The reason we are pretty sure this CLIFFS NATURAL RESOURCES for steel manufacturing is FAKE---is that it mirrors the OBAMA ERA PAY-TO-PLAY fraud sending hundreds of millions to a SOLYNDRA pretending to be a solar panel manufacturing corporation. This is all that GLOBAL GREEN CORPORATION criminality. At the time these deals to SOLYNDRA were made to an OBAMA campaign donor-----Congress and Obama had already negotiated with CHINA a deal of handing them the market in solar panels in exchange for allowing global energy corporations to FRACK CHINA to death. We KNEW China was given the leadership in solar panels production just as we KNOW China is given the leadership in STEEL PIPE MANUFACTURING. China enslaves its iron ore miners----it enslaves its steel factory workers----it enslaves its cargo shipping crews----so CLIFFS NATURAL RESOURCES as US steel manufacturing will FAIL just as SOLYNDRA. That's IK say global banking 1% pols---the goal was moving PAY-TO-PLAY to a 5% player and to make our US steel workers think they are getting REAL American made jobs.
Did we get that $535 million dollars in fraud back from Solyndra deal? NO. Is anyone in jail for willfully, deliberately, and with malice staging this fraudulent deal? NO. CA FAKE Green Corporation Clinton/Obama neo-liberals are now meeting OH FAKE trades manufacturing Bush neo-cons.
Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees .
Documents show politics infused Obama ‘green’ programs
Joe Stephens and Carol D. Leonnig DEC 25, 2011
Since the failure of solar-panel company Solyndra, President Obama’s $80 billion clean-technology program has begun to look like a political liability.
So, TRUMP who is MOVING FORWARD US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones is pretending to be right wing conservative by FAKE TRADE TARIFFS made to look to favor US manufacturing ---when the goal is making any new US manufacturing unable to compete with global foreign 1% corporations.
TRUMP being allowed to PRETEND to be right wing conservative in these trade policies---just as OBAMA was allowed to PRETEND to be left social progressive in the GLOBAL GREEN CORPORATION policies.
10 stocks we like better than Cleveland-Cliffs
When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the market.*
Steel Stocks Upgraded: Could Trump Triple Prices for AK Steel, U.S. Steel, and Cliffs Stock?
One analyst sees a bright future for shiny steel.Rich Smith
Nov 14, 2016 at 1:09PMSteel stocks went on a tear last week -- and Wall Street noticed.
After seeing iconic steel stocks like U.S. Steel (NYSE:X) tack on gains of 30% and more over the course of just a few days, investment banker Morgan Stanley wasted no time in hopping aboard the steel train. This morning, the analyst announced upgrades to overweight on both U.S. Steel and smaller rival AK Steel (NYSE:AKS), then threw in an upgrade for iron ore producer Cliffs Natural Resources (NYSE:CLF) as well (and Cliffs stock was already up 23% through the end of last week, itself).
What's with all the excitement about steel stocks all of a sudden? In a word: Trump.
Here are three things you need to know.
1. President-elect Trump is yuge news for big steel
As TheFly.com explains in a write-up on Morgan Stanley's upgrades this morning, Donald Trump's electoral victory last week created the first "credible long-term investment case" for steel stocks "in a decade."
It does so for two main reasons.
The first, as my Foolish colleague Jason Hall explained last week, is because President-elect Donald Trump has promised to protect American companies such as U.S. Steel and AK Steel from unfair competition from abroad. As Jason points out, [I]mports, particularly from Asia, have flooded the domestic market and put serious pressure on steel plants in the U.S. to operate profitably." At times, as much as 30% of the steel being used in America has been of the imported variety -- severely limiting American steel companies' ability to maintain profitable prices on their product.
Investors such as Morgan Stanley expect Trump to put a stop to that, perhaps through the expedient of raising import tariffs on foreign-produced steel.
OH, REALLY??????? MORGAN STANLEY???? HMMM..
2. The second reason
More broadly, optimism over steel stocks stems from a general belief that the incoming Trump administration will emphasize infrastructure investment. After all, at his core, Trump is a builder (of hotels, and potentially, of walls). Construction projects create a huge appetite for such commodities as concrete, asphalt, and...steel. And this promises to be good for business at U.S. Steel and AK Steel.
At the same time, farther up the supply chain, another of my Foolish colleagues -- Todd Campbell this time -- points out that "Cliffs Natural is the country's biggest producer of iron ore pellets used in steel production." Morgan Stanley doesn't see Cliffs stock as quite the bargain it believes U.S. Steel and AK Steel to be, but it still likes Cliffs a whole lot more today than it did before.
3. How much does Morgan Stanley like them?
Time to get specific. How much does Morgan Stanley like these three stocks, and which does it like best?
While both AK Steel and U.S. Steel get the thumbs up from MS, U.S. Steel appears to be its favored choice. The analyst nearly tripled its price target on U.S. Steel stock this morning, from $19 to $46. At a current share price of $25 and change, that works out to nearly 79% upside potential on the stock.
AK Steel comes in at second best. Here, Morgan Stanley barely doubled its price target from $5 to $11. With AK Steel stock selling for $7.50 as of this writing, that still works out to a very respectable 47% potential gain on the stock.
As for Cliffs Natural Resources stock, Morgan Stanley again tripled its price target, but only from $3 to $9. With Cliffs costing $7.60 today, that implies there's a possible 18% profit to be made. Ordinarily, that would be enough to catch any investor's eye. But given that Morgan Stanley sees such bright prospects farther down the supply chain, at the steelmakers themselves, the analyst sees Cliffs as a third-place option, and rates the stock only equal weight.
Final thing: Which stock should you choose?
That actually makes sense to me, and not just because of the differences between what Morgan Stanley seesas the stocks' potential valuations a year from now. You see, while data from S&P Global Market Intelligence shows that all three of these companies are free-cash-flow-positive today, both AK Steel ($178 million) and U.S. Steel ($269 million) are generating more cash profit than is Cliffs Natural Resources ($101 million). AK Steel and U.S. Steel also sport lighter debt loads than does Cliffs, and on larger market capitalizations,jh to boot.
Finally, while Morgan Stanley sees strong prospects for growth at all three stocks under a Trump administration, the consensus of analysts polled on S&P Global is that the growth rates we'll see at AK Steel and U.S. Steel over the next five years are both going to be twice as fast as what Cliffs Natural produces.
All of which adds up to stronger buy arguments for the two actual steel stocks, than for the one company that supplies them with ore.
10 stocks we like better than Cleveland-Cliffs
When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the market.*
First, we want to remember US STEEL is owned by what we discussed to be ROBBER BARON trusts with JP MORGAN at the head. JP MORGAN was OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE GLOBAL 1%----behind the US FED ------empire-building for those old world rich not working for American 99% of WE THE PEOPLE.
So, US STEEL has a US name---but it is controlled by overseas global 1%. Look, there is GENERAL ELECTRIC as well now building mobile PHARMA plants overseas to exploit labor and evade US laws.
'J.P. Morgan, in full John Pierpont Morgan, (born April 17, 1837, Hartford, Connecticut, U.S.—died March 31, 1913, Rome, Italy), American financier and industrial organizer, one of the world’s foremost financial figures during the two pre-World War I decades. He reorganized several major railroads and consolidated the United States Steel, International Harvester, and General Electric corporations'.
For these few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA our 99% of WE THE PEOPLE have shouted----why do trade tariffs work against US manufacturing? Labor unions shouted this, local chambers of commerce shouted this. As we shared yesterday-----the goal was shipping US iron ore as raw materials at cheap price where it was given to a Chinese steel manufacturer which then sold it to global corporations building Foreign Economic Zones overseas. Global banking 1% Clinton/Bush/Obama working for OLD WORLD GLOBAL 1%-----killing our US economy with these trade deals and tariffs. This is now what TRUMP is doing while pretending to FIX THIS TRADE IMBALANCE.
