From Stark
Deep in the Republican Party’s 2012 platform is a reference to China’s allegedly unfair trade practices and a promise to “impose countervailing duties” on Chinese goods entering this country, if the Chinese do not shape up.
Maybe this is a secret plan for balancing the federal budget. Even a small federal tariff on Chinese goods entering this country could probably raise a lot of money — although this would be a tax that U.S. consumers would pay.
I don’t want to encourage anyone to take party platforms too seriously, but this item hasn’t gotten much attention that I’m aware of.
I’m indebted to an old crony, Nick Hayes, for pointing it out here.
Better taxing the chinese than voting against God, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Hey John, it looks like you’re running the blog all by yer lonesome…
I wonder if that Caleb reporter feller would like a shot at helping you out; he seems to be a real likable kind of guy who wouldn’t mind anonymous comments.
Why would you think that raising tariffs on Chinese goods is secret plan, somehow hidden away in the RNC platform? It’s also a part of Believe in America: Mitt Romney’s Plan for Jobs and Economic Growth and it has been a part of the Obama Administration.
What I think is more likely part of a secret scheme is referring to the GOP plan to raise tariffs as a tax on U.S. consumers, while when President Obama and Congress have worked to raise tariff on Chinese goods over the last couple of years, the word “tax” was rarely mentioned.
Will never happen. The majority of “Chinese” exports come from factories set up by the likes of Brain.
Far as I know, these folks don’t favor being taxed.
I thought the idea, was always democratic, with a whole lot of cheap labor, their favorite type or our favorite imported type of labor, like that Canadian Softwood Lumber Duty…notice who’s houses fell in value?
http://solaroregon.org/news/wyden-asks-obama-for-dumping-duties-on-chinas-solar-panels
Love the lip service to protecting us from foreign manufacturing as we’re exporting our raw resources to Asia to facilitate cheap manufacturing of goods we import to the detriment of local/national manufacturing. The new radical is the person refusing to subsidize the exporting of our jobs. It’s really hard to do, but I’m not buying “Made in China” whenever possible. We either bring manufacturing back to this country or we’re doomed, and I’m furious at labor for siding with those who would create so few jobs here (e.g., moving our coal) for the benefit of the economy of another economic powerhouse which is going to bury us if we don’t invest in ourselves (education, innovation, production….).
Education Terry?
Like those school trust lands, in the Lake Whatcom Watershed? Granted to the State with the Organic Act of 1853. Now a school board sold off for the price of 2 new school busses?
Welcome to the 4th Corner, where the (D)unce Cap’s Supreme!
CHEAP Education….even your School Boards Made in China!
Welcome to the 4th Corner, where education funding has been explained, from the chineze in Olympia, to the chineze in the local school board’s funding model.
McCleary v. State; citing Brown v. Board of Education?
Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.
Todays School Board, left behind, and selling out their district for the price of 2 new school busses?
Vote 4th Corner politician, they missed the school bus, a voter requirement, as explained in the school trust lands case in the United States Supreme Court.
PPL MONTANA, LLC v. MONTANA CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MONTANA
No. 10–218. Argued December 7, 2011—Decided February 22, 2012
Petitioner PPL Montana, LLC (PPL), owns and operates hydroelectric facilities in Montana. Ten of its facilities are located on riverbeds underlying segments of the Missouri, Madison, and Clark Fork Riv- ers. Five hydroelectric dams on the Upper Missouri River are along the Great Falls reach, including on the three tallest waterfalls; and PPL’s two other dams on that river are in canyons on the Stubbs Ferry stretch. These, together with two dams located in steep canyons on the Madison River, are called the Missouri-Madison project. The Thompson Falls project is a facility on the Clark Fork River. Both projects are licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. PPL’s facilities have existed for many decades, some for over a centu- ry. Until recently, Montana, though aware of the projects’ existence, sought no rent for use of the riverbeds. Instead, the understanding of PPL and the United States is that PPL has paid rents to the United States. In 2003, parents of Montana schoolchildren filed a federal suit, claiming that PPL’s facilities were on riverbeds that were state owned and part of Montana’s school trust lands. The State joined the suit and, for the first time, sought rents from PPL for its use of the riverbeds..
Going to Bury US? My god DID, is obvious!
It would be an interesting concept. The government owns GMC… I heard the CEO of GMC speaking to the Chinese about how most of the cars the company makes are made in China and that he wanted to expand that so, a tax could be imposed on the good made by a U.S. government owned corporation which would raise the cost of the vehicles which would make the company less profitable which would require another call for a subsidy because, after all the government…I mean GMC, is too big to fail…
If Obama is Telling the Russians To Wait Until After Election for the deals he will be willing to make why not that he also be doing the same for the Chinese?
When Obama has as one of his main jobs advisor people like the head of GE whose company is the outsource jobs to china in chief, I’s just wonder what those unknown deals might be, don’t ya know?
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Do some research into the Trans Pacific Trade partnership.
The global corporatocracy (this includes both parties and most state and national government) is going to call all the shots; and believe me, you won’t like it.
A synonym for “tariff” is “stupid self-defeating policy.”
If the Chinese want to manipulate their currency to sell us stuff for less, then American consumers benefit and Chinese citizens suffer. The benefit to American consumers is greater than the damage done to American producers.
The imposition of a tariff is the worst remedy. it would be a short-term solution to a long-term problem, since the Chinese government cannot continue to subsidize exports in that fashion in the long term.
I had a liberal’s soul and an economics minor in undergrad school a million years ago and believed tariffs, like any interference with “free market economies” were bad. Until the ensuing 30 years demonstrated there’s no such thing as free market economies. Reality is a whole lot more complicated.
“The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit.” Milton Friedman
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Camille: I have been flying the blog solo this week and last, while yelling at Ralph’s empty chair. But Ralph alleges he will return next week.
Sounds like john was doing a good, the bad and the ugly!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
AFY, either that or telling us to eff off.
Oh wait, that’s what Ralph would say.