Timeline for What is Canada's case for applying tariffs on US dairy?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2018 at 16:12 | comment | added | Anoplexian | It was in TheHill I believe, and it was a comment to help improve this good answer. The question was about Canadian applied tariffs, not the other way around; one of the reasons was political power for the midterm elections. They were not just random tariffs, they were strategically modeled to hit where Trump would (or not) feel it most. It's not conjecture at all, although it definitely is not the only reason. Please see me in chat if you're interested in continuing. | |
| Jun 18, 2018 at 3:57 | comment | added | BobE | @Andy, not complaining, just suggesting to take your discussion w Anoplexian off to discussion (as it not within the scope of comments) | |
| Jun 17, 2018 at 20:51 | comment | added | Andy | @bobe And you complaining at me about it also contributes nothing. | |
| Jun 17, 2018 at 1:28 | comment | added | BobE | @Andy, I agree, his assertion is conjecture lacks foundation, but prolonging that discussion contributes nothing to the original question and answer. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 18:15 | comment | added | Andy | @BobE Then complain to anoplexian, as his assertion makes no sense. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 18:11 | comment | added | BobE | @Andy: You are now entering into the dangerous (and "forbidden") world of conjecture and personal opinion. A world that is incompatible with politics SE. Maybe you and Anoplexian want to take that discussion off thread. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 17:50 | comment | added | Andy | @Anoplexian Why would Trump try to lose his own supporters? | |
| Jun 12, 2018 at 13:38 | comment | added | J... | @jpmc26 Not per-se, but they do allow subsidized exporters to undercut un-subsidized foreign markets - this is a similar tactic to deliberate currency devaluation where the aggressor nation pushes out domestic industry with artificially low prices. Tariffs are a typical measure to combat ingress of commodities with such artificially depressed prices. | |
| Jun 12, 2018 at 5:04 | comment | added | Krazy Glew | @jpmc26 - Google “Are subsidies protectionist?”. You will find many introductory economics courses that say so, along with definitions of “protectionist subsidies”. Moreover, the USA is a member if the WTO, and per wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm3_e.htm “The Agricultural Agreement prohibits export subsidies ... unless ...” // I used to think that subsidies were non-distorting, until I realized rich countries could subsidize all areas of competitive disadvantage. By that distortion standard tariffs are less protectionist than subsidies. | |
| Jun 12, 2018 at 3:20 | comment | added | jpmc26 | @Jontia Are subsidies protectionist? I don't think so. | |
| Jun 12, 2018 at 2:53 | comment | added | JonathanReez | @J... the US is less socialist in the sense that it doesn't favorite any individual milk producer, unlike Canada where they have quotas. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 19:10 | comment | added | cimmanon | It's worth noting that Canada's quota system (which applies to poultry and eggs in addition to diary) also protects existing farmers from having to compete against new Canadian farmers. The only way to get a quota is by buying it from someone else. A dairy farm in New Brunswick was recently listed at $2.5M (included the livestock and farm equipment), $1M of it was for the quota. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 17:01 | comment | added | CCTO | Depends on whether you rate "state ownership of the means of production" higher than "state control of the economy" in your definition of "socialist". Dairy farmers remain nominally non-state actors but gov't money to subsidize production is surely akin to ownership in practice. Supply-side controls are more akin to regulated industries like telecom and transportation, where there is state allocation of market share. Bottom line, the US values low consumer prices above pretty much all else. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 16:23 | comment | added | Anoplexian | I read somewhere there was also a political point to it, putting pressure on those most likely to be a part of the Republican/Trump's base with the tariffs. The hope is that the base of that party loses a bit of its influence in hopes of change in the upcoming midterm elections. I'm not sure if the Canadian tariffs are being more strictly enforced to find his ire, but it seems likely given the tariffs he's done. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 14:29 | comment | added | J... | @user4012 I'd almost say the opposite. In Canada, the supply management system, although a totally socialist establishment, does pass on the cost of milk production to milk consumers only. In the US/EU structure, where the farmers are supported by subsidy, everyone pays, through taxation, to lower the cost of dairy, regardless of whether they consume those products or not. I'd say the latter is rather more socialist (everyone pays vs. consumers pay). | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 14:25 | comment | added | Jontia | @user4012 I'm not sure the phase "unintentional protectionism" means anything. Certainly not when it comes to international trade negotiations. Rent seeking after all is just another way of asking to be protected from market forces. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 14:12 | comment | added | BobE | @ user4012 @ Miguel BTW, the Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board (est 1930s) functions in much the same way that the Canadian milk supply management system works. I can recall periods in the 1980s where dairy farmers were forced (by the MMB) to destroy fresh milk because taking the milk to market would have lowered the overall market price. My point is: this milk supply management approach by the government is not unique to Canada. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 13:55 | comment | added | user4012 | @Miguel - neither one is a free-market approach, bit neither one is purely communist (the industry is privately owned) - though Canada's case (centrally managing output) is more socialist than US case. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 13:53 | comment | added | user4012 | @Jontia - the goal of US subsidies is not protectionism (that's an unintentional - though presumably not unwelcome - side effect). It's basically just a combination of rent-seeking by diary industry AND left wing wanting to make cost of living cheaper for the poor | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 9:07 | comment | added | gerrit | This is very clear by comparing milk prices in Canadian grocery stores to the ones in the USA or Europe. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 8:54 | comment | added | Miguel | @Jontia Does this mean that the US is more communist than Canada? :) | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 8:53 | comment | added | Jontia | I think the TL:DR is the US is equally protectionist, it just protects its farmers by paying them directly so they can sell their milk at a loss. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 7:35 | comment | added | jpmc26 | TL;DR: The food security argument. | |
| Jun 11, 2018 at 2:56 | history | answered | BobE | CC BY-SA 4.0 |