Buy American!

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090202/pl_afp/uspoliticseconomytrademcconnell

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The US Senate should strip a "Buy American" clause from President Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan, the chamber's top Republican said Monday amid anger at the restriction from US allies.

"I don't think we ought to use a measure that is supposed to be timely, temporary, and targeted to set off trade wars when the entire world is experiencing a downturn in the economy," said Senator Mitch McConnell.

Asked whether he would support trying to strip the measure from what is now roughly an 888-billion-dollar economic stimulus package, the Republican minority leader told reporters: "I think it's a bad idea to put it in a bill like this, which is supposed to be about jump starting the economy, yes."

The House of Representatives last week voted to require that public works projects funded by its 819-billion-dollar stimulus bill to use only US iron and steel. The Senate version extends that restriction to all manufactured goods.

Ridiculous to force public works projects financed by this "stimulus" bill to require all american goods. That's the way to mend our relations with foreign countries.....

 

[¹²³]

Barack Obama to dilute 'Buy American' plan after Europe threatens US with trade war

Barack Obama is expected to water down "Buy American" plans in his economic stimulus package after European diplomats privately threatened to launch a trade war in retaliation.

The White House has promised to review the protectionist proposals, passed last week by Democratic allies in the House of Representatives, which would ban the use of non-American steel in the $800 billion of construction projects.

Obama officials are under pressure from what European diplomats in Washington describe as a discreet but outspoken campaign of "quiet fury" from America's closest allies.

They regard the move as a provocative shift away from free trade and towards economic populism at a time of turmoil.

 

[hasoos]

You never know what is going to show up in bills when Senators trying to protect their states get to writing bills. I think I have about seen it all, from trying to stop naval bases from being dismantled to wheat crops being subsidized. Most of the time, the provision is riding piggy back on some bill that needs to be passed for reasons which are more important.

 

[Minstrel]

I'm against protectionism, but I can see it being a bit of a political nightmare to tab $800 billion of taxpayer money for "stimulus" and then send a great deal out of the country. Whether that's actually a bad thing economically I don't know, but the so-called "optics" of it are bad.

One solution might be to make trade agreements with other nations. The US will continue to buy from them, using the stimulus money, and those nations do some reciprocal buying. That way, money is injected into all the markets.

 

[hasoos]

I'm against protectionism, but I can see it being a bit of a political nightmare to tab $800 billion of taxpayer money for "stimulus" and then send a great deal out of the country. Whether that's actually a bad thing economically I don't know, but the so-called "optics" of it are bad.

One solution might be to make trade agreements with other nations. The US will continue to buy from them, using the stimulus money, and those nations do some reciprocal buying. That way, money is injected into all the markets.

Definitly. The other thing I would point out, is that it is also not necessarily all bad. For instance, say we do buy our steel from somewhere else, cheaper. Maybe now we can complete more infrastructure projects because we are getting our steel cheaper, and because of more infrastructure being improved, seed more businesses. Look at the big picture, not the immediate area.

 

[speeds]

The US's biggest trade partner isn't too thrilled with the idea either.

"We are reminding the Americans that they have legal obligations under NAFTA, under WTO," said International Trade Minister Stockwell Day."History shows clearly that you can't fall back into protectionist measures. That happened in the 1930s and what could have been a bad one- or two-year recession turned into, as we know, the Great Depression. So we want to curtail that."

 

[mook]

Definitly. The other thing I would point out, is that it is also not necessarily all bad. For instance, say we do buy our steel from somewhere else, cheaper. Maybe now we can complete more infrastructure projects because we are getting our steel cheaper, and because of more infrastructure being improved, seed more businesses. Look at the big picture, not the immediate area.

True enough. Problem is there isn't a vocal constituency for the big picture. But there is one for steel trade barriers.

I'm really surprised some of the Dems thought this would fly. Didn't Dubya try steel tariffs a few years ago and it wound up blowing up on him?

 

[maxiep]

Why is anyone surprised? The Obama Administration has shown themselves serious about pulling this country dramatically toward Socialism. Part and parcel of that is to be protectionist. After all, if you're going to expand the Government, you need taxpayers to help fund it. And given that this Administration is in bed with unions, you can bet they want those jobs to stay in American, costs and efficiency be damned.

 

[hasoos]

True enough. Problem is there isn't a vocal constituency for the big picture. But there is one for steel trade barriers.

I'm really surprised some of the Dems thought this would fly. Didn't Dubya try steel tariffs a few years ago and it wound up blowing up on him?

I can't remember if it was Tarrifs, or demands that the countries exporting the cheap steel were not allowing US steel in to compete. I know that there was a big deal because some of the countries competing with our steel companies kind of took part in unfair business practices. For instance if you are getting Steel from communist countries that don't pay their workers jack squat, its very hard to compete.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I do some importing of steel and welding products; over the last couple of years Chinese and Indian raw products (I never really looked into the Brazilian market due to shipping costs) have gone up about 140%. Big chain stores can absorb that while keeping modest price increases...for a little man it's tougher to compete on price. Brainpower has to overcome it.

Which may be why we're struggling

 

[hasoos]

You know what is one point I find is interesting is the fact that most of our products are produced using energy, which comes from our electrical grid. If we can get to the point where we get our electrical from cheap, renewable soureces, we may be able to close that gap. The key is putting it in place, and taking the lead by giving ourselves an unfair advantage to exploit until other countries pull their crap together.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I'm generally with you, though it seems that infrastructure development has been the slowest part of our country's evolution.

We're way behind on trains, mass transportation, ATC grid, energy grids, cable, fiber-optics, etc. It's not like we don't have smart people, it's that (IMO) we don't have smart politicians or people visionary enough to see that projects need to be started.

For instance...MAX in Portland vs. the garbage up here in Seattle. I love MAX, and didn't need a car when I was living down there for almost a year. With a bike and a metro pass, you were golden...even on MAX.

Up here, they're spending billions widening freeways to reduce traffic when no one realizes traffic occurs from people rubbernecking, not from traffic volume (or lack thereof). The first mass transit project they started was to run a line from downtown to the airport. Not a major commuter line like Seattle to Bellevue or Seattle-Tacoma....one from the stadium to the airport. What the heck?!?!

And in 4 years when they shut it down due to lack of use, it'll be years before anyone can get another mass transit project on the ballot b/c they can say "we tried it and it didn't work, costing taxpayers money"

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

You know what is one point I find is interesting is the fact that most of our products are produced using energy, which comes from our electrical grid. If we can get to the point where we get our electrical from cheap, renewable soureces, we may be able to close that gap. The key is putting it in place, and taking the lead by giving ourselves an unfair advantage to exploit until other countries pull their crap together.

Isn't nuclear power the most efficient and is rather clean? To me, shit like Solar and Wind is a fad and is too expensive to build the infrastructure.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

I'm generally with you, though it seems that infrastructure development has been the slowest part of our country's evolution.

We're way behind on trains, mass transportation, ATC grid, energy grids, cable, fiber-optics, etc. It's not like we don't have smart people, it's that (IMO) we don't have smart politicians or people visionary enough to see that projects need to be started.

For instance...MAX in Portland vs. the garbage up here in Seattle. I love MAX, and didn't need a car when I was living down there for almost a year. With a bike and a metro pass, you were golden...even on MAX.

Up here, they're spending billions widening freeways to reduce traffic when no one realizes traffic occurs from people rubbernecking, not from traffic volume (or lack thereof). The first mass transit project they started was to run a line from downtown to the airport. Not a major commuter line like Seattle to Bellevue or Seattle-Tacoma....one from the stadium to the airport. What the heck?!?!

And in 4 years when they shut it down due to lack of use, it'll be years before anyone can get another mass transit project on the ballot b/c they can say "we tried it and it didn't work, costing taxpayers money"

California voters (me included) voted for a recent high speed rail system in the state. Can't wait!

