Biden promises Pittsburgh workers tariffs on China will protect union jobs
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
PITTSBURGH — President Joe Biden assured steel union members in Pennsylvania on Wednesday of his unwavering support, announcing increased tariffs and protections for domestic manufacturing in the lead-up to the swing state's primary for the 2024 election season.
"The backbone of America has a steel spine," Biden said. "We're investing in American workers again."
Biden stopped in Pittsburgh to speak to an invitation-only crowd at the United Steelworkers headquarters downtown, calling on U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai to triple existing tariffs on steel and aluminum from China.
"The Chinese government has poured state money into Chinese steel companies, pushing them to make so much steel as possible, subsidized by the Chinese government," Biden said. "They're not competing. They're cheap. They're cheap, and we've seen the damage here in America."
Biden also said his administration would begin investigating Chinese anti-competitive practices in the shipbuilding industry.
"Taken together, these are strategic and targeted actions to protect American workers and ensure fair competition," Biden said.
Speakers at the event highlighted the contrast between former President Donald Trump's international trade policy, raising tariffs as competition intensified between the U.S. and China.
Biden said that Trump and MAGA Republicans in Congress want to increase tariffs on "all imports from all countries that could badly hurt American consumers."
Trump has proposed potentially raising tariffs across the board by as much as 10%, which is estimated to shrink the economy by 1.1% and threaten more than 825,000 U.S. jobs if trade partners were to retaliate.
"Trump simply doesn't get it," Biden said.
Domestic union jobs
Democratic and union leaders from Western Pennsylvania who introduced the president stressed his union connections.
"We have the most pro-labor president of all time in the most pro-labor city in America," Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Gainey said. "We are a union town and never forget it."
"He is the first president in modern history to stand on a picket line," Allegheny County Executive Sara Innamorato said, referencing his participation in the autoworkers strike last September.
"President Biden is delivering for American workers," USW International President David McCall said at the event. "Previous administrations have promised to deliver on infrastructure, but President Biden made it happen."
"It's not labor," Biden said. "It's unions."
US steel industry shifting in the background
Biden's stop at the USW comes amid the backdrop of the future acquisition of U.S. Steel by Japanese firm Nippon Steel.
The president briefly referenced the merger, saying he stands by the union against the merger.
"You're still an iconic American company, for more than a century, and it should remain in America," Biden said. "Union steelworkers are the best in the world, and that's going to happen. I promise you can still work as long as they have fair competition."
The USW union, which represents over 850,000 workers in the steel industry, has strongly opposed the measure because the foreign acquisition is likely to not only undermine union priorities but also threaten national security.
"Allowing one of our nation's largest steel manufacturers to be purchased by a foreign-owned corporation leaves us vulnerable when it comes to meeting both our defense and critical infrastructure needs," McCall said in a press release after the merger was announced in March.
Last week, the shareholders for U.S. Steel overwhelmingly granted their support for the acquisition, with 71% of shareholding voters supporting the move.
"This transaction truly represents the best path forward for all of U.S. Steel's stakeholders - union and non-union employees, customers, communities and stockholders - and for the United States and our home in Pennsylvania," company President and CEO David B. Burritt said in a statement following the vote.
Burritt added in his statement that the merger will enable the company to keep "all of the obligations under the agreements in place with our unions."
Hmmmm?
Sounds alot like you didn't build this....
Did Biden support Trump's tariffs on Chinese steel?
The current tariff on Chinese steel and aluminum is 7.5%, which (I believe) were put in place by Trump. As far as I can tell all the Trump tariffs are still in place except something about tariffs for airplanes being frozen for 5 years and tariffs for washing machines being expired.
Didn't Biden just triple the tariff on Chinese steel? He is keeping or increasing the tariffs of Chinese goods in order to make it much more difficult for common American people to survive financially and if they don't see that the common people are even stupider than ever.
IMO Biden would s**k c***s if it would get him the votes he needs for re-election. I feel really sorry for American voters this time around - they're not going to be voting for the best man to win, they're going to have to vote for the least worst to win.
I agree. It is sad that so many people aren't willing to vote for competency.
There are a few of us who will, but admittingly the number is too small to have much effect on the election.
The fact still remains that either Trump or Biden will be the next PotUS. You can vote for "competency" but it will have no effect on who is PotUS in 2024.
And it very likely will have no effect at all given the Libertarian party (one of the most senior of the potentially viable third parties) is now over 50 years old and has yet to make any real headway across the board and none whatsoever regarding the presidency. While it would be great to have a third or fourth viable party to break free of the D-R dichotomy, history has shown that merely casting votes at election time accomplishes nothing.
To get a viable third party we need a grassroots effort that starts well before the election, establishes a strong, competent political machine, secures major league funding, and —crucially— has a charismatic leader that will inspire people to break free of the D-R habit.
In 2024, who is this competent third-party candidate you imply exists?
Stating the obvious yet once again. And to think we will have people willing to vote for a traitor to thank for that.
There are a few of us who will, but admittingly the number is too small to have much effect on the election.
And my comment argued why the number will be too small and why voting third party (or not voting at all) cannot possibly have an effect in 2024.
Who is the competent third-party candidate you imply exists?
And?
Who besides you said anything about a third party candidate?
Where did I imply such a thing?
