Preview

The Politics of Trade in Steel

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
635 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Politics of Trade in Steel
1. Do you believe the Bush administration was correct in imposing tariffs in March 2002 on a wide range of steel imports?

I believe that President Bush needed to do something to protect the US steel market. At the time that President Bush decided to impose temporary tariffs on steel imports, 16 steel manufactures were already operating under bankruptcy protection (Hill, 2005). The whole idea of the tariffs as explained by Leo Gerard, the president of the United Steelworkers of America, was to protect American jobs by giving the industry a chance to rebound and to give the steel manufacturers a chance to upgrade their mills so that they could compete against the more efficient foreign producers (Hill, 2005). Did the Bush administration do the correct thing? I believe that they tried, but in the end the tariffs only protected the profits of steel employees.do you htink it protected workers?

2. Who are the main beneficiaries of protective tariffs such as those imposed on steel imports? Who are the losers?

The main beneficiaries are supposed to be the American economy, "domestic producers and employees against foreign competition, and to raise funds for the federal government" (Hill, 2005). On the flip side, the increase in tariffs only hurt the consumers and foreign businesses by increasing the prices of steel and almost starting a trade war with foreign economies. yes Because the US had established tariffs on steel, other countries had begun counteracting by imposing their own tariffs against US exports and began to seek compensation from the US through the WTO for their losses (Hill, 2005). The US economy also lost because businesses were not able to buy steel as cheap as they could if they were able to buy from foreign markets and thus had to pass the increased cost on to the American consumers.

3. Does the World Trade Organization in this case represent a loss of U.S. national sovereignty? Why do you think the WTO sided with the European Government?

In this



References: Hill, C. (2005). International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Retrieved January 14, 2007, from University of Phoenix, rEsource, MGT/448 - Global Business Strategies at https://mycampus.phoenix.edu/secure/resource/resource.asp

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    * Along with the transformative power of railroads, Republicans’ protective tariffs also helped build thriving U.S. industries. A Civil War debt of $2.8 billion was erased during the 1880s by a $2.1-billion-dollar income from tariffs.…

    • 2527 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    EC 340 exams

    • 2607 Words
    • 14 Pages

    4. To help its domestic producers, the United States unilaterally raised tariffs on ____ in…

    • 2607 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    4. What would be the result of war on the importing and exporting activities of the nations involved?…

    • 315 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Giant Sucking Sound

    • 525 Words
    • 3 Pages

    “In the 1992 U.S. presidential election, H. Ross Perot claimed that there would be a "giant sucking sound" as jobs left the United States and went to Mexico under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Why and how does free trade help the U.S. economy? How might free trade hurt the U.S. economy? Choose one side of this argument and support your perspective with the theories presented in the course readings and video resource, Trade: Its Trials and Triumphs, using proper APA forma”…

    • 525 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    No, President Truman did not have the authority to take control of the steel industry, the president should not be able to just come in and take over where ever or whatever he has the urge to at any given time, the president does not and should not have the power to seize a private company just because he thinks it is necessary. President Truman over asserted his power when he tried to take control of the steel industry; his actions were unjustified and unconstitutional, the constitution does not give the president ultimate power. President Truman rested his seizure request on lawfully vague national-crisis grounds, referring his inherent powers as president and as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The president had seized numerous industrial…

    • 342 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A tariff on a product makes a.domestic sellers better off and domestic buyers worse off.b.domestic sellers worse off and domestic buyers worse off.c.domestic sellers better off and domestic buyers better off.d.domestic sellers worse off and domestic buyers better off. ____…

    • 4900 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The root of the problem of protective tariffs is that they are almost by definition designed to assist certain segments of the economy. In the era in question, the country was distinctly divided along economic lines. Because a large percentage of Southern capital was put into land, cotton, and slaves, less capital was available for industrial for manufacturing enterprises, since in that volatile period in history they such investments were far riskier than cotton, the prime resource of the booming textile industry. Economists have determined that a reasonable expectation for return on investments in cotton was 10% per annum, an excellent return at any…

    • 817 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    What: established the highest protective tariff in US history. The tariff made unemployment worse in industries that could no longer export goods to Europe.…

    • 1627 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    c) Now assume the US imposes a tariff of 50% on the world price, how much cloth will the US consume, produce and import with tariff?…

    • 815 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    * When the U. S. enacts tariffs on lumber imported from Canada who in the U. S. benefits from that tariff (not counting the government itself since that's where the money paid as a tariff goes)? Who's hurt?…

    • 338 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Although I am a strong critic of the use and effectiveness of economic sanctions, such as trade embargoes, for the sake of this assignment, I will present both their theoretical advantages and their disadvantages based upon my research. Trade embargoes and blockades have traditionally been used to entice nations to alter their behavior or to punish them for certain behavior. The intentions behind these policies are generally noble, at least on the surface. However, these policies can have side effects. For example, FDR 's blockade of raw materials against the Japanese in Manchuria in the 1930s arguably led to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, which resulted in U.S. involvement in World War II. The decades-long embargo against Cuba not only did not lead to the topple of the communist regime there, but may have strengthened Castro 's hold on the island and has created animosity toward the United States in Latin America and much suffering by the people of Cuba. Various studies have concluded that embargoes and other economic sanctions generally have not been effective from a utilitarian or policy perspective, yet these policies continue.…

    • 1259 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Integrating regions into a trading bloc can have some positive and influential aspects for the countries within that trading bloc. Free trade within these nations can helps secure stability within the economies, generate more product at a cheaper rate then without the integration, and assist with creating peace between the nations with peaceful conflict resolutions. The Association of the Southeast Asian Nations has created such a trading block between 10 nations over three decades ago which has been helping to build and sustain the economy of these nations in Southeast Asia.…

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    c. “Is it proper for the U.S. government to sponsor the export of dangerous products oversea?” is a moral question.…

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    On September 11, 2009, the Obama administration announced its decision to impose punitive tariffs on low-end tire imports from China under a statute known as Section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974. In addition to an existing 4 percent import duty, tariffs were increased by rates of 35 percent for the first year, 30 percent the second year, and 25 percent the third year because imports of Chinese tires were deemed to be excessive. China's government responded quickly to the announcement, saying in a statement that it "strongly opposes" what it called "a serious act of trade protectionism."…

    • 343 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Dubai Under Pressure

    • 525 Words
    • 3 Pages

    3. Do you agree with the decision, accepting that transportation takes place through a global network of companies?…

    • 525 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays