Obama Launches Trade War with China

How to win friends and influence people?

AC sorry but you are wrong. We have to get people HERE back to work and not worry about China.

There has been an unfair balance of trade with China since Nixon.

Just understand that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In this case, US companies who make vehicles and export poultry will be hurt by Chinese action. That's what protectionism does.

I know perfectly well what protectionism is AC and I also know horseshat when I read it.

When I want to buy and American flag and the only one I can find is stamped Made In China I know something is wrong.

So where's the "horseshat?" We impose a tariff and they reply in kind. Two countries taking protectionist measures that drive up prices. What's inaccurate about this?

"When I want to buy and American flag...."

There's nothing wrong. You could find an American-made one if you looked hard enough, but you'd damn sure pay more for it. That's part of the problem. Government mandated wages and the second highest corporate tax rate in the world means that it costs more to produce something here than it does somewhere else.

"Buy American" simply means "Pay More."

Gee AC let me think about this. We dont import as many tires from China because the price is too high so the alternative is that we have to re-open some of the tire plants that were closed in the last 15 years to keep up with demand and of course we have to employ Americans to work in those tire plants...now those workers can afford to buy those chickens and cars that China wont...sounds like a win-win situation to me.

I have looked for an American made flag and I would pay extra for it problem is I cant find one.

I cannot believe you are advocating China and their workers over good old american workers.

Is this the "change" the GOP is spouting off about?

In his first big test on world trade since taking office in January, Mr Obama sided with America’s trade unions, which have complained that a “surge” in imports of Chinese-made tyres had caused 7,000 job losses among US factory workers.

Funny you didnt add that part to your article.

"We dont import as many tires from China because the price is too high so the alternative is that we have to re-open some of the tire plants that were closed in the last 15 years to keep up with demand and of course we have to employ Americans to work in those tire plants...now those workers can afford to buy those chickens and cars that China wont...sounds like a win-win situation to me."

You're making a lot of assumptions there about wages, etc. Try reading some Adam Smith. Great economics lessons on free trade and the consequences of protectionist measures.

"I cannot believe you are advocating China and their workers over good old american workers."

I'm not. But I do understand that it costs more to produce products here than it does elsewhere. There's no escaping that reality, Lori.

"Funny you didnt add that part to your article."

I didn't want to make it look any worse for the President. Siding with unions on a measure that causes an increase in prices and reduced consumer choice is NOT A GOOD THING.

In fact, it makes it look like he's playing politics by paying back a group that supported him in the election.

You're making a lot of assumptions there about wages, etc. Try reading some Adam Smith. Great economics lessons on free trade and the consequences of protectionist measures.

No bigger than the assumptions you are making about China being able to do irreversable harm to the poultry and car industry in America.

The difference is I am willing to take the chance if it means more Americans have jobs to buy more tires and poultry and cars.

Whereas you are more worried about China.

In fact, it makes it look like he's playing politics by paying back a group that supported him in the election.


More BS.

I didn't want to make it look any worse for the President. Siding with unions on a measure that causes an increase in prices and reduced consumer choice is NOT A GOOD THING.

So now you are worried about the choices that consumers will have to make with all the money they DONT have because all the business have moved their operations elsewhere.

As far as it looking bad for a president I agree...Bush looks more like an ass every day. And a greedy one at that.

"I cannot believe you are advocating China and their workers over good old american workers."

I'm not. But I do understand that it costs more to produce products here than it does elsewhere. There's no escaping that reality, Lori.

Hmm reality.... that is COSTS more of there is LESS of a profit.

"No bigger than the assumptions you are making about China being able to do irreversable harm to the poultry and car industry in America."

I didn't say anything about irreversable harm. Harm yes, but irreversable no.

"The difference is I am willing to take the chance if it means more Americans have jobs to buy more tires and poultry and cars."

So am I. I buy American whenever I can. I especially love my two giant American SUVs. But that doesn't change the realities I've laid out for you. Not everyone can afford to pay more for a product.

