Group items tagged

China’s “unfair trade practices” are “undermining the entire U.S. aluminum value chain.”

Chinese aluminum output has surged in recent years, accounting for 55% of global production in 2015, up from 24% a decade ago, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. U.S. output accounted for 2.7% of global production in 2015, according to the USGS.

exacerbated by what the tariffs symbolize for Mr. Trump’s agenda and the broader global economy.

By following his nationalist instincts Mr. Trump has broken with the pro-business factions in his administration and his party whose policy priorities have been critical to the upswing in business and investor sentiment since he was elected. By willingly hurting U.S. allies over a problem of overcapacity that is mainly China’s doing, he’s cast further uncertainty over the U.S. role as global leader.

With investors already on edge about Federal Reserve interest rate increases, the steel tariffs at the margin compound inflation pressure. That effect is so far too small to alter the Fed’s calculus, but a tit-for-tat cycle of retaliation could lead to even more inflation and rate increases than investors or the Fed have anticipated.

Protectionism shrinks markets, raises costs, and reduces how fast a country can grow without generating inflation. U.S. steel and aluminum companies can meet the demand previously filled by imports, but with unemployment at a 17-year low that may require hiring workers away from other industries, putting upward pressure on wages.

This is good news in the short run for workers, but bad news for any consumer who must now pay more for cars or beer cans.

nvestors speculated that the angry reaction of American allies, in particular the European Union, showed U.S. global leadership is fading and with it the dollar’s appeal as a reserve currency.

China may move more quickly to curb its overcapacity, the root of the import surge and price pressure that is hurting U.S. producers. Yet the decision has generated conflict within his own administration, his party and with key U.S. allies that, at least at the margin, counteracts the boost from the rest of his agenda.

Trump's announcement lifted American steel and aluminum stocks because those companies stand to benefit from penalties against their foreign competitors. U.S. Steel climbed 3%. But the broader market sank because of trade war fears. The Dow fell about 200 points.

The United States is also exploring the possibility of putting new tariffs on cars. Last week, The Trump administration announced an investigation into whether automobile imports are hurting US national security, laying the groundwork for another trade fight.

In January 2017, Mr. Obama’s administration launched a case at the WTO against China for subsidizing aluminum

Mr. Trump has failed to follow up. Last week, Mr. Trump invoked a little-used 1962 statute to promise tariffs of 25% on imported steel and 10% on aluminum, ostensibly for national security, a factor that led his chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn, to announce his resignation Tuesday.

Chinese forced technology transfer, commercial espionage and intellectual-property theft, all aimed at creating Chinese champions in key industries by 2025

Yet China exports little steel to the U.S. because of existing duties and accounts for just 11% of its aluminum imports, far behind Canada. The Commerce Department argued for a global remedy because Chinese production depresses global prices and drives foreign producers out of third markets, and they then ship to the U.S.

It noted that since 2003 China has four times promised to address overcapacity in steel production, as its actual capacity quadrupled to roughly half the world total. “The crisis confronting the U.S. aluminum industry is China, plain and simple,” one industry group told the department.

When the EU threatened to retaliate, Mr. Trump said he would escalate by raising duties on European cars.

This means the pain of Mr. Trump’s tariffs will fall not on China but on actors that play by the rules, including Canada, Japan and the European Union.

The U.S. is preparing a sweeping penalty against China, but it would be more effective if done jointly; otherwise, Beijing may simply persuade others to hand over their technology in exchange for Chinese sales or capital.

S., EU and Japan launched a joint WTO complaint against China for restricting exports of “rare earths,” which are vital to many advanced technologies.

In 2014, they won and China lifted its restrictions. One former U.S. trade official says the U.S. could create a similar united front against Chinese takeovers of technology companies: “That would get their attention.” Nor would it violate WTO rules, which are less restrictive on investment than tariffs, he said.

“We are much more likely to get our allies to work with us if we aren’t punishing them for selling us steel that our consumers want to buy.”

He said the jobs added in the metals industry will likely not be permanent. "As you damage the consumers of metal in the United States — the people in the supply chain who purchased the steel and aluminum — in time they would purchase less metals which would lead then to these new created jobs being temporary," Hardy said.

In fact, about 75% of all aluminum ever produced in the US is still in use today.

Action Recycling points out that the amount of aluminum Americans throw away every three months could rebuild our entire commercial air fleet.

Try using a reusable bottle instead, and only use the single-use bottles in emergencies, or when you do not have access to reusable bottle.

When you go to a restaurant, unless you actually need it, tell them you don't want a straw.

When you answer a trivia question on the Free the Ocean website, the company will remove a piece of plastic from the ocean.

