Mortyman wrote:

BMW, Daimler and Volkswagen have some of their largest factories in Republican Southwest. Together, German car manufacturers have about 33,000 employees in the United States. Manufacturing parts for car manufacturers employ another 77,000 people, according to The Guardian.

Hence why this is more a PR thing than something EU car makers worry about. You cannot tax cars which are made in the US. The ony ones who should worry are those rich people who buy Ferraris and other luxury car. Maybe Trimp has some socialist believes afterall as this would hurt the rich more than the poor.

BTW it would hurt the UK and Italy the most. The first is going out of the EU anyway and the latter has not much to say in Europe anyway.

LJ wrote:

Mortyman wrote:

BMW, Daimler and Volkswagen have some of their largest factories in Republican Southwest. Together, German car manufacturers have about 33,000 employees in the United States. Manufacturing parts for car manufacturers employ another 77,000 people, according to The Guardian.

Hence why this is more a PR thing than something EU car makers worry about. You cannot tax cars which are made in the US. The ony ones who should worry are those rich people who buy Ferraris and other luxury car. Maybe Trimp has some socialist believes afterall as this would hurt the rich more than the poor.

BTW it would hurt the UK and Italy the most. The first is going out of the EU anyway and the latter has not much to say in Europe anyway.

Maybe he thinks everyone drives luxury import cars since all of his friends are out of touch rich people.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

"The Wall Street Journal makes the point that “Mr. Trump seems not to understand that steel-using industries in the U.S. employ some 6.5 million Americans, while steel makers employ about 140,000.”

Similarly with photo solar electric: Something like 80% of the workers are engaged in installation. These two tariffs will cut US employment. And meantime China will be improving solar panels. About the same dynamic as trying to exclude Japanese cars.

The other side of this is that wages and benefits for the lower 50% of American workers really does not improving. Europe does it for its workers in part by relying on income tax for social benefits. Companies are not expected to pay for medical, retirement (generally), disability, nursing home care. We dump the cost of too many social benefits on employers.

The imbeciles shall have what they want all along ... and bear the consequences.

I don't know if this is an intentional pedagogic endeavor or not.
But it will definitely work that way.
Up to now most of the overbearing demands on politics were met with lackluster compliance ( politicians: we are not mad ).
Now every over the top wrong demand is being met.
waiting, sent the wife for some pop corn. ))

LJ wrote:

Hence why this is more a PR thing than something EU car makers worry about. You cannot tax cars which are made in the US.

It's not that simple. BMW's factory in South Carolina is their highest volume factory, directly employs over 10,000, and is the largest car exporter in the USA. However, they only produce the X3, X4, X5, X6, and X7 SUV's. All the BMW sedans you see driving around are imported. More than 70% of their vehicles produced in the USA are exported.

Surprised no one has mentioned this, but China has a much bigger advantage compared to the EU when imposing counter tariffs. A tariff on every Boeing made jet imported into China would cause this whole looming trade war to collapse completely. Is the US ready to have the products of its #1 exporter under tariff? Of course the EU can't play this card because the US would just place tariffs on Airbus jets coming into the US, but in China's case, I don't think there are any US carriers that have orders for the C919 or the ARJ.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/swit ... nance.html


Hmmn, I agree with this article myself as I said before.

drew777 wrote:

LJ wrote:

Hence why this is more a PR thing than something EU car makers worry about. You cannot tax cars which are made in the US.

It's not that simple. BMW's factory in South Carolina is their highest volume factory, directly employs over 10,000, and is the largest car exporter in the USA. However, they only produce the X3, X4, X5, X6, and X7 SUV's.

Some of which are exported back to Europe.

Trump demonstrates again lack of the slightest grasp of things he wants to regulate. Or he's just trolling, It could go either way.

AirFiero wrote:

Aesma wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Dismissing your attempt at condescending dismissal, my country has as much right as any to protect OUR jobs and companies.

Yes, as much right, as defined by WTO rules, written with US input. The taxes Trump is slapping are in violation of WTO rules, which is why other countries will respond in kind.

OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE TARRIFFS. Why can’t the US do so as well?

The US can. This is what a proper anti-dumping decision looks like: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=996

They brake down the applicable tariff even down to the company producing them, and it is changing with market prices: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/ ... fm?id=1717

If you read through the documents, you see that the companies as well as their government had a say in the matter, and that tariffs are adjusted to heal the injury, with no penalty part involved. Preexisting, per trade agreement, tariffs are even subtracted from the anti-dumping tariff.

Compare that to a blanked import-tariff regardless or country or company. That is why those are most likely illegal under WTO rules, and that is why each and every country hit by those will reply in kind. Only that they will get WTO approval later......

The same applies to steel: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/ ... fm?id=1794

By company, by products and so on. No illegal, blanket tariffs.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

By company, by products and so on. No illegal, blanket tariffs.

What else would you do to get an easy advantage over anybody else?
This is MAGA. It is not about fixing unfair deformations.

The nice thing here is that the US has retreated from picturing their selfish acts
as altruistic, fair or even beneficial to world trade.

Trump now Tweets that NAFTA needs to be renegotiated to be more fair towards the US before he lifts the tariffs:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... fta-avtale

Apparently the man sees this as a matter of loser and winner s and not deals that are negotiated to look after all the countries interests ...

WIederling wrote:

The nice thing here is that the US has retreated from picturing their selfish acts
as altruistic, fair or even beneficial to world trade.

One can agree or disagree with US policies, but in the past they where at least fairly consistent and predictable.Now we live in times where foreign policy depends on how well Trump slept and which comedian got on his nerves the evening before.

Heck, have South Korea, Turkey or Saudi Arabia gotten Ambassadors by now? Calling Kim "little rocket man" seems to be much more fun than appointing an Ambassador to SK........

best regards
Thomas

Of course this guy will not be investigated but

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/03/59058359 ... ted-stocks

One of tRump's buddies sold off shares in a crane manufacturing company in the days leading up to the tariff announcement.

Just a reminder on how well Trump's last round of tariffs worked out:

American solar company SunPower will lay off about 3 percent of its workforce in March, a decision that comes after President Trump began imposing new tariffs on imported solar materials earlier this month.

SunPower has already started the process of laying off between 150 and 250 workers, largely from its research and development and marketing positions, CEO Tom Werner told The Hill. The cuts made by the publicly traded company, which is based in San Jose, Calif., are largely an effort to stop the bleeding from the new costs associated with the 30 percent tariffs, Werner said.

SunPower estimates that with the new tariffs it will lose $50 million this year, about one-sixth of the company's overall operating costs. According to Werner, the company fears that next year's losses will be even more staggering, predicting the firm could lose closer to $100 million.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/ ... ng-tariffs

#MAGA !!

seb146 wrote:

Route66 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Source, please.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/25/ ... 3777840295
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-b ... story.html
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-c ... ion-trump/

Interesting thing linking these three articles: None use the word "illegal." YOU say that illegals are taking our jobs. These articles say that Latinos are. Why would any licenced and reputable construction company hire illegals? Do you know the liability and lawsuits and fines that creates?

To a lot of people on the hard-right anyone latino looking/sounding is automatically assumed to be an illegal. Case in point: Trump's security thug when he was kicking Jorge Ramos out of that press conference.

vfw614 wrote:

"We will put tariffs on Harley-Davidson

Good. They are crude and far too noisy. Certainly won't be missed by me.

zkojq wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

"We will put tariffs on Harley-Davidson

Good. They are crude and far too noisy. Certainly won't be missed by me.

They also one of the few made in USA motor vehicles anyone is buying. And it hits Paul Ryan's home state so that's probably the reason it was singled out.

tommy1808 wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Aesma wrote:

Yes, as much right, as defined by WTO rules, written with US input. The taxes Trump is slapping are in violation of WTO rules, which is why other countries will respond in kind.

OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE TARRIFFS. Why can’t the US do so as well?