Maybe just reading and understanding my post without looking for hidden "implications" would behoove you. Or at least stop you from making erroneous assumptions about what I didn't write.
And since you insist on asking yet AGAIN the same old questions, please give me 3 good reasons why I would be compelled to answer yet once again since you have shown no memory of the other times I have answered the same old questions. I see no point in giving you yet another answer to ignore or forget.
Are you going to vote for a "competent" person for the presidency or not? If you are, then you are either going to write in a non-candidate (which of course is utterly pointless) or you are voting for an actual candidate. And I even noted the possibility of abstaining, which is just as effective.
So, who is this "competent" candidate?
As I have often and repeatedly said on this forum, I will be voting for someone who I believe can do a good job. Are YOU voting for a 'competent' person?
Feel free to look up the answer in my comment history. Since you just asked, and I responded thusly:
you just keep proving what I said is 100% true.
All these words rather than simply answer the operative question: who is this "competent" candidate?
Since you refuse to simply answer Nikki Haley, I will assume that is what you would answer if forthright. No doubt you refuse because you know that she is not a candidate.
Nikki Haley is not running for the presidency; she is no longer a candidate. Voting for her as a write-in accomplishes nothing (see my opening argument).
Seems to me (since you refuse to clear this up), there is no "competent" candidate for people to vote for in 2024; especially one who has even the slightest hope of winning the presidency. That is reality. We have Biden or Trump. If you want to make a difference, pick one. If not, your vote will have no effect. I think most voters know this reality and will deal with it, so your criticism of people not voting for "competent" candidates is irrational.
Why the incessant repeating of the same things?
Nope, you don't get to play that game with me. How in good conscience can you make the false claim that I have refused to answer when it is clear you know what my answer is since you have asked it many times and been answered many times? I refuse to answer the same old question you have incessantly and compulsively asked time and time again, then have you pretend I didn't answer you.
Yet more of the same old tired, lame tactics.
Not interested in the least.
You started up with your tired complaint about voting for a presidential candidate who is not competent. When you keep trying to make the same complaint, expect to get the same challenge.
Especially if there is no "competent" candidate who has a chance at winning the presidency.
It is absurd to keep making the same complaint only to demure from every challenge to same.
Perhaps "Not interested in the least" holds a different meaning for one of us.
Actually, I think the perception of competency is going to have the biggest effect on who is PotUS in 2024.
Not sure about that.
Millions will merely vote for whichever of the 2 major candidates they consider the lesser of two evils.
Not based on any shred of competence, unfortunately for America.
It is rather unreasonable to expect good results with such a criteria for voting.
Given we have a choice between Trump and Biden and both are way past their prime and should not be running for the presidency, the perception of competency could be very important. At least for those whose perception shows a significant difference.
For me, the most important factor is responsibility and intent. One should always want a PotUS who is trying to do what is best for the people and the nation. That should be the primary consideration.
To drive the point home, we do not want a PotUS who competently abuses the powers of the office. We want a PotUS who holds true to his oath of office and has good intent for the people and the nation. A PotUS has a cabinet and plenty of advisors and support staff to help him do what is right for the people and the nation. If that is his intent, he has a good chance to act accordingly.
When dealt with a choice between bad and worse, responsible adults deal with reality and act to minimize the damage.
Responsible adults don't vote for people they know aren't capable.
Agreed. And you think that's Biden?
See this is why I am challenging you. You are deeming everyone voting for Trump or Biden to be irresponsible.
You claim that you will not decide which of the only two possible choices will be PotUS and thus leave this task to the rest of us. Fine. Sit it out if you cannot figure out which is worse for the nation. But to call those of us stepping up to the plate and dealing with this crap irresponsible is both uncalled for and irrational.
No, he voting with personal integrity.
If you, George, vote for Trump or Biden, do you consider yourself NOT acting as a responsible adult?
It’s like giving a toddler or a 5 year old a loaded gun, just because one is better than the other, both are irresponsible to do.
In your analogy there must be some condition that requires that the loaded gun be given to one of them. Your analogy is not very good.
Trump or Biden will be given the presidency. That fact cannot be ignored.
Why did you refuse to answer my direct question?
I answered your question, you just failed to accept it. Now we are done.
Exactly...
That means, if you (George) decide to use your vote to determine which of the two (Trump or Biden) will be the next PotUS (or, alternatively, will NOT be the next PotUS) would you consider yourself to NOT be acting as a responsible adult?
There are plenty of individuals on this site who have stated they will vote for Trump or Biden. Is using their vote to help determine who become president an irresponsible, non-adult act?
That is rather funny!
And you, sir, are making stuff up out of thin air.
I challenge YOU to quote me on that.
Yet more fantasy from you. Please, for the love of God, STOP MAKING UP STUFF.
Either quote me or cease with the games.
I have told you many times now that I will be voting. Pretending I have claimed to "sitting it out" or telling me I am when you know better is just another childish game. Play that game with someone else,
Well, once AGAIN (sigh!) you have made something up.
Ridiculous nonsense.
Maybe it is too difficult a task for all to recognize that.
Correct.
I feel if one willingly votes for Biden or Trump but don't believe he is the best person for the job, then they are irresponsible.
Now, if someone actually made a case FOR one of the two losers instead of falling back on "voting for the lesser of two evils", I can respect that. At least that is honest. And a whole hell of a lot better than sticking us with shit.