"So now you are worried about the choices that consumers will have to make with all the money they DONT have because all the business have moved their operations elsewhere."

Choice means competition. Competition means lower prices. What's not to like?

Now you get your chance AC buy American tires and put your money where your mouth is.

I do buy American tires, for my American cars. That still doesn't change the basic laws of economics, free trade, and the consequences of protectionist measures.

We import too much crap from China already. I am all for the trade wars. There are other places to do business with that might not sell us tainted crap. Any why all the tyre and not tire? Seems odd.

Tyre because the paper running the story is British.

Trade wars mean higher prices. Is taht what we need right now?

If that is what it takes to keep lead out of toys going into our children's mouths.

As long as you're okay with the tariffs China will impose on American goods in response, Jennifer, then it's not an issue.

And our big exports to China are what AC?

Oh thats right American jobs and business'.

We could export more goods if we lowered the cost of producing products here. That's how it works. If our goods are too expensive, no one will want them. If they are less expensive, they are competitive in the global marketplace.

No we couldnt AC..the average person in China makes $2,000 a year.

No one could lower their costs that much.

"...the average person in China makes $2,000 a year."

But there's like a billion of them. Lower the cost, demand goes up, and more people buy. That's supply and demand, Lori.

So should we become communists too AC?

You are really going out on a limb on this.

Not at all. Selling our goods to them has nothing to do with what I think our ideological orientation should be. Talk about going out on a limb.

Taiwan, Japan, Mexico....we can get stuff from other places. China does not have quality anyway. It seems they have a monopoly on everything we buy. How long has it been since anyone has picked up ten items and two of them do not say Made in China? I bet the ten things all say Made in China.

Enough already. I am willing to pay a bit higher if quality goes up or to even get other markets involved.

It's not just about what comes here from China, but also about what we send to China. When we subject their goods to tariffs, they reply in kind, making our goods more expensive.

Another attempt to raise prices and overwhelm the system. Once the economy collapses fully, Obama and his SEIU/ACORN buddies will come in and "Rebuild it in their own image"

That's what we're all afraid of! Sadly, I might mention.

Relax Chicken Little there's no trade war. China already has a partial ban on US poultry.

Try reading your own Wall Street bible: "China's quick action in taking the U.S. tariffs to the WTO suggested Beijing is eager to keep the trade tensions within the framework of international law, a sign the disagreement is containable."

Any other president would garner praise from the hypocrights for standing up to Chinese dumping. You can choose between a large helping of crow, or Chinese poultry, when Obama finishes facing down the Chinese. They're desperately dumping because their exports are down.

Losing an election doesn't justify you "summer soldiers" turning anti-American on every issue that comes along.

Losing an election doesn't justify you "summer soldiers" turning anti-American on every issue that comes along.

Kudo on that one Guy.

China filed a complaint with the WTO, but threatened unilateral action to counter the new tariff. That's a trade war.

"Losing an election doesn't justify you 'summer soldiers' turning anti-American on every issue that comes along."

I'm not opposed to everything President Obama does. In fact, here are some of President Obama's actions that I support totally:

1. Continuing third country renditions for terrorism suspects.

2. Continuing indefinite detentions without charge.

3. Bringing back war tribunals.

4. Expanding the war in Afghanistan.

5. Delaying large troop withdrawals from Iraq until sometime next year.

6. Allowing the CIA to continue to operate short-term, overseas detention facilities.

7. Continuing warrentless wiretapping.

8. His tax cut (although I wish it had been larger and permanent instead of temporary).

9. His inclusion of lobbyists in his administration (they are some of the foremost policy experts in the country).

10. His demand that Iran cease uranium enrichment before direct talks can occur.

11. His support for Bush's state secrets policy.

12. His agreement to closing the loophole in healthcare reform legislation so that citizenship verification could occur.

then AC is it just America you hate then or the workers or what?

This is unreal.

You say Made in America means Pay More.

Importing tires from china has cost 7,000 jobs..now think about that....the town I live in only has 3,000 people so it is like putting 2.2 towns my size out of business and thats not counting on the business that depended on those tire industries and how many people they had to lay off.

