now of course, Hillary Clinton was all for TPP and called it "the gold standard" until she was running for President. Donald Trump campaigned against TPP and enjoyed the support of the Unions.
Hillary immediately changed her position.

Try to keep up pops.

Read your own posts, you lying imbicile 😛 http://www.allmanbrothers.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&tid=139329#pid3151418

____________________________________________________________________________________

You really are a f'n idiot.
Read my post. I was just noting that fast-track had been enabled. I did not and have never posted any support for TPP.

I see your public school education failed to teach you to read.
That is okay. The Democrats need as many idiots as they can get.

RIP TPP

President Trump protects U.S. businesses and workers and voids any and all TPP.
It is done.

You were for the TPP 18 months ago, and told us it was passed back then??? 😛

______________________________________________________________________________________

Wrong again son.
I never supported and actively posted against the TPP piece of crap.
Now of course, Hillary Clinton was all for TPP and called it "the gold standard" until she was running for President. Donald Trump campaigned against TPP and enjoyed the support of the Unions.
Hillary immediately changed her position.

Try to keep up pops.

Read your own posts, you lying imbicile 😛 http://www.allmanbrothers.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&tid=139329#pid3151418

____________________________________________________________________________________

You really are a f'n idiot.
Read my post. I was just noting that fast-track had been enabled. I did not and have never posted any support for TPP.

I see your public school education failed to teach you to read.
That is okay. The Democrats need as many idiots as they can get.

I resurrected the thread, your ignorance is on full display for all to see. 😛

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Where in that post did I express any support for the TPP?
Come on dumba$$, where?

Hopefully you reject fast track authority to the President as well.

[Edited on 1/24/2017 by nebish]

Something that I think is incredibly important that I haven't heard yet...I see the Whirlpool CEO attended yesterday's meeting at the White House.

We can tell these companies that if they outsource production here and lay off US workers, or if they invest in new production outside of our border to bring finished product in for sale, we can tell them if they do that they will face a border tax.

Here is the big BUT

We can't have those rules for US companies and not foreign companies. Home appliances made in South Korea have exploded in the last several years. We can't allow Samsung or LG to enjoy the lower overhead costs (even after shipping) of their country and come in here duty free when we are requiring our companies to stay put or else they get hit with a tariff. So if Whirlpool closed a plant here to build refrigerators in Mexico, Trump is saying they will get hit with a border tax. Yet if LG builds a refrigerator in Korea, they don't get hit with a border tax. That is incredibly unfair to the companies producing in the US and dramatically impacts their competitiveness in the market place. Hopefully more to come on this.

For anyone who doesn't think a tariff works...here's a good example.

This and subsequent dumping findings against Korea,
Taiwan, and Japan (most recently for 1986-87) resulted
in the imposition of duties on TVs imported from these
countries. Foreign efforts to rescind the duties have failed,
but duties have reportedly sometimes been avoided by
shipping TVs or components to the United States through
third countries.
https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk2/1990/9007/900710.PDF

This is still in place. So did you ever wonder why all the name brand flat panel TVs are made in Mexico? Just to be close to the market they are selling in? Yeah, part of it. Sony and Panasonic and JVC and Samsung and LG have all heavily invested in TV manufacturing plants in Mexico and they did this to avoid the tariff that they would've been subjected to if they produced said TVs in Asian countries and sold them in the US.

Companies do take action and invest accordingly in the face of a tariff or duty. I bet we can get big ticket items like appliances and getting more foreign autos made here.

I think we need to be careful when predicting both winning and losing scenarios coming out of a renegotiated or trade with Mexico involving tariffs simply because most of which we were told leading up to the passage of NAFTA has not taken root, or in fact the opposite happened. Speaking to illegal immigration, NAFTA was seen as a way to boost the economy in Mexico and stem illegal immigration flows from their country. But the opposite happened, illegal immigration from Mexico soared.

This is from Wikipedia about the time when NAFTA was introduced.