China was indeed earning billions of dollars from these US trade tariffs designed to make US exporting more expensive---but global multi-national corporations in Chinese Foreign Economic Zones were earning trillions of dollars from our US losses.
U.S. Trade Deficit With China and Why It's So High
The Real Reason American Jobs Are Going to China
By Kimberly Amadeo
Updated March 05, 2018
The U.S. trade deficit with China was $375 billion in 2017. The trade deficit exists because U.S. exports to China were only $130 billion while imports from China were $506 billion.
The United States imports consumer electronics, clothing and machinery from China. A lot of the imports are from U.S. manufacturers that send raw materials to China for low-cost assembly. Once shipped back to the United States, they are considered imports.
Causes of the Trade Deficit
China can produce many consumer goods for lower costs than other countries can. Americans of course want these goods for the lowest prices. How does China keep prices so low? Most economists agree that China's competitive pricing is a result of two factors:
- A lower standard of living, which allows companies in China to pay lower wages to workers.
- An exchange rate that is partially fixed to the dollar.
If the United States implemented trade protectionism, U.S. consumers would have to pay high prices for their "Made in America" goods. That's why it's unlikely that the trade deficit will change. Most people would rather pay as little as possible for computers, electronics and clothing, even if it means other Americans lose their jobs.
REMEMBER WHEN AMERICANS PAID HIGHER PRICES FOR MANUFACTURED GOODS BUT THEY WERE HIGH QUALITY LASTING US DECADES.
China is the world's largest economy. It also has the world's biggest population. That means it must divide its production between almost 1.4 billion residents. A common way to measure standard of living is gross domestic product per capita. In 2017, China’s GDP per capita was $16,600. China's leaders are desperately trying to get the economy to grow faster to raise the country’s living standards.
They remember Mao's Cultural Revolution all too well. They know that the Chinese people won't accept a lower standard of living forever.
China sets the value of its currency, the yuan, to equal the value of a basket of currencies that includes the dollar. In other words, China pegs its currency to the dollar using a modified fixed exchange rate. When the dollar loses value, China buys dollars through U.S. Treasurys to support it. In 2016, China began relaxing its peg. It wants market forces to have a greater impact on the yuan's value. As a result, the dollar to yuan conversion has been more volatile since then. China's influence on the dollar remains substantial.
How It Affects the U.S. Economy
China must buy so many U.S. Treasury notes that it is the largest lender to the U.S. government. Japan is the second largest. As of December 2017, the U.S. debt to China was $1.2 trillion. That's 19 percent of the total public debt owned by foreign countries. Many are concerned that this gives China political leverage over U.S. fiscal policy. They worry about what would happen if it threatened to call in its loan.
By buying Treasurys, China helped keep U.S. interest rates low. That helped fuel the U.S.
housing boom, which lead to the subprime mortgage crisis. If China were to stop buying Treasurys, interest rates would rise. That could throw the United States and the world into recession. But this wouldn’t be in China's best interests, as U.S. shoppers would buy fewer Chinese exports. In fact, China is buying almost as many Treasurys as ever.
U.S. companies that can't compete with cheap Chinese goods must either lower their costs or go out of business. Many businesses reduce their costs by outsourcing jobs to China or India, which adds to U.S. unemployment. Other industries have just dried up. U.S. manufacturing, as measured by the number of jobs, declined 34 percent between 1998 and 2010. As these industries declined, so has U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace.
What's Being Done
President Donald Trump promised to lower the trade deficit with China.
On March 1, 2018, he announced he would impose a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and a 10 percent tariff on aluminum. The tariff will raise the costs of imported steel, which are primarily from China. Its economy depends heavily on steel exports. Trump's move comes a month after he imposed tariffs and quotas on imported solar panels and washing machines. China has become a global leader in solar panel production. The stock market fell, as analysts worried Trump's actions might start a trade war.
Trump also asked China to do more to raise its currency. He claims that China artificially undervalues it by 15 percent to 40 percent. That was true in 2000. But former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson initiated the U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue in 2006. He convinced the People's Bank of China to strengthen the yuan's value against the dollar. It increased 2-3 percent annually between 2000 and 2013. U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew continued the dialogue during the Obama administration.