I am personally surprised at YOU AC.

I don't hate America or its workers, Lori. But I am a realist. Idealism only gets you so far, and then you get smacked in the face.

Made in America does mean pay more. We have higher manufacturing costs (labor, regulatory requirements, etc.) and the second highest corporate tax rate in the world (second only to Japan). That means it costs more to produce goods, resulting in higher prices for those goods.

Do we have higher costs or do the Chinese government since they are communists have realllly cheap labor...of course if you dont mind that some 5 year old in a sweat shop working for $.50 cents a month makes your tires then by all means go right ahead.

How long are we going to be the world hypocrits and do things like invade Iraq to keep the world safe for democracy but then continue to support China who's premier is no 3 on the list of violations of civil rights.

And another reason why china can make things so cheap is they have NO EPA standards whatsoever. They are the biggest industrial polluters in the world.

So feel free to continue to support communism and pollution and civil rights violations....I will continue to support my country.

"Do we have higher costs or do the Chinese...."

Depends on how you define costs, but if you do it monetarily, we have higher costs.

"...but then continue to support China...."

Every President since Nixon, Republican or Democrat, has followed essentially the same policy toward China. It's not a political thing, but a US foreign policy thing.

"...they have NO EPA standards whatsoever."

That's exactly why any climate change legislation or international agreements are meaningless. China and India, the top two polluters, refuse to go along. That's why our Senate refuses to ratify Kyoto. It would impose costs on us that other countries would not be subject to.

I don't support communism or pollution or civil rights violations, but our national government has for decades, no matter who's been in office.

"I don't support communism or pollution or civil rights violations, but our national government has for decades, no matter who's been in office."

I guess if you make absolutely wild accusations, there isn't anyone who can deny it.

Wild accusations? We support China in a multitude of ways. We have open trade with Communist Vietnam and good overall relations with our former enemy. We support dictators around the world when it suits our national interests. There's nothing wild about those facts at all.

When did you join the Blame America First Brigade?

I don't blame America for anything, Guy. Pointing out that we have relations with questionable characters does not mean that I oppose those relations when they suit our national interests.

By the way, Guy, what about the list of things I support Obama on? How do you feel about those policies continued or expanded by Obama?

What about 'em? Do they mean this particular attack on the President for having the courage to stand up to the Chinese for downstream dumping doesn't count?

Are we forgetting how wrong you are here, NoBama, because you were right other times? Did this not happen? Well delete the post, stop wasting my time, and learn to drive in one lane.

This isn't hard. You accused me of turning anti-American on every issue that comes along because Republicans lost the election. That implies I am opposing Obama on every issue just because I'm a sore loser.

I then pointed out to you that I support President Obama on a host of issues, and listed those issues for you. Hell, today I can add another one to the list now that the White House has said terrorism detainees at Bagram will NOT have access to U.S. courts (continuing another Bush policy).

I am curious about how you feel with regard to the Bush policies continued or expanded by President Obama. They have nothing to do with this particular thread, but are instead a response to a comment made by you.

So, what say you?

Good debate you guys, keep it up
featured in Purely Political
with thanks
Mark

I suspect that although we would pay more for tyres, the real losers would be the Chinese. We have had a HUGE trade imbalance with China. Last year the trade imbalance was $268 billion. In 2007 it was $258.5 billion. This year it is $123.5 and counting. You get the picture. This kind of one-way imbalance is not sustainable. Getting the Chinese to sit down and talk tyres, trade and monetary policy in this harsh economic climate might help get something more equitable.

Good point, Baby J. My only thought is that perhaps the talking should have happened first, before the tariff. Maybe the President tried opening a channel and was rebuffed. I haven't seen that anywhere, but it's certainly a possibility.

Could have very well been a possibility. Obama needs to start smacking someone in the mouth. Domestically and internationally. People here at home and abroad must know that he is ready to whack somebody. This talk about dialogue, and stuff is getting old.

So AC what you wanted Obama to do was something like this.

Obama calls up Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao

Obama: Hey Wenny baby I have a bit of a problem....seems that you exporting cheaply made tires has put a lot of Americans out of business and well if you would stop I would appreciate it.

Wen Jiabao: Haha we have America by the balls. I will throw a couple of million yen your way and you just play nicely. OK Comrade?

Obama: No sorry thats not what I am about.

Wen Jiabao: You americans make me laugh...thats the same line that Bush tried before Cheney knocked the phone out of hands and put Georgy in time out.

Obama: No really I mean it.

Wen Jiabao: You dont have the balls to do it.

Next days headline: OBAMA STARTS TRADE WAR.

It's called diplomacy. Remember that from the campaign? What ever happened to it?

No its not AC its called supporting the American Workers.

He couldn't support American workers through diplomacy first? See my comment below from the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

And that would have accomplished what AC?

You either try and make the unfair trade imbalance more balanced or you dont. If Obama would have gone to the Chinese government and tried negotiating with them do you really think they would be OK with it? Would they have cut production and export by 10, 15 25%?



What did you want him to negotiate?

What would you have the ultimate goal be?

"And that would have accomplished what AC?"

It would have made him not look like a hypocrite who campaigned on always talking first and acting only when absolutely necessary. You know, breaking from the pattern of the last 8 years.

It would have made him not look like a hypocrite who campaigned on always talking first and acting only when absolutely necessary. You know, breaking from the pattern of the last 8 years.

Wrong. He said he was going to do just this and he did.

"Wrong."

Afraid not. Diplomacy first, remember? Or was that just campaign rhetoric?

And again AC what would you have wanted him to do in a diplomatic capacity?

What would have been the goal?

Is this what you are talking about?

Obama: You guys need to cut production and imports to the US.
China: No
Obama:OK

Things go on as usual.

"...what would you have wanted him to do in a diplomatic capacity?"

He could have registered a complaint with the WTO. That's what China did, and it's the kind of diplomacy he campaigned on.

He could have registered a complaint with the WTO. That's what China did, and it's the kind of diplomacy he campaigned on.


And that would have accomplished what?


BTW did you notice the related article at the top on the right side of this is the AP article on how Obama DIDNT start a trade war.

"And that would have accomplished what?"

It would have fulfilled his campaign promise, and it would have been the diplomatic thing to do.

It would have fulfilled his campaign promise, and it would have been the diplomatic thing to do.

No AC one of his campaign promises was to end unfair trade and impose tarrifs for business that move their production out of the USA and to start eliminating the unfair trade with China.

"...one of his campaign promises...."

Just add "while engaging in dialogue with other nations...."

Wasn't Bush criticized for taking action without talking?

"China's quick action in taking the U.S. tariffs to the WTO suggested Beijing is eager to keep the trade tensions within the framework of international law, a sign the disagreement is containable."

If so, then it would seem that AC's claim that President Obama has launched a trade war with China is, as Lori put it, a big steaming load of "horseshat."

"I especially love my two giant American SUVs."

A giant American SUV? I wasn't aware such a thing existed, AC. Is this more of your equine excrement?

Headlines, Wil. Designed to draw readers. Attention getter, you know? Although if you think a trade war constitutes tit-for-tat tariffs, then this would certainly qualify.

"I wasn't aware such a thing existed, AC."

One Suburban and one Expedition. Plus a Harley ( a gas guzzler by motorcycle standards).

"Attention getter, you know?"

Whether it gets any attention or not, it's still a lie.

"One Suburban and one Expedition."

According to Wikipedia, Suburbans are assembled in Jacksonville, WI; Arlington, TX; and Silao, Guanajuato (except for the 2009 models, which are assembled exclusively in Arlington). And according to the US DOT, they're made from between 61% and 70% parts from the U.S./Canada.

Expeditions are built in Wayne, MI and Louisville, KY and use between 70% and 95%(2007 model) parts from the U.S./Canada.