The US can. This is what a proper anti-dumping decision looks like: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=996

They brake down the applicable tariff even down to the company producing them, and it is changing with market prices: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/ ... fm?id=1717

If you read through the documents, you see that the companies as well as their government had a say in the matter, and that tariffs are adjusted to heal the injury, with no penalty part involved. Preexisting, per trade agreement, tariffs are even subtracted from the anti-dumping tariff.

Compare that to a blanked import-tariff regardless or country or company. That is why those are most likely illegal under WTO rules, and that is why each and every country hit by those will reply in kind. Only that they will get WTO approval later......

The same applies to steel: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/ ... fm?id=1794

By company, by products and so on. No illegal, blanket tariffs.

best regards
Thomas

Thanks for the data. We would expect a lot more fine details in the final policy than any blanket tariff. Especially regarding Canada.

AirFiero wrote:

Thanks for the data. We would expect a lot more fine details in the final policy than any blanket tariff. Especially regarding Canada.

Party line so far is: we absolutely want a trade war...

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/switch-d ... nance.html

best regards
Thomas

JJJ wrote:

zkojq wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

"We will put tariffs on Harley-Davidson

Good. They are crude and far too noisy. Certainly won't be missed by me.

They also one of the few made in USA motor vehicles anyone is buying. And it hits Paul Ryan's home state so that's probably the reason it was singled out.

To be fair most of the BMW SUV and coups made in the USA are exported.

CCGPV wrote:

To be fair most of the BMW SUV and coups made in the USA are exported.

the X1 isn´t, and currently none of the Coupes iirc.

But yes, many people don´t realize that some part of the trade imbalance with country A may be components to assemble locally in country B and export to country C, those exports may effect the B-C trade balance more than the A-B relationship. Exports on the Spartanburg BMWs is what... 70% or so?

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

To be fair most of the BMW SUV and coups made in the USA are exported.

the X1 isn´t, and currently none of the Coupes iirc.

But yes, many people don´t realize that some part of the trade imbalance with country A may be components to assemble locally in country B and export to country C, those exports may effect the B-C trade balance more than the A-B relationship. Exports on the Spartanburg BMWs is what... 70% or so?

best regards
Thomas

That sounds correct.

That is a major complaint people have with some NAFTA rules. You can build all the technical components in Mexico and ship them to the USA to be built by low wage and vice versa.

I don't know enough about the issue to say what is good or bad.

CCGPV wrote:

JJJ wrote:

zkojq wrote:

Good. They are crude and far too noisy. Certainly won't be missed by me.

They also one of the few made in USA motor vehicles anyone is buying. And it hits Paul Ryan's home state so that's probably the reason it was singled out.

To be fair most of the BMW SUV and coups made in the USA are exported.

I did mention that a few posts above, that a lot of the X-model made in the US find their way back to Europe.

Something like 20% of US auto exports are BMWs out of SC.

Many democrats are cheering on this, I wonder if Trump will take the hint ?

tommy1808 wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Thanks for the data. We would expect a lot more fine details in the final policy than any blanket tariff. Especially regarding Canada.

Party line so far is: we absolutely want a trade war...

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/switch-d ... nance.html

best regards
Thomas

NEVER take the first proposal in a negotiation from Trump as the final. Reference “The Art of the Deal”. In other words, he plays his opponents and does it very well.

Always wait for the endgame.

[

Tugger wrote:

You do understand that you stated the construction trade has been "given away" to illegals. Iplying they have taken it over, right? Is 12% taking over?

Or you could look at the research that has been done on it:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pew-7 ... le/2617560

Your own source says the construction industry is 15% illegal. This is significant. Notably also, that is country-wide. There are cities in which that percentage is going to be significantly higher. You're good with that? You believe this had no pressure on wages? Really, you don't seem that obtuse.

seb146 wrote:

Interesting thing linking these three articles: None use the word "illegal." YOU say that illegals are taking our jobs. These articles say that Latinos are. Why would any licenced and reputable construction company hire illegals? Do you know the liability and lawsuits and fines that creates?

