AFP Hosting Event – Trade War Hits Home: Tariffs’ Impact on South Dakota

27 thoughts on “AFP Hosting Event – Trade War Hits Home: Tariffs’ Impact on South Dakota”

1. and what is AFP’s solution to the trade tariffs that China and others already have on us?

   1. Take two minutes to watch Milton Friedman explain why retaliatory tariffs are a bad idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkHdq_2EUk4

      1. I will use handle free trade to talk about this discussion so you know you are speaking to same person, could you do the same and picka handle?

         I am all for free trade…BUT China imposes tariffs on us and we are taking it on the chin, because they then manipulate their currency on the back end also. You have to have HONEST players …China and others impose tariffs on us and we are not to put tariffs on them or do anything …just let them spend our money back here to benefit us?

         The analogy is more they have the gun and they are shooting in our boat and we are smiling at them as we don’t do anything

         1. So to be clear, you disagree with Milton Friedman. My question is: do you disagree with him on long-term retaliatory tariffs or only as a short-term negotiating position. There is a big difference.

            1. I agree with the President that we need to do it for a short term (preferably) to get them to remove the tariffs they have had on us for years, so we get to free trade.

               Right now it is imbalanced in their favor and AFP seemingly is criticizing us for fighting back….I want to give them the chance to tell us their solutions…

2. I am an unapologetic Free Trader. I also agree with Friedman we are better off without tariffs even if other’s do it.

   However, I do think good negotiating sometimes requires short-term pain for long-term gain. If short-term retaliation results in free trade long-term, it is a positive. For instance, if we end up with greater trade freedom with Mexico as a result of Trump threatening and then imposing tariffs, it was a good thing for Mexico and the US. Same with regard to Europe, China, etc.

   If Trump’s strategy results in less free trade in the future, he deserves to face the political consequences because it will have imposed economic consequences on average Americans. But, if it results in more free trade, he deserves the credit. Only time will tell.

   1. That’s a HUGE 3rd paragraph for Troy Jones ! You might lose your invite for a free meal !

   2. Stocks jumped on Monday as the United States and Mexico closed a new trade deal. Investors also digested reassuring comments from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.

   3. Troy, do you think it is possible that, with China now buying the majority of their soybeans from Brazil, U.S. farmers are at-risk to lose their future market share? Right now, China isn’t buying many U.S. soybeans because their price went up 25% due to a tariff. If the negotiations aren’t settled soon is there a potential that we lose that market permanently (or at least for a long while)?

      In that case, what is deemed short-term pain will end up longer than we think.

3. friedman argues for a better world but he pragmatically understood the roadblocks inherent in dealing with centrally-controlled economies, able to game a free system any way they like to. upshot: both viewpoints are right.

4. You know there is something wrong in America right now, when the Koch brothers, Bill Kristol, David Frum, and the Democratic Party are all standing in the same corner.

   #PoliticsMakesForStrangeBedfellows

   1. Bullseye, JKC ! NeverTrumper’s ALLl. And others. This blog, various term limited SD politicians, and other current and aspiring office holders. I get a kick out of the AFP offering a free meal with every function they have and then call it grassroots. Kind of like a carton of cigarettes in days gone by. Maybe that’s just their expression of free trade ?

   2. Curious, JKC: are those folks on the wrong side or right side? I would add to that side people like Ron Johnson, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Jonah Goldberg, and the WSJ. Trump and Always Trumpers (like Kelly Lieberg) are on the opposite side.

      1. Anon. If you care to be accurate, I’m not a NeverTrumper. Not to be confused with an AlwaysTrumper. But that wouldn’t serve you. Your inability to grasp the difference might be contributing to how you are misunderstanding Trump’s tariff ploy.

         1. Kelly, can you share your understanding of Trump’s tariff ploy?

            1. I’ll add a few comments. A complete explanation would break Troy’s post length record. 🙂 I’m a Friedman fan and not a Keynesian fan. Lesson of the Pencil. Less government vs more government. And with more government comes more crony opportunities. Cronies are near complete self serving entities while espousing some pap about a greater good. A theft from the truest free market expression.

               The US has built an extensive network of complicated trade deals that many have identified as not in our BEST interest. Too many insiders making out with the bulk of the population not so much. Allowing those countries to protect theirs at the cost of US not being allowed equal penetration.