Harley's are also built with foreign-made parts, and aren't SUVs.

Giant American SUVs? I don't think so. More like a couple of bullshit-guzzling Trollmobiles.

"...it's still a lie."

Oh, grow up.

"According to "Wikipedia...."

I would suspect that most of the cars sold in this country have parts or labor involved from another country. Globalization has made this a very interdependent world. But at the end of the day, both Chevy and Ford are traditional American companies, largely assembled in the United States. That makes them American SUVs in my book.

Sounds like you have a problem with gas guzzlers.

"Oh, grow up."

I'm grown up enough to know the truth from a lie. Apparently you were hoping for less grown up readers.

"But at the end of the day, both Chevy and Ford are traditional American companies, largely assembled in the United States."

GM and Ford are U.S.-based multinationals with vehicles assembled all over the world.

"That makes them American SUVs in my book. "

Your book is filled with a lot of lies and bullshit, AC.

"Sounds like you have a problem with gas guzzlers."

I have more of a problem with lying trolls.

You take this stuff way too seriously, Wil. I appreciate intelligent debaters, not folks who quibble over semantics or intent.

Sounds like I've struck a nerve with you. Get over it.

I guess it's a good thing for me that I couldn't care less about what you do or do not appreciate. If it were true that you appreciated intelligent debaters, then I would imagine you wouldn't be such a liar and a troll.

You seem to care an awful lot. You seemingly expend a fair bit of energy on my posts.

Thanks for the sentiments. It warms my heart.

I have lots of energy to expend, and I sometimes prefer to expend it by pointing out lying trolls such as yourself. I can't imagine why you think that means I "care an awful lot" about what you do or do not appreciate. Possibly you suffer from some sort of intellectual and emotion dysfunctions that make you believe such a thing, but more likely I suspect that it's just another example of your deliberately dishonest, trollish behavior here at Gather.

"I have lots of energy to expend...."

So do I.

"...deliberately dishonest...."

Oh no, Wil doesn't approve of me. Whatever will I do.

Boo hoo, quit whining and grow up already.

"Oh no, Wil doesn't approve of me."

Whether I approve or not has nothing to do with the fact that you're a liar and a troll.

"Whatever will I do."

I would imagine that you'll keep lying and trolling.

"Boo hoo, quit whining and grow up already."

I'm not whining. I'm pointing out that you're a liar and a troll. Deal with it, loser.

"I'm not whining."

Yes, you are. And to be honest, it's kind of pathetic.

"Yes, you are. And to be honest, it's kind of pathetic."

I don't think you could be honest if you tried, AC.

I'm being completely honest when I say that your whining is kind of pathetic.

Since I'm not whining, you're clearly not being even the tiniest bit honest. Which doesn't surprise me, given that you are a liar and a troll. On the other hand, your feeble attempts to insult me really are pathetic.

Oh, but you are whining, Wil. You may not see it, but it's definitely whining.

No AC, I'm not whining. But you are a liar and a troll. You may not see it or want to admit it, but you definitely are.

Whining....

Liar. Troll. Douchebag.

I'm sure your mother is proud.

I'm sure your mother wishes her son wasn't such a lying, trolling douchebag.

Oooh, you really got me with that one. Whatever will I do????

I would imagine that you will continue lying and trolling and generally being a douchebag.

And I would imagine that you will continue to be delusional.

Keep on trolling AC. I'm here all week. Try the veal.

And you just keep on whining, buddy.

No whining here, trollboy.

I thought about referring to it as "crying," but I think whining fits. I'm sticking with that.

You can refer to it as whatever you like, trollboy. You're still a liar. And a troll. And a douchebag. And I'm sticking with that, although I'm seriously considering adding "dipshit pseudo-libertardian" to the list as well.

Boo hoo. Still whining, I see.

Still trolling, I see.

Still whining, I see.

Still a lying, trolling douchebag of a dipshit pseudo-libertardian, I see.

Still whining, Wil.

"Still whining, Wil.