Albeit a little more expensive initially, swapping out old bulbs saves you money in the long run.

You can cut down on paper waste by asking for email receipts.

You can create a giant garden bed full of fruits and vegetables in your backyard, or have just a few small potted plants inside your home.

Some gift wrap is recyclable when it doesn't use foil or glitter or any other such additives that interfere with the recycling process.

Composting lowers the amount of garbage that ends up in a landfil

Brussels plans to challenge any U.S. tariffs at the WTO, possibly with other trading partners.

A fundamental question U.S. allies are struggling to address is whether the Trump administration wants to work through the WTO.

The Trump administration’s strategy is two-pronged. First, to dust off little-used American laws allowing for unilateral imposition of tariffs and quotas without seeking WTO permission

Second, to essentially threaten to shut down the WTO’s dispute-settlement mechanism, unless it enacts reforms demanded by the U.S

But the Europeans say they will discuss the Trump administration’s concerns only after the bloc receives a permanent, unconditional exemption from the tariffs. They regard the tariffs as illegal under global rules.“We will not negotiate under threat,” the commission said in the statement Tuesday.

“There is huge frustration with the way the administration is doing business,” said Mujtaba Rahman, managing director in London for Eurasia Group, a consultancy.

Economists say the biggest danger to the global economy is not so much the tariffs as the insecurity they sow among business managers trying to plan where to buy or sell products that contain steel or aluminum. Advertisement Continue reading the main story Big metals consumers like auto manufacturers and construction firms have been stockpiling supplies, girding for a disruptive trade war. “As a result, there is a visible surge in steel prices in the U.S., which negatively affects manufacturing and many other sectors,” said Max Finne, assistant professor of operations management at the University of Warwick in Britain.Mr. Trump’s provocative approach has fueled anxiety in Europe that the long-awaited economic recovery is losing momentum. The threat of a trade war adds to a list of risks that are making businesses less willing to invest and create jobs, including the imminent end of European Central Bank stimulus, Britain’s planned exit from the bloc and political deadlock in Italy.

The European Union regards the planned tariffs on steel and aluminum as a violation of international treaties and has already complained to the World Trade Organization, normally the arbiter of trade disputes. The complaint lays the groundwork for the bloc to impose retaliatory tariffs on a long list of American products — including bluejeans, bourbon and Harley-Davidson motorcycles — as early as mid-June.

The Obama administration pursued such an agreement for years, but it was largely moribund even before Mr. Trump took office, in part because of popular opposition in Germany.

Europe would be happy to cooperate with the United States to press China on issues such as protection of intellectual property. But in the current climate it seems unlikely that the European Union and United States are capable of joining forces.“The way Trump is going about it may not be the most effective, but he’s put it on the agenda. There is some sympathy for that,” Mr. Rahman said. “But it’s very difficult. The process seems completely broken.”

But the tariffs loomed in the backdrop as the administration continued to negotiate with Mexico and Canada over Nafta and European officials over other trade matters. Neither talks achieved much.

he idea has drawn ire from both foreign leaders and business executives, who say it undercuts the surety that trade agreements are meant to create.

The Trump administration has argued that imports have weakened the country’s industrial base, and, by extension, its ability to produce tanks, weapons and armored vehicles. “We take the view that without a strong economy, you can’t have strong national security,” the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, said Thursday.

Along with fighting the tariffs at the World Trade Organization, European officials have been preparing levies on an estimated $3 billion of imported American products in late June. In a joint statement, ministers from France and Germany said the countries would coordinate their response.

Whether American consumers and companies get caught in the crossfire depends on how it all plays out.

The Federal Reserve’s latest Beige Book, a collection of anecdotes about the health of regional economies, contains more than two dozen references to business fears that the administration’s trade policies, and the steel and aluminum tariffs in particular, would hurt sales and profits.

The Mexican government said that the US action was not justified, and that it would retaliate with its own comparable penalties on US products including lamps, pork, fruit, cheese and flat steel.

The Trump administration surprised observers on Tuesday by announcing it would impose tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese goods and restrict Chinese investment in the United States.

Steel industry groups called on politicians in affected countries to defend their companies and workers. Eurofer, the European Steel Association, asked EU leaders to "react accordingly with appropriate and proportionate measures."

Within a week of making the announcement, which could provoke a cycle of retaliation between trade partners, President Trump continued to defend the move even as his own White House worked to soften its effects.

After the European Union threatened countertariffs on goods like Harley-Davidson motorcycles, Kentucky bourbon and bluejeans, Mr. Trump said he was prepared to escalate the fight by imposing higher taxes on European cars. (China, in the meantime, has been fairly cautious in weighing in.)

