Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

recockulous-too t1_j19b9al wrote

Reply to comment by ohokayiguess1 in WTO on ‘Thin Ice’ With Metals-Tariff Ruling, US Trade Chief Says by defenestrate_urself

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