Thread: Report: Trump planning executive action on 'unfair' product dumping

Exactly, except our prices don't reflect the subsidies. Our farm prices are based on free market regardless of the amount of subsidy they receive from the government. Farm prices are based on the commodities market. That's why our subsidies don't violate the WTO or these free trade agreements. China and other countries that own and heavily subsidize do so and then cut the price and "dump" it into our market at price levels they know our companies under our laws, WTO and free trade agreements can't compete with.

I don't understand exactly what you are saying or maybe I didn't make myself clear.

Our government subsidized corn to be exported to Mexico. I don't really see any difference. The prices of the corn sold in Mexico did reflect the subsidizes. It had to be less than the local farmers were selling for. That's what I call undercutting local farmers.

That corn sent to Mexico didn't sell for the same price there, it does here. The poor people of Mexico couldn't/wouldn't have bought it.

Also, we evidently pay Mexican farmers to not grow crops. One instance, I know of.

Our commodities are based on how much the government is willing to subsidize them, in all the many forms, Think Ethanol, think crop insurance, think the tax benefits, think school lunches, think food stamps. Also how many times they are sold or resold on the commodities market. Not a lot to do with free market. That's what keeps the price of oil up and much of our food stuff.

While traveling through an area where they raise a lot of cotton, two years in a row, I saw them plowing under acres - hundred, I could see of cotton that had not been picked.

I read, or saw don't remember which, a documentary about a cotton farmer. He said he couldn't afford NOT to grow cotton. because of all the subsidies, crop insurance, etc., by the government, he would always come out OK no matter the circumstances.

I remember Pres. Bush lobbying for money for corporations. Those corporations who remained in the US AND 'those who have moved offshore, so they can stay competitive'

Boy would I like to see something done about Chinese and other foreign imports, but unless something changes, does it matter which mob puts the squeeze on you - Chinese or our own.

Originally Posted by nntrixie

I don't understand exactly what you are saying or maybe I didn't make myself clear.

Our government subsidized corn to be exported to Mexico. I don't really see any difference. The prices of the corn sold Mexico did reflect the subsidizes.

Also, we evidently pay Mexican farmers to not grow crops. One instance, I know of.

Our commodities are based on how much the government is willing to subsidize them, in all the many forms, Think Ethanol, think crop insurance, think the tax benefits, think school lunches, think food stamps. Also how many times they are sold or resold on the commodities market. Not a lot to do with free market. That's what keeps the price of oil up and much of our food stuff.

While traveling through an area where they raise a lot of cotton, two years in a row, I saw them plowing under acres - hundred, I could see of cotton that had not been picked.

I read, or saw don't remember which, a documentary about a cotton farmer. He said he couldn't afford NOT to grow cotton. because of all the subsidies, crop insurance, etc., by the government, he would always come out OK no matter the circumstances.

I remember Pres. Bush lobbying for money for corporations. Those corporations who remained in the US AND 'those who have moved offshore, so they can stay competitive'

Boy would I like to see something done about Chinese and other foreign imports, but unless something changes, does it matter which mob puts the squeeze on you - Chinese or our own.

Really? You mean Mexico paid a different price than we paid for the same corn? Maybe NAFTA allows for that. I don't know. I know putting the Mexican corn farmers out of business was a big part of NAFTA. Why the stupid Mexicans would agree to that, I don't know. I guess the same reason stupid Americans thought "free trade is good for America". Just a bunch of stupid people being led around the corral by a ring in their nose, before economic slaughter by the Globalists.

All these "free trade agreements" need to be ripped up and thrown in the trash and the United States needs to withdraw from the WTO.

Whether something is "unfair dumping" or not is very hard to prove which is why most administrations just ignore it. But the laws are there and if it is unfair dumping in violation of a trade agreement or the WTO, the latter being the case with China since we do not have an agreement with them, then the time and effort should be spent to investigate, make the case and try to prove it to the WTO. Whether or not to pursue it is where Trump is at now. It may prove not worth the effort.

There was a timber case several years ago about unfair dumping with Canada. Too long ago to remember all the details, but I think we won that one under NAFTA. It was filed by the American timber companies. These "unfair dumping" cases are brought forward all the time by many different countries. Trump's thinking we should be more active under the WTO guidelines for those countries not covered by a trade agreement with their own dispute resolution mechanisms.

I support raising the issues whenever appropriate wherever the problem exists. You'll win some and lose some, but it puts everyone on notice, "don't mess with US", or we'll sue you. I mean that is vintage Trump. No reason for him to change now.

I support raising any issue that unfairly harms the American public.

Now, I would have preferred our government went after China for it's lumber and sheetrock that was toxic and caused many health problems for American people. I actually remember Pres Trump mentioning Chinese sheetrock and it's dangers.

I wish we had gone after toxic, dangerous, and poor quality products rather than the quantity of products.

I wish foreign imports were subject to the same health and safety rules American products are subject to.

Also, I wish all foreign food products had to be labeled as to the country of manufacture or country of origin.

I don't like picking up a package of crackers and it reads 'distributed by xyz corporation'. You have no idea where these are manufactured.

Yeah, and all those things should have been addressed by former Presidents, Congress, Courts and so forth. Trump is trying to use our laws to do just what you wish be done. They're hard cases sometimes to prove, it involves a lot of factors and complex maneuvering by the violators and dumpers. And like Trump said on the campaign trail, these international business opponents are very smart. But he's smart, too, smarter than most Presidents we've had, so they may have met their match here.

He'll do whatever he thinks he can do under executive authority to stop any and all things that are hurting our country. But it's very complicated now woven into complex WTO agreements and free trade agreements that are thousands of pages long. The politics is hard too because for every American aluminum producer who hates dumping, there are 1000 US buyers of dumped aluminum who love foreign dumped aluminum.

I hope you are right and some of these things are included in the negotiations.

Yes, me too.