Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Simplicci t1_j18i3f5 wrote

So after a thorough review the WTO sees the whole tariff thing exactly as was predicted by non US politicians and even US experts back when it was implemented, but now the US feels it's being treated unfair?

46

[deleted] t1_j18ga14 wrote

[deleted]

40

ohokayiguess1 t1_j18n3nk wrote

You spent 3 paragrpahs to say "US Hypocrites." Why don't you articulate the reasoning you feel they're being hypocritical in this situation and provide some analysis that backs the idea that the US is wrong in this situation?

17

recockulous-too t1_j19b9al wrote

My Opinion is I feel the US is correct, the US steel industry has been decimated by low cost imports from other areas of the world. They can’t compete. Especially in wages and energy costs. The tariffs reverse this. So imagine if all or most of the steel becomes imported and therefore shutters the US steel industry. In case of War time how long would it take to restart and train the employees needed to supply domestically if imported steel becomes scarce or blocked. This is why I think this is a national security issue.

28

Soytaco t1_j19fzyf wrote

Well they could subsidize the industry directly instead of using tariffs.

Another reason it's worth having the production here is environmental. Less shipping, probably less pollution from our production then in cheaper countries, and hopefully we'll also end up toward the front of the pack in moving to green steel.

2

recockulous-too t1_j1a28iz wrote

Yes I agree with your other reason but it wouldn’t be a National security reason.

Subsidizing the steel industry is the same as tariffs as far as the WTO is concerned. But instead of the tax payers paying for it, it would be by companies and end users of the steel and aluminum. You can say that the consumer ultimately pays the same but the main difference is that the consumer has a choice whether or not to use it without increasing national debt.

9

RoboNerdOK t1_j19c63h wrote

The US is in the right here, though I think the implementation was done poorly. It should have been a gradual increase in tariffs to allow industry time to adapt. We basically protected ourselves against shortages of critical materials by smashing the supply chain with a sledgehammer.

1

Codyfucksticks t1_j1egb5s wrote

Feel free to provide some analysis the US is in the right

0

ohokayiguess1 t1_j1eh5nd wrote

Why? I didn't make a statement alluding to that. Reading is fundamental, friend.

1

ausnee t1_j1bo39k wrote

Tankies don't ever justify their opinions, they just stir up shit and leave everyone else to argue about it.

−3

DifferenceThat8887 t1_j1cd5km wrote

This is not a 'tankie' opinion its an accurate criticism of US international political strategy.

5

ausnee t1_j1cdg85 wrote

It's a half assed take that ignores the facts or reality of the situation, just for a chance to criticize the US. Just like every single other moron tankie opinion. Join them if you want.

−4

DifferenceThat8887 t1_j1cdy4b wrote

Some the best international relations specialists, who are far from anti-American, have been making this criticism of the USA for decades.

5

ausnee t1_j1cef5m wrote

And tankies have been parroting their idiotic takes for just as long.

−5

DifferenceThat8887 t1_j1ca227 wrote

It's not just hypocritical, it completely undermines the entire concept of international law. It sends a big fat signal to countries like China that the 'rules based order' rhetoric is simply propaganda. If other states don't trust the most powerful country in the world to follow international law in good faith they sure as shit aren't going to follow it either.

What's worse is that US officials genuinely can't understand this and don't grasp that as the dominant superpower the USA's actions define the incentives that every other state responds to.

12

UniversalMomentum t1_j18ptif wrote

I think it's more like your imagination/paranoia. The US and all the other countries in the world do roughly the same shit.

Rules are just shit people said one time, they aren't decrees of justice. Just like all nations have idiotic laws that maybe once made sense but don't anymore, rules are all dynamic, laws are all dynamic. You adjust them to get the outcomes you want, not because they are divine rule.

So the real question is what's the actual global and national consensus vs what does WTO think. WTO doesn't represent a global democracy so we can't just assume they represent all that much.

Rules need to be consensus based, not tradition based, so you really need to know the consensus domestically and globally on the issue not just whine about rules being broken sometimes and not others.

7

DifferenceThat8887 t1_j1cd754 wrote

The problem is that the USA is in a position to create a situation where it would be in the interests of other powers to follow international law/rules. No other country has that ability (or ever has)

4

Logistocrate t1_j18en7d wrote

Wait...whether or not the WTO rulings were made by elected officials or not has no bearing on whether the tarrifs were legal under WTO rules. That's the best my country could come up with in rebuttal? Take that weak sauce elsewhere and remove the tarrifs.

35

defenestrate_urself OP t1_j18fht6 wrote

The lack of adjudicators in the WTO that she is complaining about is also as a result of Trump blocking their appointment to cripple the WTO functioning.

> Washington has paralyzed the WTO’s Appellate Body, which acts as a supreme court for international trade, by blocking appointments for over two years. Two of the body’s three members came to the end of their terms last week, leaving it unable to issue rulings.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-wto-idUSKBN1YM1XB

29

scottieducati t1_j1b92k4 wrote

ofc the fat orange struck his tiny fingers in that too.

6

Lolwut100494 t1_j1bbtf3 wrote

All countries support "rule based international order" until it's their asses on the line.

18

budliteasscheeks t1_j18ffcg wrote

I wouldn't listen to this word salad from Katherine Tai, simply just trying to deflect from the issue. The U.S is at fault, just accept and move on.

10

codydodd t1_j18i81e wrote

As a Canadian, the US has routinely ignores WTO rulings related to softwood lumber. Rules for thee but not for me. And yet of course the US complains when other large parties like China routinely ignore it too. I honestly think if the US had embraced rules-based order after the Cold War there would be less precedent available for today's despots to also think rules are for weak nations.

21

DifferenceThat8887 t1_j1ccg1f wrote

Precisely. The USA is a global superpower and is capable of creating a situation where it would be rational for countries like Russia and China to abide by international law. But it needs to follow it's own rules to do that.

It amazes me how hostile people are to this. There seems to be this idea that peace achieved by coordinating rational self interest is somehow illegitimate and that unless Russia and China are to willing to unilaterally compromise themselves in pursuit of peace as a moral goal (which will never happen) we should just accept inevitable war.

No doubt the Chinese etc have a similar mentality but unlike China the USA is actually capable of creating a rational peace due to its massive power advantage.

6

Startrail_wanderer t1_j1a1voz wrote

The US is a rules based international order country only when the rules are in their favour

5

Skeith86 t1_j1aaurc wrote

What is this about?

0

SuspiciousStable9649 t1_j1c915b wrote

Trump maybe kind of went overboard with the tariffs (maybe not-in-accordance-to-international-agreements) and we seem to be trying to not get in WTO hot water after the fact. We seem to be making crap arguments so there’s probably a reason we can’t just say ‘oops.’ Probability we don’t want to admit that democracy let in someone that was able to f things up so thoroughly. So we’re kind of stuck defending the mango.

1