Trump squeezes Mexico
It's only been days since the President's north American trade agreement (USMCA) arrived for Congressional approval, yet the President feels the need to take a drastic step against Mexico. Congress has been totally unwilling to meet its obligations on enforcing border security. Mexico has done little to prevent the caravans and traffic of refugees through it's territory. Therefore the President has announced plans to place tariffs on Mexico of 5% commencing on June 10th and rising 5% every month until Mexico takes measures to end the flood of refugees & immigrants and drugs flowing over America's southern border.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 permits tariffs to be levied in the event of a national emergency originating from a foreign source.
It's stern stuff, but the President has found himself trying to secure the southern border all alone, while having federal judges fight him every step of the way.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
“We are going to do something very dramatic on the border because people are coming into our country," Trump told reporters
Got a feeling some folks are going to be throwing a hissy fit over this.
Shocker, eh?
And US consumers take it up ass once again. You realize now we all pay higher prices on top of the China tariffs, so this will squeeze wallets even more. This must be Trumps final gift to Putin to try to save his sinking ship.
Most people don't realize how this will hurt American workers-- erspeciallyin the automotive industry. And traders know it. From that linked article:
GM Stock, Ford Stock Fall
GM stock fell 1.5% and Ford stock 2% in late trade.
Why would tariffs on Mexico hurt American companies? If anything, wouldn't it seem to hurt Mexican companies-- but help American companies?
Well, here's why:
GM Stock, Ford Stock Fall
GM stock fell 1.5% and Ford stock 2% in late trade. U.S. tariffs on Mexico would affect supply chains for General Motors and Ford. Mexico is a big producer of cars, trucks and parts.
A tariff would significantly raise the cost of parts (from mexico) that are used in the production of cars in the U.S.! This would significantly raise the cost to American car manufacturers. Increased cost of American made vehicles would hurt sales-- if it continued thses American manufauturers would eventually have to lay off workers, even perhaps close a few factories.
And the American factories that depend upon imported parts can retool entire factories overnight!
Mexico is a big producer of cars, trucks and parts.
The following article is a bit more technical, but this part may help to understand the complexity of the situation:
How Much of your Car is Made in Mexico?
The Issue:
The vertical integration of automobile production across the three NAFTA countries is viewed as one of the most important international supply chains in North America and the world. Given the reliance on auto parts and labor from Canada and Mexico, an escalation of trade tensions is raising uncertainty for the U.S auto industry. While the NAFTA renegotiation has been ongoing for over a year, more recently, the U.S. Commerce Department initiated an investigation into whether imports of autos and auto parts imperil national security.
This could result in a 25 percent tariff on imported vehicles – a policy whose effects are hard to gauge accurately since obtaining a precise measure of the degree of integration in auto production in North America is challenging.
My recent research shows that commonly held views of supply chain integration in automobile production among the United States, Canada and Mexico understate the true depth of these linkages by a substantial extent. This suggests that imposing protectionist measures that disrupt the tight trade linkages in automobile production among NAFTA countries could cause greater economic disruption than what would be concluded based on traditional, lower estimates of international supply-chain integration.
There's a lot more HERE.
(P.S: These raised Tariffs on cars imported from Mexico would be so detrimental that my guess is that trump won't actually go through with it.)
We can do it my way or we can do it Trump's way. There is no actual war with Mexico doing it Trump's way!
You don't effing solve an immigration problem with fricken tariffs.
Gotta try something new, like actual "Pressure" on a country that allows it to continually occur through their own country !
Decades and Decades of Congressional ideas? hasn't fixed it.....has it ?
Some have no solutions and want to continue the same policies that got us to this point.
Absolutely brilliant!
Let's do the same ineffective crap we have always done, because it has worked so well, right?
There have been proposed solutions. Some good, some not so good. - Congress is so fractured by partisanship they can't do anything meaningful. The other party HAS to block bills or they risk alienating their base voters.
For example yesterday I heard Tim Kaine speak on the radio - A Progressive caller accused Kaine of being too far to the right to vote for in 2020 because Kaine voted on Trump favorable legislation 19% of the time. It's gotten so far past ridiculous.
A 5% tariff is NOT going to help resolve the complex issues at hand. It will only hurt the consumers that are already at risk.
Like "Speaking Softly" and carrying "NO STICK" !
That attitude wins ya a "Nobel Peace Prize".
How do you solve it?
Even when the same Ideology owns most of congress, they don't do crap. Congress has kicked this can down the road for decades and decades.
These last two years haven't newly created this problem ya know.
How does anyone know a "Tariff" on Mexico....won't work.
We do know....the Shit from the "Past" hasn't worked.
Did you know some think we have an immigration problem?
What problem?
I do know we have an illegal alien problem.
I disagree that it won't help.
If Mexico stops some of the caravans and polices its own borders better, it will reduce the number of illegal aliens coming into the country.
IF... If... Mexico may just give Trump the finger and go about it's business.
That is entirely possible.
But we already know for a fact beyond a shadow of a doubt that what we have been doing isn't working.
Unless you think it has?
No one wants to address the actual problem driving our current influx of immigrants - the brutal violence, poverty & corruption of Central America.
Let's send them more tax payer money's. That should fix it !
Maybe "Nation Rebuilding" will work ?
Are you admitting that what we have been doing isn't working?
They're illegal aliens, not "immigrants". Immigrants have legal permission to enter a foreign country.
the word "Illegal" has been Struck from the Dictionary of the "Left"....as in "Left Out" !
So do people seeking asylum.
Look up the percentage of how many of these illegal aliens actually qualify for asylum. I have no problem with those who legitimately need asylum, but better jobs doesn't cut it.
I know.
What "IS" actual Asylum ?
Hint:
"Seeking asylum means someone is asking for political protection from another country because they cannot return to their own country. An asylum-seeker must prove they faced persecution in their home country due to race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinions."
Just because you and others allowed your neighborhood to go "Trashy", isn't asylum worthy.
Our country seems to allow someone in under asylum, if they say their fart was the wrong note in their country.
Plus, they're supposed to seek asylum at the US embassy in their OWN country or in the first foreign country they enter. They're not supposed to walk thousands of miles to the US/Mexico border and THEN seek asylum.
That's the "Idea" anyway.....BUT ……….
I never denied that there were problems.
Why didn't you republicans fix it when you had years of congressional/executive control.
That's what Beto and Biden have proposed.
Same reasons Democrats didn't--it is politically popular to do it.
All Presidents and Congresses have been kicking the can down the road ever since Reagan let the Dems screw him and us.
That should be politically Unpopular.
Then you should be willing to try something different.
What we have done is not working.
If it was, we wouldn't be even discussing this.
Shall we wait for democrats or Obama judges to do something?
BECAUSE WE STILL NEEDED 60 VOTES IN THE SENATE TO PASS LEGISLATION!
Funny how they complain about Republicans, who've never had 60 Senators to work with and yet they didn't accomplish much of anything despite actually having filibuster proof control of Congress
So true. As I recall, immigration reform was a top priority for Obama during the 2008 election.
I'm sure the gop/Republicans blocked anything he tried to do regarding the issue
We try to solve problems all over the world with economic sanctions. That's all a tariff is. They can be very effective. And sometimes not.
Who are Obama judges?
In 2009 - 2010? Obama had majorities in both houses and a super majority in the Senate. He could have done anything he wanted. He wanted National Health Care.
The judges who have been obstructing Trump
Which judges would those be?
Yep ... right around the time of Fast and Furious.
Yeah and so?
"Federal district judges who preside over a portion of a single state have been able to block President Donald Trump’s actions 30 times through nationwide injunctions—far more than any other administration in history, according to the Justice Department.
The trend has prompted the Trump administration’s Justice Department to seek an end to nationwide injunctions, following a similar argument made by the Obama administration.
“The core problem, in other words, is not so much the geographic scope of the injunction, but its reach far beyond the confines of the case or controversy before the court,” Beth Williams, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy, said Monday at a forum at The Heritage Foundation.
“Injunctive relief should be no broader than necessary to provide complete relief to the party,” Williams said.
Judges on the lower federal courts issued injunctions against Trump administration policies providing extreme vetting of immigrants from countries deemed to be failed states; denying funding to sanctuary cities that won’t cooperate with federal law enforcement on immigration law; and tightening the asylum process for illegal immigrants, among other issues.
Lower courts issued these injunctions far in excess of previous administrations, according to Justice Department numbers.
Many of the lawsuits were filed in district courts that put the cases on track to be heard in the liberal U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, because, Williams added, such rulings “invites unvarnished judge-shopping.”
Congressional Democrats need to start doing their fricken jobs and provide for border security.
Their apparent solution is to just let everyone in who jumps the border.
The same could be said of the democrats.
Why don't they want secured borders
They should be issuing injunctions against this 'president'.
That doesn't make them Obama judges
The fact is that many of them ARE Obama judges. As far as national injunctions go, it is possible the SCOTUS will weigh in on it.
No one was complaining about higher prices in the liberal push for a $15 per hour minimum wage, which would have some effect on just about every American, so why worry about paying 5 or 10% more on products from Mexico?
good point
Actually the effect of a higher minimum wage (on businesses) varies.
For some businesses that are just getting by, it might hurt.
But it actually helps some other businesses.
How could that be?
well (this is a generalization, but its true in many cases) obviously the people receiving those raises, minimum wage, are at the low end of the wage scale. And many of these people don't manage their money sensibly. So when they earn more mopney, what d0 they do? Come Friday (payday) they go out and spend it!
And more spending means more profits for many American businesses!
which would have some effect on just about every American,
If McDonalds had to pay their employees more-- how would that hurt me?
