business

Asia fears trade war after Trump plans hefty steel, aluminium tariffs

20 Comments
By Jane Chung and Tom Westbrook

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2018.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

20 Comments
Login to comment

All you Trump supporters: rush out now and stock up on aluminum foil before the prices rise. You'll need lots of material for making those shiny hats you like to wear.

The Dotard doesn't seem to understand that these tariffs will hurt our trading partners such as Canada, South Korea, Brazil, Japan, Germany, Mexico etc. They are the ones that who will retaliate. As stated in the article, we only import 2% from China. So once again the Cheeto punishes and alienates our allies.

1 ( +12 / -11 )

When DT put this import trade/embargo tax on this steel and ali, does he not realise that the steel users in the USA will have to absorb or pass on these extra costs to the manufacturers of goods i.e. the car industry which intern will put up the price of the finished item, all this will do is cause inflation in the USA, mind you the price of a gun will go up as well! so not a bad thing then!

6 ( +10 / -4 )

I remember the days when the Democratic Party was the party of trade tariffs and protecting U.S. manufacturers from "predatory" foreign manufacturers....

Now we have leftist Democrats pillory Trump for enacting the very same policies that they advocated not so long ago.

Strange times we live in...

1 ( +8 / -7 )

Trade war has been going on for hundreds and even thousands of years. As long as there is greed and competition, there will be some form of positioning to take advantage and disregard "fairness" and mutual benefit. The monopolization of an industry or the supply of some raw material which denies fairness and mutual benefit can cause the other to retaliate. That is a conflict which if left uncontrolled can become labeled as a war.

When it becomes a group, a family, a clan or a nation, versus another, it can become physical taking the form of actual military war. It could probably be said that all wars are by nature for economic gains which can be gotten by control of natural and human resources based upon the territory one controls.

Capitalism recognizes that and allows for that activity while Democracy allows for a somewhat mutually agreeable and beneficial relationship, as a Republican form of government allows for some organized representation by the participants to organize and maintain such relationship. On a global scale with all factors being different, one cannot expect that a trade wars are not already happening.

The creation of EU is a good example of organizing to gain advantage of an economic advantage and gains which if left uncontrolled can indeed may become a war with other nations. As long as the process remains Democratic, open, fair and, mutually agreeable and beneficial, there may not be a war.

Here, Trump has opened the eyes to the unfairness of the relationship that exists for the US with other nations. It is not to say he will actually "force" and "act" on something which will actually cause a war, as much as to "introduce" fairness into the competitive nature of trade between nations in which each nation tries to protect and maintain their own economic wellbeing. The key is his "rhetoric" get the attention and the reactiun needed to bring about Democratic dicsussions and negotiations for a meaningful trading environment to "prevent" wars.

One must always remember, Trump is a master communicator.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Bad news for Japan in particular, which has spent the years under Abe alienating itself from its neighbours and only yesterday had sex-slave deniers shouting, "Who needs China and SK!? We can do it alone with the US!". Oops!

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

The U.S should focus on areas in which it has a comparative advantage and there are many, - the tech industry is obviously a massive one, university education, oil, defense etc. They should exploit those advantages for maximum benefit, taking into account a bunch of other factors of course, like environmental and social impacts. They should seek to invest the overall wealth generated to form new comparative advantages. Areas of industry they think they can have a good shot at with some solid investment and hard work.

Since the U.S is a free market economy and not centrally controlled like China, the job of the U.S government is more limited but still very significant, or at least it should be. They identify those industries, create industry policy, education policy, tax policy etc etc to support those industries which includes supporting it in free trade agreements. They pump taxes back into areas, like specific educational areas for example that align with the policies they created. They also, ideally, start chipping away at those other areas of advantage they think they might be able to have a decent crack at.

Every country should be doing that. It is really basic economics 101. That's how you survive under global free trade with declining tariffs and protectionism in general. That's one of the ways a country like say Germany for example actually survives and prospers, even in the age in which you have behemoths like China and the U.S around.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

A scientific tariff treaty that every participating country agrees to that sets rate to an average price that allows workers to be paid a living wage is fine, but not unilateral tariffs. No one, to my knowledge, does this though (free trade doesn't guarantee living wage either).

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Matt Hartwell:

This sounds reasonable, but it is politicians and lobbyists, not economists and scientists, that determines the winners and losers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Trump lost his marbles.

The rest of the world should just sit tight and smile as the dopey Trump tariffs will hurt Americans overall.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Perhaps "Dumping Products" is just another aspect of welfare but on an international level.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Australia- who is the pot to call the kettle black.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

These decisions by Trump are good. They can lead the way to a responsible adult being elected next time.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

 If it makes the Aussies, Koreans, and Chinese squeal, so what? They are competitors after all. your assuming that other countries wont put tariffs on goods that the US exports, EU and Canada have already stated that they will impose retaliatory tariffs of their own. It will only hurt the US consumers in the long term and destabilize world trade. Any country that imports agriculture goods from the US can easily claim food security as a national issue and impose tariffs as a result.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Australia- who is the pot to call the kettle black. hows that Australia has had a FTA with the US for years

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

We continue to seek clarification. I don’t think exports of steel and aluminum from Japan, which is a U.S. ally, damages U.S. national security in any way, and we would like to explain that to the U.S. 

Not all of US' allies are as unbelievable petty and brown-nosing.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@Bungle

Trump was elected to represent American interests, which he is doing.

The people voted for his opponent, who had distinctly different policies in this area. Trump was appointed by the electoral system. Most American voters rejected him.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The people voted for his opponent, who had distinctly different policies in this area. Trump was appointed by the electoral system. Most American voters rejected him.

It wasn’t a coups d'é·tat that brought him in. Still enough voted for him to win.

We continue to seek clarification. I don’t think exports of steel and aluminum from Japan, which is a U.S. ally, damages U.S. national security in any way, and we would like to explain that to the U.S. 

Its not about national security. What a misinterpretation of protectionism. It remains to be seen if this applies to Japan as news reported yesterday. Let’s see how good the Abe Trump relationship really is.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

At what point does this become a WTO violation? Does the WTO not have any guidelines on tariffs and trade wars?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Hey JT... just me being annoying. Sometimes "aluminum" is used and sometimes "aluminium". I know both are perfectly fine but... it'd be cool if just one was used. It's like an itch that I can't scratch when I see both used through an article inconsistently.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites