VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:53:52 03/08/02 Fri
Author: Perceptor II
Subject: I steel haven't found what I'm looking for.
In reply to: FawnDoo 's message, "Steeling ourselves for an argument" on 13:02:45 03/06/02 Wed

I have no doubt that President Bush is only imposing tariffs because he believes that the U.S. steel industry desperately needs the protection, and that he only intends for them to be temporary. This sort of economic protectionism goes against his natural inclinations, as he is a big proponent of free trade agreements. It's actually hard to be a U.S. president and not be a big proponent of free trade, because the vast majority of the time free trade is to our benefit. It also seems to go against his nature (what I've seen of it) to bail out large corporations, whether they contributed to his campaign or not. Enron made huge contributions to Mr. Bush's campaign. They asked for help in bailing themselves out of bankruptcy, and obviously didn't get it.

As for the idea that this could be disastrous for the worldwide steel industry, would the collapse of the steel industry in the world's dominant economy be any better? Elasticity is in play here. The collapse of one or two giant corporations will have negative effects on the worldwide steel industry as a whole, and negative effects on the worldwide economy as a whole. There's also the concern about the U.S. economy. All U.S. manufacturing has been in a slump since mid-2000, and if the current recovery is to be sustained manufacturing is going to have to pick up again. It is, but the collapse of our steel industry would cause manufacturing to go back into a slump, possibly dragging the rest of the economy back into negative growth. Seeing how the rest of the world is so dependent upon our economy, I don't think that would be good for the world as a whole.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.