               It should be noted that China holds a #1 adversarial position as opposed to a less confrontational competitive trade relationship. They both share the same upside down qualities of our trade exchanges but China has a higher strategic component.

               The US is the biggest economic gorilla on the planet. I offer no apology and am blessed to be an American. No pure free trade environment exists but the closet example is here. Fewer regulations, capital, natural resources, productivity, innovation, tax policy, burdens of the state. It is our global competitive advantage. NFL vs NCAA.

               An example of proximity, why does Canada have a multi hundred % tariff against US dairy products ? Because in a free trade environment, there wouldn’t hardly be a milk cow in Canada without those tariffs. Not because the Canadians have inferior cows or that Canadians only have three fingers ! They’re less capitalist more socialist govt is a big expense upon their competitive ability. They are financing a much bigger state overhead. One example, but this can be replicated across different markets and industries.

               Yes, this Trump tariff ploy is disruptive and domestic pain could well be felt. But the resetting of the table is the ultimate goal. Our size, scope and better than the rest market engine make for an impossibility to avoid dealing with us. That’s not so we can over leverage an unfair trade advantage, but we should get a fair exchange while having a free exchange.

               The globalist / multinationalists hold too much influence over trade at the expense of the US citizen. The likes of the UN, geographic pacts, cartels are only interested in decided exchanges, not free nor fair. Graft, extorsion, inefficiencies, protective policies are costs we all pay. And it is these intermediaries who are distorting their motives and conspiring with sympathetic storytellers.

               Decided outcomes at the expense of others.
               Uncomfortable free trade pursuit equals pushback from connected beneficiaries with great cost to the whole. Immigration reform equals pushback from connected beneficiaries with great cost to the whole. Renewable energy reduction equals pushback from connected beneficiaries with great cost to the whole. Reduced foreign aid packages equals pushback from connected beneficiaries with great cost to the whole.

               Would you prefer a dinner or a carton of Lucky’s ?

      2. They are on the “American side!” 😉

5. One of the biggest issues with the view that Trump’s actions are all part of a negotiation is that they are using SD’s economy as a bargaining chip. SD is going to take a gigantic hit in the hopes that, in the long run, we end up with a better deal.

   How long do SD producers have to sacrifice? What is going to be the impact on the budget that Noem and the new legislature are going to have to deal with next year? A $600+ million hit to the soybean market in SD translates into what kind of hit to SD’s sales tax revenue?

   Is there not a less damaging approach to negotiating with China? Have we exhausted all of our options at the WTO? If we re-enter TPP does it isolate China from its neighbors and push them to change their practices?

   1. and your solution is what?

      Of course the other side is TARGETING agriculture to have the most immediate impact and put pressure on Trump to fold..good luck with that

      1. I didn’t say I had one. I’m ASKING if there is a better way.

6. I am not worried about a long term impact of movement to Brazilian beans if the issue is resolved before another harvest. After that, it will be be an increasing problem.

7. Does AFP believe in taking it on the chin or does AFP believe it is important to not allow the USA to be taken advantage of?
   As I have posted before, I believe in free trade. However while I like free trade, I also believe fair trade is important. NAFTA is a case in point. It turns out there is a loophole in which one country can dump a product such as steel in Canada or Mexico and then those countries can sell it in the USA duty free. I believe the agreement between Mexico and the USA addresses this kind of problem.
   Also as posted previously, China is not able to withstand trade issues with the USA for a long time. China’s economy relies upon being able to sell their products overseas. If they are unable to sell their products, their companies suffer. The USA is able to consume most of what it produces. If China purchases its soybeans from other countries, then there are other countries that will buy from the USA.

8. What happened to the new deal with North Korea? Not impressed.

9. In terms of jobs, the agreement appears to be “much ado about nothing,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.
   “It won’t materially change the U.S.-Mexican trade balance or increase trade between the two countries,” Zandi said in an e-mail. “Like the trade deal with the EU, the U.S.-Mexican deal is a face-saving way to cool the brinkmanship. It doesn’t move the dial for either the U.S. or Mexican economies.” – CNBC

10. And the panel of experts are?????

    1. Paul Krugman, Nancy Pelosi, Mitt Romney, Larry Sommers, Simon Johnson, Steve Rattner, Ben White, and the Washington Post.

11. U.S. Q2 GDP Winning Revised Up To 4.2% !

    Largest U.S. pork imported removed all tariffs !

Comments are closed.