• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Charles Koch: Corporations need to 'reject' Trump's tariffs

Donc

Donc

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
9,796
Reaction score
2,590
Location
out yonder
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Looks like Charles Koch just gave the Republican party permission to strap on a set of balls.:2wave:

<Republican donor Charles Koch slammed President Trump's announced tariffs on steel and aluminum and encouraged corporate leaders to reject the plan in an op-ed on Wednesday. >

<"One might assume that, as the head of Koch Industries — a large company involved in many industries, including steel — I would applaud such import tariffs because they would be to our immediate and financial benefit. But corporate leaders must reject this type of short-term thinking, and we have," Koch wrote in The Washington Post.
Koch went on to describe the "harmful effect" he said the tariffs would have, saying consumers will be hurt the most by the restrictions. Koch is a free market libertarian who did not contribute to Trump's campaign despite his history as a major Republican donor. He is the latest businessman to speak out against Trump's plan to slap a 25 percent tariff on imported steel and a 10 percent tariff on imported aluminum.>


<Republicans have not lined up behind Trump's announced tariffs either.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on Tuesday he has "genuine concern" the tariffs could lead to a trade war.
"I think the best way to characterize where most Republican senators are right now, including myself, is genuine concern that this not escalate into something much broader," McConnell said. >


<Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has also voiced concerns over the tariffs, with his office issuing a statement saying Ryan was “extremely worried about the consequences of a trade war” triggered by the tariffs.>


<The European Union has said it will consider slapping its own tariffs on major U.S. imports such as bourbon and Harley-Davidson motorcycles, which could have major impacts on McConnell's and Ryan's home states. >


<However, Trump has maintained that tariffs will help the U.S., which he said has been on the losing side of trade.>


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/377317-charles-koch-corporations-need-to-reject-trumps-tariffs


 
Kind of a no-brainer that Koch would righteously oppose the moronic Trump tariffs.
 
Reformedfindlay said:
Kind of a no-brainer that Koch would righteously oppose the moronic Trump tariffs.
Click to expand...

IMO tariffs are too little,late. Tariffs Shoulda been at least ten years ago.:2wave:
 
Donc said:
IMO tariffs are too little,late. Tariffs Shoulda been at least ten years ago.:2wave:
Click to expand...

Tariffs should have been never. And what do you mean 10 years ago? You mean like the 2003 Bush steel tariffs which ****ed us more than it helped us?
 
Reformedfindlay

Tariffs should have been never. And what do you mean 10 years ago?
Click to expand...

Take NOTE of the qualifier word I put in my post.It is too late for tariffs BUTT THAT is not why Trump is screeching about tariffs now...he is attempting to distract from the Marine on a mission AKA Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller. :2wave:

You mean like the 2003 Bush steel tariffs which ****ed us more than it helped us?
Click to expand...

NO!
 
Reformedfindlay said:
Kind of a no-brainer that Koch would righteously oppose the moronic Trump tariffs.
Click to expand...

Saying they are moronic, while not explaining why.... par for the course I guess.

Then again most of the people on here don't even know that these are not the only tariffs being rolled out... so I am not surprised.
 
Donc said:
Take NOTE of the qualifier word I put in my post.It is too late for tariffs BUTT THAT is not why Trump is screeching about tariffs now...he is attempting to distract from the Marine on a mission AKA Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller. :2wave:



NO!
Click to expand...

I would be more worried about this whole investigation issue, if it actually had the power to touch Trump.
 
I've lost the link, but (as I recall it) approximately 15% of American "job loss" has been due to "outsourcing" and the remaining 85% has been due to improvements in efficiency and increasing automation.

Not only that, but that 15% "job loss" has been positively dwarfed by the expansion of the total US labour market.

On the other hand, Mr. Trump's incredibly generous "sortaoffer" to Canada and Mexico that he would "sortaconsider" magnanimously "possimaybe" give them a 30 day "exemption" from (the full weight of [after all 24.999999999% IS less than 25%]) the tariffs PROVIDED that they "relaxed and enjoyed it" is going to be greeted with the hosannas and shouts of "Long Live America" that it deserves in those countries.
 
Oborosen said:
Saying they are moronic, while not explaining why.... par for the course I guess.

Then again most of the people on here don't even know that these are not the only tariffs being rolled out... so I am not surprised.
Click to expand...

Oh I've argued this ad naseum in other threads, but if you're so inclined, I can reiterate myself for the who-the-hell-knows time.

Granted, the thread is focused on Koch's rejection of the tariffs, there are other more specialized threads focused on the tariffs themselves.
 
Oborosen said:
Saying they are moronic, while not explaining why.... par for the course I guess.

Then again most of the people on here don't even know that these are not the only tariffs being rolled out... so I am not surprised.
Click to expand...

You want a little explaining? Here:
Trump seems unconcerned, for now. But it’s worth pointing out that the stock market is flat for the year, which is pretty unusual given that the tax cuts are expected to generate record corporate profits. Markets are adjusting to the possibility of slightly higher inflation, and most forecasters still think stocks will end handsomely higher in 2018. But that confidence dims with every tweet and utterance from the White House indicating Trump’s fondness for tariffs and his belief that “trade wars are good.”

Many forecasters—including Moody’s Analytics, Oxford Economics, Citibank and Macroeconomic Advisers—predicted the economy would quake, and stocks fall, if Trump won. But those analyses were based on Trump doing what he said he was going to do, which Trump hasn’t, so far. As a reminder, while campaigning, Trump said he’d imposed tariffs of 45% on all imports from China and 35% on imports from Mexico. Trump hasn’t done either of those things, so far, but he’s now testing the waters on tariffs for the first time, with his proposed steel and aluminum duties. Trump also said he’d revamp the North American Free Trade Agreement, or withdraw from it completely (work in progress, outcome unknown). And he vowed to kick 11 million undocumented immigrants out of the country and reduce the number of legal immigrants (also works in progress).

When economists tried to estimate how those policies, if enacted, would affect the economy, the outlook was gloomy. Moody’s Analytics found that the economy would enter a recession starting in 2019 and lose 2.8 million jobs that year alone. Oxford Economics predicted Trump’s plan would cost the economy 4 million jobs and slash $1 trillion in economic output. Citibank said a Trump victory would induce a global recession.

None of that carnage has occurred. But the main reason it hasn’t is that Trump has only done things that stimulate the economy, so far. He hasn’t done things he called for while campaigning that are likely to depress the economy—until now.

The nonprofit group Trade Partnership analyzed Trump’s metal tariffs and found they’d generate 33,000 new jobs in steel and aluminum, but kill 179,000 jobs in other industries, because of the higher prices manufacturers buying those metals would have to pay. So a net loss of 146,000 jobs, just from two tariffs. That doesn’t include any ramifications of retaliatory tariffs by trading partners.

Does Trump want to institute two tariffs just to check off a campaign promise? Just to keep faith with deplorables who expect him to sucker-punch the globalists? Maybe. It’s possible Trump will get his tariffs, downplay the damage when partners retaliate, declare victory and call it a day. Trump could also impose the tariffs but then announce exemptions for a variety of trading partners, diluting the damage. If there isn’t much bite to accompany the bark, markets will quiver but probably recover, and 2018 might end nicely.
Click to expand...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-doomsayers-might-turn-right-142123574.html

The tariffs will only benefit a few, and Trump, as usual, hasn't a clue.

Hopefully someone scares him out of this nonsense. About the only thing that idiot and the repub gov. have done so far that helps me is overheating the markets. That came crashing down lately, mostly because 1) they applied too much heat, 2) Trump's yap keeps opening.
 
Charles Koch said:
When large companies can pressure politicians to force everyday Americans to fork over unearned millions, we should all question the fairness of the system.
Click to expand...
That, ladies and gentlemen, is what we call irony.
 
Reformedfindlay said:
Oh I've argued this ad naseum in other threads, but if you're so inclined, I can reiterate myself for the who-the-hell-knows time.

Granted, the thread is focused on Koch's rejection of the tariffs, there are other more specialized threads focused on the tariffs themselves.
Click to expand...

If you didn't want to, nor bother to reiterate once again. Then why did you even post, without either explaining or posting a link to a prior explanation?