I was expecting that response. First off, both those rags do everything possible to gloss over the "illegal" aspect, their editorial boards are as liberal as it gets and their reporting reflects it. That said, correspond what they say with this Pew research and try to tell us illegals ave no bearing on the job market...over a million illegals in LA , an African-American job "crisis", but oh no, illegals don't steal work form American citizens....sure...



It would be very interesting to correlate that map with data on African-American unemployment, as the UCLA study highlighted. Would you dare Seb?

787Driver wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

Harley-Davidson targets Paul Ryan, Bourbon targets Mitch McConnell - what about Levis?

Just the average Joe and Bob that voted for Trump.

Your condescension aside, Levi's is Nancy Pelosi territory. Providing evidence that lack of informative intelligence crosses party lines. And i wonder how much that affects US industry anyway, I can't remember ever seeing a Made in USA tag on Lev'is. Not a particularly well thought plan.

AirFiero wrote:

NEVER take the first proposal in a negotiation from Trump as the final. Reference “The Art of the Deal”. In other words, he plays his opponents and does it very well.

Always wait for the endgame.

What I said on Pg1. And in today's headlines, as I said, it is directed at Canada and Mexico over NAFTA negotiations.
Trump says Canada and Mexico will escape new tariffs only after NAFTA concessions

I suspect that was the ploy all along, and it was the kneejerk reaction from Europe about an un-defined, proposed policy that caused the "tax the Euro cars" proclamation. As for that, all this talk about BMW's produced in SC, Germany imports $7 billion in US autos, but exports to the US $22 billion in automobiles. Not too much ambiguity there, is there?

zkojq wrote:

Just a reminder on how well Trump's last round of tariffs worked out:

American solar company SunPower will lay off about 3 percent of its workforce in March, a decision that comes after President Trump began imposing new tariffs on imported solar materials earlier this month.

SunPower has already started the process of laying off between 150 and 250 workers, largely from its research and development and marketing positions, CEO Tom Werner told The Hill. The cuts made by the publicly traded company, which is based in San Jose, Calif., are largely an effort to stop the bleeding from the new costs associated with the 30 percent tariffs, Werner said.

SunPower estimates that with the new tariffs it will lose $50 million this year, about one-sixth of the company's overall operating costs. According to Werner, the company fears that next year's losses will be even more staggering, predicting the firm could lose closer to $100 million.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/ ... ng-tariffs

#MAGA !!

I had to check that one out because I've followed Sunpower for years. Smelled like FUD, sounded like FUD....

Sunpower (coincidentally majority owned by French oil giant, Total SA) has been in trouble for years, and outsourced much if not all of their production. 14 months ago, they announced a layoff of 25% of their workforce and have not made a profit for a long time.

By REUTERS December 7, 2016
SunPower, the No. 2 U.S. solar panel maker, said on Wednesday it would lay off about 25% of its workforce, or 2,500 employees, and close one plant as part of a cost-cutting plan announced last month to counter slumping prices.

Route66 wrote:

but exports to the US $22 billion in automobiles. Not too much ambiguity there, is there?

Germany only exported ~550.000 cars to the US in 2016. You exported some 400-450.000 cars because of BMW, Mercedes and VW, they easily make up those 15 billion. BMW alone did 2/3 of that before the latest expansion*. Looking at a trade balace between to contries in isolation made sense when almost nothing was re-exportet and supply chains where mostly domestic.

Best regards
Thomas

* numbers from or extrapolated from here
https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&source=w ... BZUMxX1yNg

Route66 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Interesting thing linking these three articles: None use the word "illegal." YOU say that illegals are taking our jobs. These articles say that Latinos are. Why would any licenced and reputable construction company hire illegals? Do you know the liability and lawsuits and fines that creates?

I was expecting that response. First off, both those rags do everything possible to gloss over the "illegal" aspect, their editorial boards are as liberal as it gets and their reporting reflects it. That said, correspond what they say with this Pew research and try to tell us illegals ave no bearing on the job market...over a million illegals in LA , an African-American job "crisis", but oh no, illegals don't steal work form American citizens....sure...

Do you even ask why? No? Let me bring something up:

Construction, more than likely, includes small, independent contractors who have one or two employees and they need seven or ten for a temporary project; a day or two. Blacks need steady and permanent work. We all do. Maybe we should do some research as to why Blacks are not in construction at the rate of Latinos. Maybe it goes deeper than they don't want to sit outside Home Depot hoping for a temporary job they will be under paid for. Maybe it does not fit their schedule? Maybe they have too many low wage jobs they are working to go apply for a higher paying construction job?

The surface facts are useful, but sometimes digging deeper is also telling.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/partisan ... d=53551869


Trump is working to cost 146000 jobs with his tariffs.

casinterest wrote:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/partisan-group-predicts-trump-tariffs-cost-146000-jobs/story?id=53551869


Trump is working to cost 146000 jobs with his tariffs.

#somuchwinning

And now Gary Cohn, Trumps chief economic adviser is now resigning....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03 ... esign.html

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

And now Gary Cohn, Trumps chief economic adviser is now resigning....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03 ... esign.html

Tugg

He will be excused away by the Fox pundit crowd as a Democrat Goldman Sacks hack.

[quote="Route66"][/quote]
Well here's a story about a company halting US expansion plans thanks to the new tariffs, if that makes you feel better.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/elec ... t-53488664

zkojq wrote:

Well here's a story about a company halting US expansion plans thanks to the new tariffs, if that makes you feel better.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/elec ... t-53488664

No surprise there. Having manufacturing in the US is interesting for foreign companies because products made in the US have relative free market access to many nations.

Trump may make that disappear, and for example BMW could much rather shift 70% of the Spartanburg production to other countries, and reduce that plant to US domestic production. Of course not over night.

That way Trump could slap whatever tariff he wants on car imports, the US still loses Jobs........

And of course companies from coutnries having a investment protection agreement with the United States will just sue and have the US taxpayer reimburse all lost profits.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

And of course companies from coutnries having a investment protection agreement with the United States will just sue and have the US taxpayer reimburse all lost profits.

Another "leveling the table" thing backfires?

IMU the non public court of arbitration solution for corporations to sue government
for lost profits ( TTIP item ) was designed to take decission leeway
from foreign governments not hurt the US.

It appears the Tariffs are on.

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/08/59174419 ... um-imports

Tune at 3:30 P.M eastern to see if Mexico, and Canada escape the tariffs.

Mind you for the folks that think China is the target. China doesn't account for anything close to a lot for imports to the US.

So with Mexico and Canada exempted, how could this help the US? Mexico and Canada will just increase production and take more market share from the US makers.

Regarding Canada, it's just as I predicted...

Trump signs steel and aluminum tariffs that exempt Canada and Mexico and leave door open to other countries
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/08/trump-s ... thers.html

Behold Trump the Negotiator...proclaim asinine starting position, have almost all members of your party explain what an utter moron you are, rant and rave about America is #1 and I'm a winner, and then eliminate all teeth from initial proposal before the negotiating even begins. What a bloated, incompetent, complete and total wanker for the ages. Every time I think there's still hope for this nation I think of the 48% of voters that cast their ballots for this orange tragedy and I wonder if my optimism isn't misplaced.

AirFiero wrote:

Regarding Canada, it's just as I predicted...

Trump signs steel and aluminum tariffs that exempt Canada and Mexico and leave door open to other countries
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/08/trump-s ... thers.html

"For now". Nobody knows how long Canada's exemption will last.

What did you predict for the EU? They've already drawn up a list worth of tariffs on US goods worth around $2.5 billion. Think he'll backtrack after his attack on Germany? Or will he press on, and put US jobs at risk?

If he does backtrack on the EU, then the 2 largest exporters are exempt, which raises the question: why not target specific countries in the first place? All this has done is totally tick off some of the US' closest military allies.

I don't understand how that's a sensible thing to do, but then again, I lack the intellectual and moral flexibility of a Trump voter.

ElPistolero wrote:

I don't understand how that's a sensible thing to do, but then again, I lack the intellectual and moral flexibility of a Trump voter.

Well, with Putin pulling the strings it makes perfect sense. Pretty much everything Trump does and says makes sense when you look at it from Russia´s perspective.

best regards
Thomas

typical lose - lose of Trump.

tommy1808 wrote:

ElPistolero wrote:

I don't understand how that's a sensible thing to do, but then again, I lack the intellectual and moral flexibility of a Trump voter.

Well, with Putin pulling the strings it makes perfect sense. Pretty much everything Trump does and says makes sense when you look at it from Russia´s perspective.

best regards
Thomas

In the sense that everybody will be worse of, except Russia, you are right.

Even if you follow Trump's logic, exempting Canada and Mexico doesn't make sense. They should be the most taxed, until he got what he wants, a "better deal" on NAFTA.

Other countries don't have such an agreement to lose, and will retaliate immediately.

At least this is indirectly tariffing Russian steel and aluminum, I guess.

Jouhou wrote:

At least this is indirectly tariffing Russian steel and aluminum, I guess.

There isn´t that much to put a tariff on:


best regards
Thomas

I really hope that EU won’t ask for „exception“, like an appeal for clemency. That’s disgraceful. The EU should take immediate action without asking for anything. I think the plan was to raise the taxes on Bourbon (sorry for all a.netters who are active in that industry, but your president started a war...).

N14AZ wrote:

I really hope that EU won’t ask for „exception“, like an appeal for clemency. That’s disgraceful. The EU should take immediate action without asking for anything. I think the plan was to raise the taxes on Bourbon (sorry for all a.netters who are active in that industry, but your president started a war...).

By all means, teach trumpistan about how the economy works. Just target the districts represented by the idiot's enablers.

Aesma wrote:

Even if you follow Trump's logic, exempting Canada and Mexico doesn't make sense. They should be the most taxed, until he got what he wants, a "better deal" on NAFTA.

Other countries don't have such an agreement to lose, and will retaliate immediately.

A better deal on NAFTA to trump means what he wants and Canada and Mexico be damned.

Had he been tougher on us Canada might walk away from the talks and those whom do know something about trade realize that Canada provides a whole lot of resources to the US that without NAFTA have no obligation to, especially when TPP has been signed Canada and Mexico now have other markets open to them.

Trump might not know this but those negotiating on his behalf do which is why they want a good deal .

Aesma wrote:

Even if you follow Trump's logic, exempting Canada and Mexico doesn't make sense. They should be the most taxed, until he got what he wants, a "better deal" on NAFTA.

The idea is that you hold the threat over the discussions but the exemption means the nations aren't pissed of while negotiating.

Jouhou wrote:

N14AZ wrote:

Just target the districts represented by the idiot's enablers.

Well the sad thing is that the tariffs actually do end up targeting and impacting the very districts that did support him. Might not be steel or aluminum directly but responses by any affected nation will impact anything from mining to manufacturing.

Tugg

WASHINGTON — U.S. allies seeking to avoid the steel and aluminum tariffs approved by President Donald Trump might be asked to step up their financial commitments to NATO.

Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin told CNBC in a Friday interview that the president will consider national security, noting that Trump wants to be sure that NATO gets more funding from European allies who Trump has previously criticized for not contributing enough.

https://www.defensenews.com/news/2018/0 ... xemptions/

So what is it then? Protecting US workers in the steel industry or more money or the defense industry? And Trump doesn't care a bit about the steel manufactory.

Dutchy wrote:

WASHINGTON — U.S. allies seeking to avoid the steel and aluminum tariffs approved by President Donald Trump might be asked to step up their financial commitments to NATO.

Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin told CNBC in a Friday interview that the president will consider national security, noting that Trump wants to be sure that NATO gets more funding from European allies who Trump has previously criticized for not contributing enough.

https://www.defensenews.com/news/2018/0 ... xemptions/

So what is it then? Protecting US workers in the steel industry or more money or the defense industry? And Trump doesn't care a bit about the steel manufactory.

It's trump not understanding economics at all.