Mexico's economy experienced a severe recession as a result of the peso's devaluation and the flight to safer investments. The country's GDP declined by 6.2% over the course of 1995. Mexico's financial sector bore the brunt of the crisis as banks collapsed, revealing low-quality assets and fraudulent lending practices. Thousands of mortgages went into default as Mexican citizens struggled to keep pace with rising interest rates, resulting in widespread repossession of houses.[13][14]

In addition to declining GDP growth, Mexico experienced hyperinflation and extreme poverty skyrocketed as real wages plummeted and unemployment nearly doubled. Prices increased by 35% in 1995. Nominal wages were sustained, but real wages fell by 25-35% over the same year. Unemployment climbed to 7.4% in 1995 from its pre-crisis level of 3.9% in 1994. In the formal sector alone, over one million people lost their jobs and average real wages decreased by 13.5% throughout 1995. Overall household incomes plummeted by 30% in the same year. Mexico's extreme poverty grew to 37% in 1996 from 21% in 1994, undoing the previous ten years of successful poverty reduction initiatives. The nation's poverty levels would not begin returning to normal until 2001.[15]:10

NAFTA gave corporate America access to cheap labor. The very minimal wages were used by many migrants to fund their way to the US. How could this have ever worked in favor of American labor? The whole premise of NAFTA was daft and it had nothing to do with the migrant outcome. What happened was totally predictable. My father-in-law was CEO of a company that had two maquiladoras in Mexico. Believe me this was about making money for corporations. There may have been some rhetoric that if we throw a few pesos at the peasants they will stay home, but this objective was not part of any policy.

What will happen as a result of Trump’s tirade is also totally predictable.

On the Central America issue

I said “Mexico has also stepped up security on its southern border and this has stopped the flow of Central Americans coming to the US.”

“Mexico has a lot of chips to play,” said Jorge Castañeda, a former foreign secretary who has staked out a combative approach.

Let Mr. Trump pull the United States out of Nafta, he argues. Instead of stopping Central American migrants at its southern border, Mexico should let them through on their way to the United States. “And let’s see if his wall keeps the terrorists out, because we won’t,” Mr. Castañeda added.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/business/economy/nafta-mexico-free-trade.html

You didn’t understand the point I was making. There is no way to stop migrants but one can stop the flow. Mexico simply tried to stop the flow by reducing the number of migrants. They monitored the trains that took Central Americans north. But through graft people do get through.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/04/mexico-torture-migrants-citizens-central-america

From today’s Washington Post which reiterates my point.

Outside of the economic realm, Mexico also has plenty of cards to play in negotiations with Trump. Last year, Mexico deported nearly 150,000 migrants bound for the United States, most of them from Central America. Without this cooperation, officials predict that the number of migrants turning up at the U.S. border could double.

“He has the Central American card, which he has mentioned, and it’s a very powerful card,” former foreign minister Jorge Castañeda said of Peña Nieto.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/in-fight-with-trump-mexico-has-plenty-of-ways-to-punch-back/2017/01/28/07d57d58-e4d0-11e6-a419-eefe8eff0835_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_mexico-645pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.703ed1ec6334

NAFTA gave corporate America access to cheap labor. The very minimal wages were used by many migrants to fund their way to the US. How could this have ever worked in favor of American labor? The whole premise of NAFTA was daft and it had nothing to do with the migrant outcome. What happened was totally predictable. My father-in-law was CEO of a company that had two maquiladoras in Mexico. Believe me this was about making money for corporations. There may have been some rhetoric that if we throw a few pesos at the peasants they will stay home, but this objective was not part of any policy.

You won't find any disagreement from me here.

What will happen as a result of Trump’s tirade is also totally predictable.

Tell me what you are predicting then?

On the Central America issue

I said “Mexico has also stepped up security on its southern border and this has stopped the flow of Central Americans coming to the US.”

quote:“Mexico has a lot of chips to play,” said Jorge Castañeda, a former foreign secretary who has staked out a combative approach.

Let Mr. Trump pull the United States out of Nafta, he argues. Instead of stopping Central American migrants at its southern border, Mexico should let them through on their way to the United States. “And let’s see if his wall keeps the terrorists out, because we won’t,” Mr. Castañeda added.

> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/business/economy/nafta-mexico-free-trade.html <" target=_blank> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/business/economy/nafta-mexico-free-trade .html

You didn’t understand the point I was making. There is no way to stop migrants but one can stop the flow. Mexico simply tried to stop the flow by reducing the number of migrants. They monitored the trains that took Central Americans north. But through graft people do get through.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/04/mexico-torture-migrants-citiz ens-central-america

From today’s Washington Post which reiterates my point.

quote: Outside of the economic realm, Mexico also has plenty of cards to play in negotiations with Trump. Last year, Mexico deported nearly 150,000 migrants bound for the United States, most of them from Central America. Without this cooperation, officials predict that the number of migrants turning up at the U.S. border could double.

“He has the Central American card, which he has mentioned, and it’s a very powerful card,” former foreign minister Jorge Castañeda said of Peña Nieto.

Well, the article I linked stated that through August of 2016 there were 369,411 apprehensions and more than half were non-Mexicans (plus remember that the Chicago Tribune reported only 54% of illegals are captured). So through 8 months last year 150,000+ Central Americans were apprehended. It's certainly good for both nations that Mexico has stepped up their own illegal immigration enforcement. There is also a spike in unaccompanied children and families coming with children - 33,743 such people were apprehended first 6 months of fiscal year 2014 and 2015 combined, first six months of 2016 it was 32,117!

The numbers remain a big problem for our nation, big problem for their nation. Status quo isn't good enough. More people need apprehended, more barriers and difficulties need to confront illegals trying to come here. More people need deported once we catch them, no lenience for children or families. They adapt to what our system does or doesn't do. They come now and just say they seek asylum, they try to game the system whatever way they can.

Trump's bullsh!t is going to hurt americans, more than help them. and will probably cause a recession.

Easy to sit in the back seat and say what won't work.

I'm on record, you know what I believe and advocate. Tell us, what would you do, what do you believe?

Haven't read through all the posts so forgive me if this is a stupid question already posed and answered. Has some one pointed out yet to Trump and his supporters that a tariff on Mexican goods is actually a tax on American consumers? In other words we Americans will pay for this useless and unneeded wall should Donnie's proposed 20% tariff actually be put in place.

Has anyone mentioned this?

It is quickly becoming apparent that the division in America is now far, far beyond simple political disagreements.

The visions and understanding of what America itself is couldn't be more different, with the chasm deepening by the hour.

As if Donald Trump is the only one who has talked of a tariff this past election.

His campaign says Sanders also would impose countervailing tariffs on imports from China and Japan “until they stop dumping steel into the United States and stop manipulating their currencies.”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/03/31/bernie-sanders-pledges-rewrite-disastrous-trade-deals/82473012/

Go ahead and read some of that article if you like. Could replace the name Bernie Sanders with the name Donald Trump and the trade policy would sound much the same.

Haven't read through all the posts so forgive me if this is a stupid question already posed and answered. Has some one pointed out yet to Trump and his supporters that a tariff on Mexican goods is actually a tax on American consumers? In other words we Americans will pay for this useless and unneeded wall should Donnie's proposed 20% tariff actually be put in place.

Has anyone mentioned this?

Nobody here has mentioned it, but lots of people in tv and print media are mentioning it. And I think it is a given that any cost or tax a business pays gets passed onto the consumer...minimum wage increases, added regulatory costs...unless somebody is under the impression a business is going to accept less margin then, yes any tax, tariff or increase in overhead costs will get passed onto the consumer.

The idea is to punish the goods being produced abroad and favor the ones that are produced domestically. The revenue the government raises from the border tax or be used to fund any number of government spending programs. Help offset trade adjustment assistance education subsidies, other social program costs that unemployed workers need. It can go towards anything. US infrastructure spending projects. Indeed it could go towards a border wall, if that is what the government sees fit.

The secure fence act of 2006 is already law. If they would've built it then it would've been much cheaper.

So, do you think a trade war with mexico is good?, do you think a 20% tariff on mexican goods to pay for a useless, 25 Billion dollar border wall is a good idea?.

[Edited on 1/29/2017 by pops42]

You answered my question with two of your own. All you ever do is throw shit on the wall and criticize others. How about telling us what you believe is wrong and how you would fix it? I'm sure you have some well reasoned positions you can articulate.