Whine all you like, AC. But you ought to stop all the lying and the trolling.

Interesting. Attempting to reverse the charge. Sounds like more whining.

Looks like more lying from you, and there's nothing interesting about it.

Looks like more whining from you, and what's interesting is that a grown man would be crying like a child.

Since I'm neither whining nor crying, I find it bizarre that you seem to think that I am. Do you have an obsession with crying children? Do you like to make children cry, AC? Do you like it even more than you like being a lying troll?

Definitely whining.

You're definitely lying, trollboy. Let me guess...you got beat up a lot at school, right?

Whining....

Lying....Trolling....Generally being a douchebag.

Whining....

Trolling....

Whining....

Trolling....

Whining....

Lying....Trolling....Trolling....Lying....

Whining....

Lying....Trolling....Did your parents not give you enough affection and attention when you were a child?

Whining....

Trolling....Lying....Is your middle name Polynices?

Whining.....

Trolling....

Whining....

Trolling....Lying....

Whining....

Lying....Trolling....

Whining....

Look at that -- you're still trolling. Got enough Gather Points™ to buy yourself a PSE with your wife yet?

Look at that -- you're still whining.

No whining here, AC. Just pointing out that you are both a liar and a troll.

Definitely whining.

Definitely lying. Definitely trolling. Definitely full of shit.

Definitely whining....

Definitely trolling....

Still whining....

Still trolling....Still lying....

Still whining....

The status quo with China is no longer an option. This might have nothing to do with trade. This could all be a move for foreign policy...think North Korea.

If this is all about trade, great. It's about time. Impose more tariffs, they demand us to pay them, we lower our currency, impose further tariffs, and... err, I don't know what then. Somebody up there MUST know what they are doing, right?

"I have looked for an American made flag and I would pay extra for it problem is I cant find one."

Annin & Co. has been making flags in the U.S. since 1847. They made the flags that have been used at every presidential inauguration since Zachary Taylor. They employ about 500 people at manufacturing plants in Verona, NJ; South Boston, VA; and Coshocton, Ohio.

You can use the store locator on their website to find out a store near you, and if you want to shop online, you can get them from Martin's Flag Company, a family-owned and operated business in Fort Dodge, Iowa.

Actually Wil I do know about Martins.....I have one....I live 20 miles away from Fort Dodge Iowa

And my Martin's flag didnt cost me thousand or even hundreds of dollars more and the quality is worth it.

Shameless plug for Martin's.

"And my Martin's flag didn't cost me thousand...."

But I'd suspect it cost more than the one I bought at Wal Mart (made in China).

Buying from Walmart cheaply made China stuff is your thing AC. Me I support America whenever I can.

I support America, too, Lori. But it's just foolish to pay $5 for something when I can get the same thing, made somewhere else, for $2. Maybe you have that kind of money to burn. Most Americans don't.

Maybe you have that kind of money to burn. Most Americans don't.

And why is that AC? Wait I know....because of things like American business either moving their HQ to places like China or buying cheap Chinese made products so they can still make big profits.

"And why is that AC?"

You're obviously able to spend more when a less expensive choice is available. Not everyone has that luxury.

I bought one from Wal Mart that was made in China and the first gust of wind separated the flag from the wood!!!!!!

The Center for Strategic and International Studies had this to say today:

"China has reacted to the president's decision with vehemence, charging the United States with 'serious commercial protectionism' and vowed retaliation."

"The president campaigned on a platform focused on trade remedy enforcement, so delivered on at least part of his campaign promises to a critical part of his political base. He would have been subjected to heavy criticism by organized labor had he rejected the request for tariff protection."

"The administration has been quick to point out that invoking a provision of U.S. trade law to which China agreed in 2001 is not necessarily 'protectionism.' Even so, the president's decision is unquestionably a capitulation to domestic political interests that are averse to open markets and free trade. As such, the decision cannot help but cloud discussions between the United States and China at the upcoming G-20 and cast a pall on the administration's credibility in any efforts to discourage protectionism as part of global economic recovery programs going forward."