This is the kind of thing that quickly bogs these threads down.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
You want a little explaining? Here:


https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-doomsayers-might-turn-right-142123574.html

The tariffs will only benefit a few, and Trump, as usual, hasn't a clue.

Hopefully someone scares him out of this nonsense. About the only thing that idiot and the repub gov. have done so far that helps me is overheating the markets. That came crashing down lately, mostly because 1) they applied too much heat, 2) Trump's yap keeps opening.
Click to expand...

Fear mongering, extremely biased and finally, doesn't even supply workable data.
He links to two sources for his information. The first and most troubling one being CNN and the other being Bloomberg.

CNN for one, who we all know has it out for Trump and rarely shows their work. When they do however it almost always destroys their own narrative and forces them to back peddle. The Bloomberg model on the other hand only shows projections, but I cannot find the data that they are using to make these projections. Even though it is Bloomberg doing this, the most I can account this for is that its guess work and even coming from them. That still means they are guessing.

The other citation (without a link I might add) is a non profit called Trade Partnership.
Which after a short search for that group, which turned up nothing. I had to widen my range for the search and easily came up with this group.
Data and Data Analysis | TRADE PARTNERSHIP WORLDWIDE, LLC

Who actually supply a handy PDF if you would like to download it and it boils down to the same thing.

This is an estimation, not a fact.
We have a journalist (one of many) lacking more then the required amount of integrity to actually be fully fourth coming with his research. At least when Alex Jones and his people made that whole gay frog comment, they actually supplied the scientific research that helped them come to that conclusion.

I have nothing against Rick Newman (the author of this article)
But his lack of diligence is starting to reflect poorly on his career.
 
Oborosen said:
Fear mongering, extremely biased and finally, doesn't even supply workable data.
He links to two sources for his information. The first and most troubling one being CNN and the other being Bloomberg.

CNN for one, who we all know has it out for Trump and rarely shows their work. When they do however it almost always destroys their own narrative and forces them to back peddle. The Bloomberg model on the other hand only shows projections, but I cannot find the data that they are using to make these projections. Even though it is Bloomberg doing this, the most I can account this for is that its guess work and even coming from them. That still means they are guessing.

The other citation (without a link I might add) is a non profit called Trade Partnership.
Which after a short search for that group, which turned up nothing. I had to widen my range for the search and easily came up with this group.
Data and Data Analysis | TRADE PARTNERSHIP WORLDWIDE, LLC

Who actually supply a handy PDF if you would like to download it and it boils down to the same thing.

This is an estimation, not a fact.
We have a journalist (one of many) lacking more then the required amount of integrity to actually be fully fourth coming with his research. At least when Alex Jones and his people made that whole gay frog comment, they actually supplied the scientific research that helped them come to that conclusion.

I have nothing against Rick Newman (the author of this article)
But his lack of diligence is starting to reflect poorly on his career.
Click to expand...

It's all estimations at this time. That goes without saying. The economy is a complicated beast, and reducing it to a simple equation we can solve is impossible. Therefore everything you'll see now is speculation and opinion. This another from the one I linked:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/econ...isks-ending-economic-expansion-162159427.html

Do you have an opinion piece or economic analysis that you think argues well for these tariffs? Post it.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
It's all estimations at this time. That goes without saying. The economy is a complicated beast, and reducing it to a simple equation we can solve is impossible. Therefore everything you'll see now is speculation and opinion. This another from the one I linked:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/econ...isks-ending-economic-expansion-162159427.html

Do you have an opinion piece or economic analysis that you think argues well for these tariffs? Post it.
Click to expand...

No, I don't have anything to argue on the tariffs or for the tariffs. Because I haven't really cared for the issue, other then getting for the kneejerk reactions from the rest of the resistance.

This article is nothing but the usual. He is trying to sell all of this as fact, when he himself doesn't even have the answer and even his sources are at the very least questionable. CNN, especially so.

If he could have done the article, without the fear mongering and the attacks at both Trump's and his supporters expense. I would be more readily willing to listen to him and even then I would still come to this conclusion.

This is just more of the same, from journalist who lack that portion of integrity required to do their job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom