#166
|
||||
|
||||
Rnhood writes
Quote:
And Wall Street isn’t Main Street. I doubt that soy, pig, almond, etc farmer has a bunch of $ in the stock market. No 401k either. Just in, so much for negotiation. https://thehill.com/policy/finance/4...-trump-tariffs
__________________
Chisholm's Custom Wheels Qui Si Parla Campagnolo Last edited by oldpotatoe; 09-22-2018 at 07:32 AM. |
#167
|
|||
|
|||
I scanned the last few pages and didn’t see this. Apologies if duplicate post.
Trek will likely have to bump prices. https://www.jsonline.com/story/money...rs/1381287002/ |
#168
|
|||
|
|||
Trump approves tariffs on Chinese goods including $1 billion in bike products
You implied that it was their whole production that was affected. It's only straight gage spokes. Read what you initially wrote. You also said they couldn't find a US supplier. That's wrong because they are currently looking, according to the article. Last edited by MikeD; 09-22-2018 at 08:54 AM. |
#169
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
So? are prices going up? Who's paying for that? |
#170
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
“A bicycle is not a sofa” -- Dario Pegoretti |
#171
|
|||
|
|||
What's more important, you having a good paying job (or any job) or paying a little more for stuff, because that's where this is headed with respect to China, if we allow them to continue their unfair trade practices unfettered. |
#172
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Mike, The unemployment rate fell from 9.8 percent to the current 3.8 percent with millions of jobs created. I don’t see you think this is about there being any jobs or not. The Chinese trade practices fall into several categories. The “forced” transfer of IP is just a contract issue. If you have to give up IP to do business there, that is a cost-benefit question. The outright theft of IP is different, is clearly a problem, and results in less profit for US firms. The industrial policy accelerated the supplanting of US heavy (and dirty) industry, bu that sort of evolution was going to happen. It hurt here because it happened quickly and when the job market was soft. One would be naive to think there weren’t problems to be resolved, but surely you don’t believe that somehow there won’t be any jobs left in the US because of Chinese trade practices. |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
You didn't answer my question.
|
#174
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
My point with the spoke example is that implementing tariffs is picking winners and losers, with a blunt instrument with many unintended consequnces that affects jobs just as much as unfair trade practices. I agree with you fair is fair, and paying more may be a good thing to consider, but the bicycle supply chain is being caught up in an unfair way, with what I believe is hurting some American bicycle companies, benefiting others, and not addressing in any meaningful way the unfair trade practices. Take WTB for example. California based, they have a domestic business in the USA, supplying both OEM bike brands, and selling their parts to retail stores through USA distributors. Their tires and rims are all made in China. The effect of this tariff is potentially devastating. Bicycle brands that have spec'd their products will switch to a competing brand that makes tires and rims somewhere else. So Kenda, Schwalbe, Alex will likely get sales and WTB could lose a lot market share, and have an effect on the American company. Is this a good trade policy? WTB will be forced to relocate tire molds to other countries to retain their business with the bike brands, the tire business isn't coming to the US, so all this downside with no benefit to the American economy. Patrick from WTB recently wrote: "if we don’t move, we will lose market share to competitors, many of them non-U. S. companies who make tires in Taiwan, Indonesia and other countries other than China. So then we have the U.S. Trade Representative picking winners, and they are picking foreign companies, not U.S. companies. If this happens, we will lose customers, lose margin and not make a profit. If we lose money, we have less to invest in the company and less money to employ more people here." https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...s#.W6aAVNhKhE4 https://www.bicycleretailer.com/inte...d#.W6aAKthKhE4 Last edited by Grant McLean; 09-22-2018 at 12:53 PM. |
#175
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I agree this sucks. Wonder why they aren't going for an exemption? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
#176
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
There is a mismatch of process here. The enacting of the tariffs being driven by Trump is very fast with arbitary deadlines and may or may not be haphazard. The application for an exemption will be driven by a well defined process with no defined deadline for ruling which is a hard decision to reverse current US policy. Last edited by verticaldoug; 09-23-2018 at 08:08 AM. |
#177
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1KR277 |
#178
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
A lot of aluminum plants were shuttered because of high power costs and aluminum production uses a lot of power. Canada has access to cheap hydro power. The 10% tariff apparently isn't high enough for Alcoa to make it economically feasible to reopen mothballed plants. The Trump administration wants more production of steel and aluminum in the US. Maybe a NAFTA deal with Canada will cause the tariffs to be dropped. |
#179
|
|||
|
|||
On the news this morning: proposed 25% tariff on Japanese auto imports forthcoming. That should be very interesting....
__________________
“A bicycle is not a sofa” -- Dario Pegoretti |
#180
|
|||
|
|||
Japan will buckle as they can't afford the hit on their export market. I believe they have already offered to reduce the 39% tariff they currently have on agricultural products. It'll get worked out.
|
|
|