A potential threat to the economy

We’re going to manage through this so that it is not detrimental” to economic-growth gains.

The departure will put pressure on other advisers, especially Mr. Mnuchin, to make the case for preserving the post-World War II trade architecture the U.S. helped construct and to speak credibly to financial markets.

On CNBC, Mr. Ross said the steps were needed to target China, which is a major steel producer but doesn’t account for a large share of U.S. imports, because China makes significant transshipments through other countries.

Critics have said the tariffs, issued under the guise of national-security considerations, will damage relationships with Canadian and European allies, slow economic growth and harm American metal-consuming industries.

“He’s not afraid to get into a trade war although that’s not what we want,” said Mr. Mnuchin. “Let’s be very clear. We’re not looking to get into trade wars.”

big benefits for the U.S. steel industry, but caused “some harm” to U.S. firms that use steel and faced higher costs.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Wednesday there may be “potential carveouts” for Mexico, Canada and possibly other countries. But officials said it was unclear whether that would be addressed on Thursday; Mr. Trump may take additional action later to give national-security exemptions on a country-by-country basis

Coming on the same day that 11 US allies -- but not the US -- sign a landmark Asia-Pacific trade agreement, the move on tariffs only underscores Trump's embrace of the protectionist policies he believes helped him win the presidency.

The tariff signing came after days of confusion over how the President would move forward. On Thursday morning, the situation was still shrouded in uncertainty. Multiple officials awoke with no clear picture of what Trump was prepared to sign during the afternoon event. Advisers have been scrambling since last week to finalize details on the tariffs after Trump announced he would impose them during a meeting with industry executives.

"He may be a globalist, but I still like him," Trump said Thursday of Cohn, who was sitting in the room and announced earlier this week he is resigning as director of the National Economic Council. "He is seriously a globalist, there is no question. But in his own way he's a nationalist because he loves our country."

So why did Trump do it? The reasons are obvious. First reason: politics. It’s March of Trump’s midterm election year. He needs to be able to say he’s delivered on his promises to American workers. Now he can say that. Second reason: politics. There is a special election in western Pennsylvania on Tuesday, and it’s widely believed that the Republican candidate is weak, in a district Trump carried by 20 points. The tariff announcement can’t hurt with that one.

Of course in the White House, all this just makes the president laugh. He’s looking at his poll numbers; confident they’ll go up; the midterms are coming into focus and things are right on track.

“We are in uncharted territory in terms of trade policy,” said Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute of International Economics. “What President Trump has done is make everything uncertain in trade policy. You don’t know on almost a day-to-day basis what trade policy is going to be and businesses find it very difficult to operate in that kind of environment.”

Ross said in an interview with The Washington Post that Trump was acting within his authority. He said that under Section 232 of a key U.S. trade law Trump “has very broad powers. He can raise the tariffs. He can lower them. He can let countries in and let them out.”

One of the most fundamental problems with recycling is that we don’t really know how much of it actually happens because of an opaque global system that too often relies on measuring the material that arrives at the front door of the facility rather than what comes out

What we do know is that with plastics, at least, the amount being recycled is much less than most of us assumed.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, two of the most commonly used plastics in America — PET (used in soda bottles) and HDPE (used in milk jugs, among other things) — are “widely recycled,” but the rate is really only about 30 percent

Other plastics, like soft wraps and films, sometimes called No. 4 plastics, are not widely accepted in curbside collections.

The E.P.A. estimates that just 2.7 percent of polypropylene — the hard plastic known as No. 5, used to make furniture and cleaning bottles — was reprocessed in 2018

Crunch the sums, and only around 10 percent of plastics in the United States is recycle

the landfill-happy United States is far worse at recycling than other major economies. According to the E.P.A., America’s national recycling rate, just 32 percent, is lower than Britain’s 44 percent, Germany’s 48 percent and South Korea’s 58 percent.

the scientific research over decades has repeatedly found that in almost all cases, recycling our waste materials has significant environmental benefits

We need clearer labeling of what is and is not actually recyclable and transparency around true recycling rates

Recycling steel, for example, saves 72 percent of the energy of producing new steel; it also cuts water use by 40 percent

Recycling a ton of aluminum requires only about 5 percent of the energy and saves almost nine tons of bauxite from being hauled from mines

Even anti-plastics campaigners agree that recycling plastics, like PET, is better for the climate than burning them — a likely outcome if recycling efforts were to be abandoned.

The economic perks are significant, too. Recycling creates as many as 50 jobs for every one created by sending waste to landfills; the E.P.A. estimates that recycling and reuse accounted for 681,000 jobs in the United States alone.

That’s even more true in the developing world, where waste pickers rely on recycling for income.

before we abandon recycling, we should first try to fix it

Companies should be phasing out products that can’t be recycled and designing more products that are easier to recycle and reuse rather than leaving sustainability to their marketing departments.

Lawmakers can help by passing new laws, as cities like Seattle and San Francisco have done, to help increase recycling rates and drive investment into the sector.

Governments can also ban or restrict many problematic plastics to reduce the amount of needless plastics in our everyday lives, for instance in food packaging

According to a 2015 analysis by scientists at the University of Southampton in England, recycling a majority of commonly tossed-out waste materials resulted in a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions

Greater safety regulations are needed to reduce toxic chemical contents and microplastic pollution caused by the recycling process.

consumers can do their bit by buying recycled products (and buying less and reusing more).

Yes, recycling is broken, but abandon it too soon, and we risk going back to the system of decades past, in which we dumped and burned our garbage without care, in our relentless quest for more. Do that, and like the recycling symbol itself, we really will be going in circles.

Underlying the dispute is a complicated economic and political landscape of factories and farms that at once entrench the Israeli occupation and help feed the Palestinian families that oppose it. About 25,000 Palestinians work legally for Israelis in the West Bank, many in construction, building the settlements they hope will soon be dismantled.

. They have about 1,000 plants — sophisticated aluminum and food manufacturers as well as tiny textile and furniture workshops — that pump roughly $300 million into the Palestinian economy through salaries and, at the same time, take up vast acreage in what Palestinians see as their future state.Palestinian officials and boycott advocates say that these settlement businesses exploit a vulnerable work force, and that Israel’s occupation is largely responsible for the moribund Palestinian economy that makes its own jobs appealing. Israeli leaders and factory owners, though, say the companies do more to help than hurt Palestinians, and provide rare opportunities for coexistence between the two peoples.

Diana Buttu, a lawyer who has been studying West Bank work conditions, and other boycott supporters acknowledged that the settlement industry provided important economic opportunities for Palestinians even as it challenged their national aspirations.

Palestinian minimum wage was $410 a month, compared with Israel’s $1,217, and most Palestinian workers lacked pensions, vacation days and disability insurance — factors she and others say are the fault of the Palestinian Authority as well as Israel.

The Palestinian Authority began boycotting settlement products in late 2009, but stopped short of punishing people who helped produce them. Mohammed Mustafa, the Palestinian deputy prime minister for economic affairs, called the industrial parks part of an exploitative pattern of “business colonization” that has blocked the authority from building a viable economy.

“If we have our land, if we have our resources, if we have independence, if we have control of our economy, then we will give them opportunities,” Mr. Mustafa said. “Yes, they are paying them more, but who wants to be working in a settlement? This is, in a way, even worse than not giving them a job.”

The Palestinian Authority cannot inspect these workplaces, and the Israeli Ministry of Economy has jurisdiction over only minimum-wage violations (a spokeswoman said it opened 10 investigations last year).

Many vaccines contain traces of the formaldehyde used to inactivate viruses, and this can be alarming to those of us who associate formaldehyde with dead frogs in glass jars. Large concentrations are indeed toxic, but formaldehyde is a product of our bodies, essential to our metabolism, and the amount of formaldehyde already circulating in our systems is considerably greater than the amount we receive through vaccination.

As for mercury, a child will almost certainly get more mercury exposure from her immediate environment than from vaccination. This is true, too, of the aluminum that is often used as an adjuvant in vaccines to intensify the immune response.

Our breast milk, it turns out, is as polluted as our environment at large. Laboratory analysis of breast milk has detected paint thinners, dry-cleaning fluids, flame retardants, pesticides, and rocket fuel. “Most of these chemicals are found in microscopic amounts,” the journalist Florence Williams notes, “but if human milk were sold at the local Piggly Wiggly, some stock would exceed federal food-safety levels for DDT residues and PCBs.”

fear of toxicity strikes me as an old anxiety with a new name. Where the word filth once suggested, with its moralist air, the evils of the flesh, the word toxic now condemns the chemical evils of our industrial world.

like filth theory, toxicity theory is anchored in legitimate dangers

the way we think about toxicity bears some resemblance to the way we once thought about filth. Both theories allow their subscribers to maintain a sense of control over their own health by pursuing personal purity. For the filth theorist, this means a retreat into the home, where heavy curtains and shutters might seal out the smell of the poor and their problems. Our version of this shuttering is now achieved through the purchase of purified water, air purifiers, and food produced with the promise of purity.

Purity, especially bodily purity, is the seemingly innocent concept behind a number of the most sinister social actions of the past century.