(In fact, if I were a stockholder in some consumer products companyies- say, for example, Nike--- it might be great!)
Do you really believe that if McDonalds paid every worker at least $15 per hour, their prices would stay the same?
Of course they would increase costs to consumers.
You think restaurants all over wouldn't increase prices if produce rose to accommodate $15 per hour pickers?
Not just increase costs to customers; but also slash work staff to the bare bones that is needed to run each shift.
For those that still have jobs it means harder working conditions for that extra money. For those that lose their jobs; well- unemployment is low right now; but with all of the gloom and doomers constantly spouting off since Trump was elected, they must just give themselves a self fulfilling prophesy.
And who eats at McDonalds the most? It's not rich people. Minimum wage legislation is effectively a tax on the working class.
No it's not. How ludicrous
It would more likely hurt the franchisee, since McDonald's owns and operates very few stores.
So, the franchiser has to hire fewer people or provide fewer hours to make a decent profit.
Lemme take a wild guess. Um, could it be because it's Trump doing it? Yeah, that's the ticket!
Well said.
"Trump squeezes?" Really?
Yup
That's funny, ain't it?
Only if trump actually does it.
This would be so damaging to the U.S. economy that I doubt he'll go through with it....
Here's what 's happening to GM (general Motors) stock today so far.
(Sure talking about putting tariffs on Mexico may appeal to trump's hardcore "base'-- but maybe this is even more about his personal feud with GM CEO Mary Barra?
Of course its not just the American auto-makers (and their employees) who would be screwed.
You can't make Corona-- or Modelo-- in the U.S.
(Check out the Constellation Brands stock chart)
Noooo. I love Corona. My favorite beer.
The way he's going he might put a tariff on poutine if Canada doesn't stop sending hockey players to the USA.
Lol, You know that during prohibition in the US, Canada also had a partial prohibition. Canada prohibited the sale of alcoholic beverages within Canada, but it was legal to produce it & sell it outside the country. Thus Canadian manufactures made a fortune selling it directly to American organized crime during that period. That may have been one of the early examples of globalism!
Hey Vic, you know what? I never knew Canada also had a prohibition. I know there was a Temperance organization that decried the alcoholic beverages - I had to argue against them when I was able to secure the very first licence in Toronto for the sale of alcoholic beverages at a sidewalk cafe for a famous French restaurant that was a client of mine.
Seems like some people are more worried about paying a little more for their groceries than finally resolving the illegal alien immigration crisis at our southern border. Their foreign groceries are more important than child trafficking, rapes, drugs, and disease.
Some liberals apparently have no empathy...
Apparently there are people who don't know that there are local farmers markets, big and small, in almost every state ... thousands of them ... so they buy their produce from supermarkets which import products that could be bought locally. We've gotten our produce from farmers markets for years. The food is fresh, and the prices are reasonable.
Some liberals apparently have no empathy...
Such a sweeping comment kind of like conservatives have no christianity
So you think every liberal has empathy?
LOL!
And you think every conservative has empathy?
They're kind of like male CEO's - Conservatives simply put in the extra effort!
What extra effort?
You know, like actually going out to states like Wisconsin and Michigan
'Seems like some people are more worried about paying a little more for their groceries than finally resolving the illegal alien immigration crisis at our southern border. Their foreign groceries are more important than child trafficking, rapes, drugs, and disease.'
How does a tariff 'finally resolve the illegal alien immigration crisis at our southern border???????????'
He didn't say tariffs would solve the problem all by themselves.
But it might put pressure on Mexico to stop allowing caravans to traipse through their country on the way to ours, which many enter illegally.
Any sane person can look at the situation and realize that all the things we have been doing isn't working.
I never said it would be a 100% resolution, but it will make Mexico finally sit up and pay attention. Mexico was supposed to monitor its southern border to stop the flow to the USA, and as we have seen, it has not done this. Naughty children need to be punished. Simple.
Thanks for stepping in. I tried to explain in comment 7.2.2 , too.
I didn't ask you.
I know you didn't, but since you asked, I volunteered.
No charge!
Your benevolent charity has brought a tear to my eye.
This is an open forum, anyone can respond
This is another thing overpopulation is making worse
I don't like this development, but before we start pulling our hair out over it (notwithstanding those of us who shave), I'd love to hear what the president is supposed to do instead. How is he supposed to respond to over a thousand illegal aliens rushing through the border at once, as happened the other day?
I guess we're just supposed to allow anyone who wants to enter the country to do so unchecked?
If Border Patrol agents have to keep rounding these people up and then housing and feeding them, when are they supposed to patrol the border? Before you criticize, let's hear an alternative. "This should have been fixed X# of years ago" isn't an answer for today. The problem lies in front of us. The Democrats want to deny it's even happening, so they're no help.
Thanks to all those who kept it civil