The revenue the government raises from the border tax or be used to fund any number of government spending programs.

This is based on the premise that the world will always need us or want to do business with us. That might not always be the case.

Help offset trade adjustment assistance education subsidies, other social program costs that unemployed workers need.

Can you show me the current GOP that would be down with this? Are they in an alternate universe? 😉

Simple, forget the f$cking wall, and forget about getting rid of nafta [its not going to happen] its just posturing from trump. he will not deliver anything worthwhile to anybody but the super-wealthy. all he seems to worry about is how few people showed up to his inauguration. hows that?

Not the depth I was hoping for, you are entitled to your skepticism. I just do not know what you want, like if Hillary had won, what would you be hoping she did to address the trade and outsourcing problem? I assume you feel there is a problem here because you commented about TPP something to the effect "bad for most of us".

But anyway, Bhawk's post quoted below touches on some of the problems of not delivering.

quote: Help offset trade adjustment assistance education subsidies, other social program costs that unemployed workers need.

Can you show me the current GOP that would be down with this? Are they in an alternate universe?

As much as people like to paint Trump as just your regular old Republican, nothing new, same old same old - that just flatly is false when it comes to trade and favoring US labor. I mean compare his position to our least favorite Republicans from the past, Trump is in stark contrast to the GOP as we know/knew it.

So then, really I don't know who can be faithfully counted on in the Republican party to support Trump's trade agenda - early 20th century Republicans were all about tariffs and protection, but these modern day Republicans have been bought and owned by corporate and foreign interests, as too many Democrats have too.

I actually don't know how he delivers because I don't think he will get enough people in his party to support him. I had envisioned that Trump might get half of the Republicans and half of the Democrats to go along with new trade deals that put workers ahead of multinational corporations, but the more he pisses Democrats off, the less likely they will want to work with him on anything...even if it is in their interest. I don't know we are just 1 week in and Congress hasn't had a chance to conduct much business yet.

No, I can't show you the current GOP being down with it. However, say what you will about the myriad of reasons Trump won the election, this populist belief against decades of trade agreements that negatively impacted their lives and their communities and enriched foreign countries at their expense, that is a very real and tangible and provable thing. The Republicans I think have an opportunity to flip a whole segment of the voting landscape to their favor, organized labor. If Republicans can make moves closer to them, not just talking, but actually giving them something that they feel is in their interest, it is a huge political win and depending on your outlook of the nation, a win for America as well. That could be the only come to Jesus moment I think the Republicans might be having when it comes to doing trade the Trump way.

Time will tell.

As to your other point about the world needing our business? I think atleast in our lifetimes the American market and the American consumer are going to remain quite necessary for any company domestic or abroad. I guess you could say that China and India someday will be more important, and they might be. The American consumer plays a dominant role currently, let's not throw it away, let's use it to our advantage and get more of what is sold here, made here.

Not sure where I saw this, might even had been one of the threads here. After Trump had his meeting with business leaders and the union, I saw a quote from a businessman who said something to the effect that 'we build factories for 40-50 years of life - we aren't going to move factories because one party comes into power - the policies could quickly change in 4 years. We plan for the future for our company.'

So Trump can say what he want and may have some influence, but I don't see a big rush of factories coming back... just a lot of added costs to consumers.....

These are difficult issues that cant be reversed overnight but the negativity and pushback from Trump opponents to plans to shift things is nuts. I dont see why Americans should accept a porous border and a net outflow of jobs. Its a race to the bottom and we have to make changs that will benefit the American worker. If it means i have to pay 20% more for guac and tequila, so be it.

If it means i have to pay 20% more for guac and tequila, so be it.

but not health care.......lol

😛

These are difficult issues that cant be reversed overnight but the negativity and pushback from Trump opponents to plans to shift things is nuts. I dont see why Americans should accept a porous border and a net outflow of jobs. Its a race to the bottom and we have to make changs that will benefit the American worker. If it means i have to pay 20% more for guac and tequila, so be it.

It's not a porous border - but believe what you want - I'm sure that $20 billion dollar wall will solve all our problems..... you probably have to worry more about Asians taking your job than Hispanics.... funny that the mayor of Berlin is telling Trump not to build the wall.....