Trump to sign 2 executive orders tomorrow aimed at trade deficit and tariff enforcement

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/30/trump-executive-orders-to-tackle-trade-deficit-tariff-enforcement.html

President Donald Trump is expected to sign two executive orders on Friday, which aim to fulfill key campaign promises to make trade more fair.

The first commissions a report on trade practices that contribute to the trade deficit, while the second seeks better collection of anti-dumping and countervailing duties.

Pretty milquetoast IMO. Just throwing a few bones to his supporters.

[kevindavis007]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/30/trump-executive-orders-to-tackle-trade-deficit-tariff-enforcement.html

Pretty milquetoast IMO. Just throwing a few bones to his dumb supporters.

Just what we need more commissions..

[LonestarDream]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/30/trump-executive-orders-to-tackle-trade-deficit-tariff-enforcement.html

Pretty milquetoast IMO. Just throwing a few bones to his supporters.

More winning!!

Bringing attention to and close the trade deficit = More American jobs.

[EC]

Both good steps, especially the commission. Can't fix a problem until you know how big the problem is. Unlike under the Worm, I expect this commission to actually do some work.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

More winning!!

Bringing attention to and close the trade deficit = More American jobs.

Sad that you're actually gullible enough to believe that.

[Hoodat]

Bringing attention to and close the trade deficit = More American jobs.

Uh, no.  Closing the trade deficit does not mean more American jobs. 

Expanding trade means more American jobs.  Decreasing trade means less American jobs.

Envy makes a very poor substitute for economics knowledge.

[kevindavis007]

Both good steps, especially the commission. Can't fix a problem until you know how big the problem is. Unlike under the Worm, I expect this commission to actually do some work.

In all fairness, I have seen a lot of commissions, where nothing gets done. So I'm kinda skeptical.

[kevindavis007]

More winning!!

Bringing attention to and close the trade deficit = More American jobs.

Also, it means higher prices for the consumer.


Also, there is no guarantee that the jobs will come back due to automation.

[EC]

In all fairness, I have seen a lot of commissions, where nothing gets done. So I'm kinda skeptical.

Normally, I'd be 100% in agreement. A commission is too often a handy rug to sweep crap under.

In this case though, I'm not sure that'll happen. It's something Trump knows well from business - get a team together to really look at the problem/company you're buying/law you want to skirt - and he'll expect results. He'll also expect results at business speeds, not the far more leisurely bureaucratic pace. His past (documented) experience inclines me to take his word at face value in this particular case.

I can be an optimist sometimes. 

[ABX]

Also, it means higher prices for the consumer.


Also, there is no guarantee that the jobs will come back due to automation.

There is something else we have to watch for regarding unintended consequences. Most of the discussion around trade focus only on the manufacturing segment of the economy. However, it misses two other segments, the merchant and the service segments, which are the fastest growing segments of the economy right now.

Here is an example that I'm sure most here can drive around a few blocks and see.

Next to my office is a strip-mall. In the past year, 2 women's clothing boutiques and a cell phone accessory store opened up in that strip mall. All of these are locally owned businesses, started by average, middle class people (one was started by a woman whose husband lost his job in the oil field - they cashed in their savings to start their shop).

From what I can tell, all these businesses are doing well. In chatting with the woman who started one of the clothing stores, the reason she was able to afford to start her shop is she is able to source merchandise to sell, from China (via Alibaba.com*) very cheap. She would not be able to have the margins to offer what she sells to her base nor would she have had the capital to start if she had to buy only domestic products. At that, if she bought only domestic clothing, she would have to be a high end store with a very limited client market.

If we focus only on manufacturing, we may end up putting an anchor around the necks of all of these people who are taking advantage of the current trade system to become business owners. This is business ownership that is opening up to middle class, not just the wealthy with a lot of capital to invest.





* As an addendum, here is an example. This dress is sourced wholesale from Alibaba.com for about $4, which can be resold for $40. https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Women-s-Vintage-3-4-Sleeve_60486611851.html  If someone tried to source this domestically, they would probably pay between $20-$40 wholesale- you can see how that can make start-up and inventory costs skyrocket.

[kevindavis007]

There is something else we have to watch for regarding unintended consequences. Most of the discussion around trade focus only on the manufacturing segment of the economy. However, it misses two other segments, the merchant and the service segments, which are the fastest growing segments of the economy right now.

Here is an example that I'm sure most here can drive around a few blocks and see.

Next to my office is a strip-mall. In the past year, 2 women's clothing boutiques and a cell phone accessory store opened up in that strip mall. All of these are locally owned businesses, started by average, middle class people (one was started by a woman whose husband lost his job in the oil field - they cashed in their savings to start their shop).

From what I can tell, all these businesses are doing well. In chatting with the woman who started one of the clothing stores, the reason she was able to afford to start her shop is she is able to source merchandise to sell, from China (via Alibaba.com*) very cheap. She would not be able to have the margins to offer what she sells to her base nor would she have had the capital to start if she had to buy only domestic products. At that, if she bought only domestic clothing, she would have to be a high end store with a very limited client market.

If we focus only on manufacturing, we may end up putting an anchor around the necks of all of these people who are taking advantage of the current trade system to become business owners. This is business ownership that is opening up to middle class, not just the wealthy with a lot of capital to invest.





* As an addendum, here is an example. This dress is sourced wholesale from Alibaba.com for about $4, which can be resold for $40. https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Women-s-Vintage-3-4-Sleeve_60486611851.html  If someone tried to source this domestically, they would probably pay between $20-$40 wholesale- you can see how that can make start-up and inventory costs skyrocket.

The economy is much more different today than it was in the 1950's let alone the 1980's.