"...the new tariffs only apply to imports from China; so one possible result will be a shift of imports from China to other low-cost production countries, many of which have capacity to expand production for the U.S. market."

"Consumers will be hurt by the decision, because tire prices will inevitably increase (although perhaps only marginally, since imports from other markets will supplant those from China)."

"More broadly, the retaliation China has threatened will almost certainly hurt the business community and its ongoing plans for expansion in China's market."

"The special safeguard provision in Section 421 is particularly sensitive within China because it only applies to China and therefore is perceived to be inherently discriminatory against China."

"Accordingly, sensitivities to the provision run deep, and China's domestic politics will demand some retaliatory response to the president's decision. Retaliation will almost certainly affect U.S. economic interests in China, which could, unless cooler heads prevail, lead to tit-for-tat protectionism."

And this has what to do with the price of tea in China.

Uh, it has to do with this whole thread. CSIS is a non-partisan think tank that provided an analysis on this topic yesterday. That analysis backs much of what I've told you here.

And??????? So they agree with you.

I can find 100 different sites and think tanks and whatnots that agree with what I say..does that make me always right?

Silly girl, you're never right. :)

From Political Research Associates, a progressive think-tank:

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is a right-wing, neoconservative think tank which was founded in 1962.

So with its right-wing credentials in mind, does the CSIS agree with AC's claim that President Obama has launched a trade war with China? The last "critical question" in Freeman's article asks "Is this the start of a trade war with China?" and none of the 152 words that make up the answer is 'yes'. Instead, Freeman's conclusion is that "[t]he two sides ultimately have too much at stake in positive economic relations to allow a total meltdown in commercial relations".

Also conveniently left out of the discussion are the issues with China's "Buy Chinese" policy that was a part of its economic stimulus policy earlier this year, as well as the WTO ruling last year that found that China had illegally imposed tariffs on foreign-made auto parts. Seems like an ongoing thing to me, which doesn't really fit in with the plan to blame Pres. Obama for starting (or launching a trade war, does it?

Big shock, a "progressive" think tank calls a non-partisan organization (that is largely supportive of Obama, I might add, especially when it comes to foreign policy--Anthony Cordesman was part of the Obama review team for Afghan strategy) right wing.

"...too much at stake in positive economic relations to allow a total meltdown in commercial relations."

You can have a tit-for-tat trade war without a "total meltdown."

Just because it's non-partisan doesn't mean it can't be right-wing and neoconservative.

"You can have a tit-for-tat trade war without a "total meltdown."

You can have a square dance with a "total meltdown", too. But Freeman didn't say this thing with the tires was a square dance or a trade war.

And this article at wsj.com does a good job of explaining why this isn't a trade war.

Everyone is going crazy about the 35% tariff President Obama is placing on tires coming out of China. But we need to relax. This is not a trade war.

Peter Ford's article in the Christian Science Monitor also says it's not a trade war. And speaking of the CSM, they also said it wasn't a trade war when Bush imposed a tariff on Chinese glossy paper a few years ago.

Were you complaining about Bush launching a trade war back then, AC? And if so, then how can Obama be launching a trade war in 2009 if Bush had already launched it in 2007?

"Just because it's non-partisan doesn't mean it can't be right-wing and neoconservative."

Ah, I see. I suspect a lot of folks would disagree with that logic. Doesn't non-partisan mean objective and unbiased? So you're saying that right wing neocons can be unbiased and non-partisan?

"This is not a trade war."

Will you hold fast on that line if China imposes tariffs on U.S. automobiles and poultry?

"Were you complaining about Bush launching a trade war back then, AC?"

Yes. I oppose all protectionist measures, except in certain cases of technology deemed critical to the national defense.

"And if so, then how can Obama be launching a trade war in 2009 if Bush had already launched it in 2007?"

These things come and go. There's a lot at stake and these little flare ups, skirmishes in the overall war for the balance of trade if you will, happen and then the two sides calm things down. Then they heat up again. Then they calm down again. See how this works?