 

[BrianFromWA]

Good to hear, and that's news to me. Is it based on the EuroRail designs? Japanese? Do the rails have to be all retrofitted, or do they have to build new trackage? (if that's even a word)

Mrs. BrianFromWA and I have tossed the idea around a couple times of using the Coast Starlight to go from SEA to her folks' in Sacramento, but it's like a 22 hour train ride that's more expensive than an airline ticket. Doesn't make sense for us. I'd love a high-speed train.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/

check out the map:

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/map.htm and typical cost savings.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

I think a lot of competition for building the actual infrastructure is coming from China....Japan was the usual leader in this kind of thing. Would be ironic if China build the new High Speed Trains in California.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

the thing is, I'm not even that confident in American techonolgy and innovation to build a high-speed railway. Other countries have been doing it using firms that have been actually experienced in it. I'd prefer that over some american company, which I feel would likely be a lot less efficient, riddled with Union Bullshit and what not.

i mean how rediculous would it be if Arnie proclaimed that the project and materials could ONLY be awarded to California firms. Its fucking retarded!

 

[hasoos]

Isn't nuclear power the most efficient and is rather clean? To me, shit like Solar and Wind is a fad and is too expensive to build the infrastructure.

I am pro nuke too. What most people don't realize, is that nuke power occurs naturally too. Unfortunately, it is just melting the interior of the earth into lava. It is not as "renewable" though.

Also, remember solar and wind isn't the only renewable power out there. There have been some real great designs for tidal power as well.


I do agree that solar and wind cost a lot, but I don't think it is a fad. I believe it is just in the developmental stage, and at some point it will be cheap enough. My brother works as an engineer for a solar power company and tells me about goodies they are working on all the time, and it is advancing fast, as now there are a lot more people putting their brianpower behind it than there were years ago, which leads to more new ideas. The other thing to remember is, once the systems are up, the only thing you have to pay for is maintenance. So you may even get by with a high initial cost, but one day your costs will be recouped, and then after that:

It is all gravy.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

I am pro nuke too. What most people don't realize, is that nuke power occurs naturally too. Unfortunately, it is just melting the interior of the earth into lava. It is not as "renewable" though.

Also, remember solar and wind isn't the only renewable power out there. There have been some real great designs for tidal power as well.


I do agree that solar and wind cost a lot, but I don't think it is a fad. I believe it is just in the developmental stage, and at some point it will be cheap enough. My brother works as an engineer for a solar power company and tells me about goodies they are working on all the time, and it is advancing fast, as now there are a lot more people putting their brianpower behind it than there were years ago, which leads to more new ideas. The other thing to remember is, once the systems are up, the only thing you have to pay for is maintenance. So you may even get by with a high initial cost, but one day your costs will be recouped, and then after that:

It is all gravy.

I'm not against developing solar and wind and hydro-electric power. I'm just in the camp that thinks that its being overdeveloped with not a reasonable rate of return, all in the name of the "environment". I think a larger portion of this needs to be developed by the private sector and entrepreneurs and more government power would be better spent developing nuclear power.

My boss is trying to get on this bandwagon so we've been doing research at getting his house wired up, its extremely expensive, several hundred grand to get it done up properly. At this stage in the game, I don't think its very practical, personally.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Man, that looks cool. SAC to SD in 3 hrs, for 60 bucks? Done.

 

[hasoos]

I'm not against developing solar and wind and hydro-electric power. I'm just in the camp that thinks that its being overdeveloped with not a reasonable rate of return, all in the name of the "environment". I think a larger portion of this needs to be developed by the private sector and entrepreneurs and more government power would be better spent developing nuclear power.

My boss is trying to get on this bandwagon so we've been doing research at getting his house wired up, its extremely expensive, several hundred grand to get it done up properly. At this stage in the game, I don't think its very practical, personally.

Yea it isn't cost effective yet. There is one company out there that will instal the solar power on your house, and then sell you the electricity back at a rate that is guaranteed lower than you power company's rates. The unfortunate thing is, if their setup doesn't suppy all of your power, you end up having 2 bills, and if you generate more than you need, they just sell it back to the power company. But if you want to get solar power and not have to pay for it out the nose here is the link

http://renu.citizenre.com/

 

[Minstrel]

I am pro nuke too. What most people don't realize, is that nuke power occurs naturally too. Unfortunately, it is just melting the interior of the earth into lava.

Well, it is also creating the Earth's magnetosphere, which shields us from deadly amounts of radiation from the sun. So it's not going completely to waste.