The dollar strengthened 25 percent in 2014 and 2015. It took the Chinese yuan with it. China had to lower costs even more to compete with Southeast Asian companies. That's why the PBOC tried unpegging the yuan from the dollar in 2015. The yuan immediately plummeted. That indicated that the yuan was overvalued. If the yuan were undervalued, as Trump claims, it would have risen instead.
Most US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE living in 1990s remember the riots in Seattle as the WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION was being created. Below we see what created those nasty trade imbalances killing our US manufacturing----starting with GATT after WW 2 as MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE was just gaining momentum. What made those trade deficits soar------CLINTON ERA 1994 revision of GATT. This is when the trade deficits for US vs overseas markets soared----and its goal was to extract our natural resources to export overseas to be used by global multi-national corporations partnered with Chinese and Asian manufacturers.
'After the war the U.S. promoted the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) established in 1947, to minimize tariffs and other restrictions, and to liberalize trade among all capitalist countries. In 1995 GATT became the World Trade Organization (WTO); with the collapse of Communism its open markets/low tariff ideology became dominant worldwide in the 1990s'.
Remember, it was a right wing Republican Congress pushing these tariff and trade deals----it was a FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING 1% CLINTON as President---able to veto these trade deals ---that is what 99% of Democrats elected him to do-----but Clinton was always a global banking 1% pol.
'Bill Clinton (1946-), the 42nd U.S. president, served in office from 1993 to 2001'.
'GATT was formed in 1947 and lasted until 1994, moreover, it was replaced by the World Trade Organization in 1995. The original GATT text (GATT 1947) is still in effect under the WTO framework, subject to the modifications of GATT 1994'.
These are those 5% to the 1% global banking pols who passed trade and tariff laws creating the massive US trade imbalance. The same pols and players pretending they are working to fix US trade imbalance VOTED for these policies---oh, look, there is PELOSI and all those pols in states having industrial manufacturing economies.
---- YEAS 288 ---
de la Garza
Johnson, E. B.
First we need to educate on how the US trade imbalance was created------we need to understand the goals of doing damage to our sovereign US economy--then we follow to where all that exported natural resources goes to see the building of all those Foreign Economic Zones overseas by what were US corporations now consolidated through merger and acquisition into global multi-national corporations no longer AMERICAN.
THIS IS WHY WE HAVE HAD THE EVER-GROWING TRADE DEFICITS AND IMBALANCE AGAINST US MANUFACTURING.
Who have protested loudest these few decades against these bad trade deals and tariffs? The FAKE right wing CONSERVATIVES pretending they were protecting US markets.
New Era In World Trade Begins As Senate Approves Gatt Treaty
December 02, 1994|By Elaine S. Povich, Tribune Stafff Writer.
WASHINGTON — The Senate on Thursday approved the GATT treaty, the most sweeping expansion of world trade ever, giving President Clinton a clear victory in Congress' last major legislative act before Republicans take over.
Approval came on a 76-24 vote, and followed House passage Tuesday. Significantly, 35 Senate Republicans joined 41 Democrats in approving the treaty, which is aimed at boosting U.S. exports of goods.
The path was cleared for GATT approval when the Senate agreed 68-32 to waive budget rules that might have stood in the way. The budget waiver required 60 votes.
Approval of GATT means tariffs will be reduced or eliminated on imported goods in the U.S. and on American goods overseas.
Products from construction equipment and furniture to toys and beer should therefore be more available worldwide, and presumably cheaper as well.
Clinton hailed passage of the trade pact, saying it was a "victory for America" that would lead to more high-wage jobs for Americans.
"Let's make the GATT vote the first vote of a new era of cooperation," said Clinton, who was joined by Democrats and Republicans in a victory celebration on the South Lawn of the White House. "America's best days are ahead of us."
OH, REALLY??? CLINTON THINKS DARK AGES IS AMERICA'S BEST DAYS?
GATT's passage is an example of the way the Republican-led Congress and the Democratic president could work together. But underlying its approval are significant splits which may be more telling about the political fights to come next year between Clinton and the GOP.
The GATT vote broke down more on regional than party lines. Senators from textile-producing and dairy states, for example, opposed the treaty, fearing imports would hurt those industries. Senators with export-dependent wheat and corn constituencies, however, supported it.
GATT opponents including independent Ross Perot and Republican Pat Buchanan tried to turn the issue into a referendum on economic nationalism-and lost. Perot vows he will start a third party over the issue, which, ironically, could help Clinton in 1996 by siphoning votes from a Republican opponent.
"We've always had an `America first' crowd," noted political pollster and analyst Stuart Rothenberg. "It's a hair bigger now. Perot, Buchanan and (consumer advocate Ralph) Nader have the ability to reach the grassroots."
SADLY NADER IS PUSHING LIBERTARIANISM THIS IS HOW WE KNOW HE WAS A PLAYER. PEROT WAS NEVER AN AMERICA FIRST. HE IS A PEROT FIRST.
One of Clinton's potential GOP opponents, Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas, supported GATT but still sniped at Clinton, saying that administration officials who furiously lobbied the issue on Thursday were arrogant. He also expressed dislike for the structure of the treaty, which accords every nation equal strength.
"I would have to say the irresponsibility of the Clinton administration in the way they structured it had made it very difficult for me to be strongly supportive of it," Gramm said. "But it is important to the people who pay the taxes and pull the wagon in Texas and in America.'
GRAMM IS OF COURSE THAT 33RD DEGREE OLD WORLD MERCHANT OF VENICE KINGS AND QUEENS FREEMASON.
The debate on GATT had echoes of last summer's fight over NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, with unions and Perot opposed to both. NAFTA, too, was an example of bipartisan cooperation and something that Clinton has cited as one of his major accomplishments.
But Clinton has little reason to sustain hope that he can expect cooperation on other issues, such as prayer in schools, welfare reform, term limits and balancing the budget.
GATT lowers tariff and non-tariff barriers for manufactured products and other goods, brings agriculture and services trade under international rules for the first time, establishes a set of rules for settling trade disputes and creates a new World Trade Organization to implement the agreements.
The organization was among the most controversial issues, with opponents of the treaty arguing that the U.S. was subordinating its sovereignty to an international group without the veto power it has in the United Nations.
That was among the arguments advanced by Perot.
But Perot's potency appears to have diminished after Congress' refusal to heed his dire warnings that NAFTA would result in a "giant sucking sound" of American jobs headed for Mexico.
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) said a new study by the congressional Joint Economic Committee showed a net loss of 10,000 American jobs due to NAFTA, but the Commerce Department reported an increase of 130,000 jobs connected to a huge increase in American exports to Mexico.
"That sucking sound never materialized," said Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun (D-Ill.), who supported GATT, as did Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.).
"Illinois winds up being one the top 10 winners under the GATT," she said. "We are an exporting state, we are a state that has a large agricultural (base), certainly, but also an industrial base that will benefit positively from the GATT."
Thirty-three other nations already have ratified GATT, which was signed by 124 nations, and supporters said other countries are ready to ratify it as soon as the U.S. does.
"(Treasury) Secretary (Lloyd) Bentsen said the whole world is waiting for the United States to act," said Senate GOP leader Bob Dole, who supported the treaty. "The bottom line is we cannot isolate ourselves from the rest of the world."
HOW THEY VOTED
Here is how U.S. senators from the Midwest voted in the 76-24 roll call by which the Senate voted Thursday to approve the world trade accord negotiated under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote to approve ratification legislation and a "no" vote was a vote to reject ratification.
Illinois: Moseley-Braun (D), yes; Simon (D), yes.
Indiana: Coats (R), yes; Lugar, (R), yes.
Michigan: Levin (D), yes; Riegle (D), yes.
Wisconsin: Feingold (D), no; Kohl (D), yes.
'Oh, not at all. He becomes the Arkansas hurricane when the global corporations give him his marching orders on the Uruguay Round of GATT (The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade). Then our President really gets his adrenaline up and successfully demands a special session of Congress after the election to approve this international autocratic regime, the World Trade Organization (WTO)'.
We are not sure about NADER and his intention back in 1990s----we do know the GREEN PARTY was being taken by the far-right wing GREEN REVOLUTION BIG AG and BIG MEAT. It is odd to see our 99% of labor union members shy away from NADER when he was the one back in 1994 shouting the correct labor stance regarding manufacturing, trade, and tariff.
Bill Clinton and GATT
Question: When does President Clinton really become a tiger on the back of Congress?
When getting health insurance reform through the legislature? When getting labor law reform through Capital Hill? When getting campaign finance reform through the national legislature? Legislation for the people that is being blocked?
Oh, not at all. He becomes the Arkansas hurricane when the global corporations give him his marching orders on the Uruguay Round of GATT (The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade). Then our President really gets his adrenaline up and successfully demands a special session of Congress after the election to approve this international autocratic regime, the World Trade Organization (WTO).
He made this extraordinary move after Senator Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, declared he was going to have public hearings and explore the many ramifications of this trade pact for his entitled 45 days. That time period would extend beyond the Congressional adjournment date in early October.
Bill Clinton is setting records for turning his back on the very people who elected him and dropping to his knees for the corporate interests that favored George Bush in 1992.
To Clinton, it does not matter that all the environmental groups, all the trade unions (who know a little about losing jobs) and all the consumer groups, except for one consumer magazine, oppose this GATT treaty. Also the Citizens Trade Coalition, composed of these and many other grass roots organizations, including farm, church, and health groups, has been active in informing more Americans of what is in this massive agreement between 123 countries.
Mr. Clinton completely ignores these citizens. He declines to respond to public letters by heads of 51 media organizations and 130 prominent Americans from widely different political persuasions protesting the secrecy, the shutout of citizen participation and the damage to democracy and our domestic laws that would flow from the new GATT.
Instead he gives brief media pep talks about how much economic growth and jobs would flow from this global trade pact. To ballyhoo GATT he pulls wild statistics from his hat and dances the GATT Numbers Shuffle. Why, didn’t you know that this GATT will increase the U.S. GNP an annual average of $100 billion over ten years, according to his speculation agency, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) next to the White House? Even other GATT boosters offer estimates that are only one-twentieth to one sixth of USTR’s imagination.
There are more critical views of what the GATT will do. European Parliament member and billionaire, Sir James Goldsmith, has written about the downward pull of this Pact because it opens the way for new factories in authoritarian countries using serf-paid laborers to drive down the labor gains and displace the jobs in the U.S, and Europe.
He adds that many white collar jobs will be moved to nations such as India where English-speaking, computer-skilled people in the millions can do the work and electronically send the results daily back to companies in western cities with high unemployment and declining wage rates.
Clearly, the GATT agreement has a broader downward bias in its mandate. Dictatorial nations who harshly or brutally treat their workers, consumers and the environment do not violate this trade agreement, except when they try to sell abroad products made by prison labor. Even products made by cruel child labor, spreading rapidly throughout the Third World, cannot be lawfully banned by GATT-member nations.
What are vulnerable are above average humane laws in countries that have health and safety standards to protect their people. Already, even Japan, Canada and the European Community (EC) have issued reports complaining that many of our federal and state food, safety, environmental and workplace health laws or standards are GATT-illegal under the new agreement.
Should the President succeed and pull the United States into this World Trade Organization, established by the new GATT, the tiniest nation-members, such as St. Kitts or Singapore, would have an equal vote with the U.S. and there is no U.S. veto power as we have on the UN Security Council.
Any of these countries could take our nation to the WTO’s secret tribunals in Geneva and if they win their case that a federal safety law or state environmental statutes, for example, is unlawful under the GATT Pact, the U.S. would either have to repeal that law or pay perpetual trade fines.
These and other issues in the new GATT might have led a more democratically-incline President to take the proposed Pact to the nation, discuss it throughout the country, make copies easily available and detailed summaries understandable.
He conducted such an outreach to the people with his health care proposals. But with global trade agreements, he has the backing of many Republicans in Congress and their big business backers. So, he resorts to airy pep talks and drives toward an end run around the American people with an up or down, no amendment vote in the Senate around December 1.
That is just enough time for the American people to rise and use the November elections to demand Senate disapproval of this global autocratic regime over our modest democracy.
These trade policies of REVISED 1994 GATT TURNING TO WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION was protested heavily----and yes, those ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT FAKE violent protesters were there in 1999 just as today while 99% of US citizens are PEACEFUL PROTESTORS.
This was the MOVING FORWARD of US corporations moving overseas to build FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----and the trade policies installed by CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA deliberately created the trade imbalance that killed US manufacturing. Meanwhile, our overseas nations' 99% were protesting the installation of huge global corporate campuses killing their local economies.
Flash forward to today----and the OPPOSITE is happening in US cities deemed FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----now foreign global corporations are being brought to US to kill any ability of US 99% to rebuild local, domestic US economy. We lived in Seattle as these protests were growing.
The ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT fake 5 % players were brought in by global banking 1% to create violence leading to CRACKDOWN on legal protesting----just as happened during BLACK LIVES MATTER.
WTO Protests 1999 - N28 - Return March Back to Capitol Hill from Sweatshop Rallies
Published on Nov 30, 2012
DATE: November 28, 1999 WHERE: March back to Capitol Hill from the sweatshop rallies, Downtown Seattle, WA VIDEOGRAPHER CREDIT: Brian Jones
Here is the 2001 protests against 1994 GATT creating a WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION. Notice QATAR as UAE were Arab nations embracing ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1%. BUSH ERA BFF'S
Whereas the policies for creating the US trade deficit including the use of bad tariff laws was installed in 1994----it wasn't until 2000 that US unemployment from loss of US manufacturing soared---and the enslavement of those FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES built as a result of 1994 GATT had global 99% of citizens protesting the ENSLAVEMENT of those global corporate factories.
US STEEL was earliest to leave US ------ergo the closing of our US steel mills.
Volume 5 - Number 38
WTO Protests Mushrooming Around The Globe
6 November 2001
Given the difficulties in voicing discontent with the possible launch of new global trade talks directly at the Ministerial Conference in Doha (Qatar), a broad coalition of NGOs is planning a series of street demonstrations and other events in several cities all around the world.
No demos in Doha
Although the Qatari government has not explicitly forbidden individuals to show their disapproval with WTO policies, other factors have contributed to make any significant demonstrations in Qatar 'physically' impossible, in particular the limited number of places available for foreigners attending the conference, be it official delegations, press, officially accredited NGOs or street-demonstrators (see BRIDGES Weekly, 11 September, 2001).
At the time the Qatari capital was chosen as the site of the upcoming Ministerial, the protagonists of the Seattle-protests joined the chorus of critics accusing the WTO of avoiding the confrontation with protesters. "Our message is, you can try to run but you can't hide," Lori Wallach, Director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch said. "We'll bug you at home [...] the protests will be all over the place."
Dissenters plan protests at home
Instead of focusing their efforts on the Ministerial venue, NGOs are organising a global day of action in some 30-40 countries around the world on 9 November, the opening day of the conference. [Public Citizen has collected a comprehensive list of planned actions available at: http://www.citizen.org/hot_issues/issue.cfm?ID=149.] Protests will take place in major cities such as Washington, Paris, Honk Kong, Tokyo, New York and Geneva. Demonstrations will also be held in India, Thailand, Russia, Philippines and some other developing countries.
The list of participating NGOs encompasses a broad and multi-polar network of activists who are catalysing energies under different flags. One of these networks is the Peoples Global Action (PGA) which, in its "global call" (available at: http://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/free/qatar/pgacall.htm), asks its membership to engage in awareness-raising campaigns against WTO through "community based consultations, counter-meetings, public debates and publications". PGA also proposes a "maximum disruption of the work of the trade ministers attending the conference: demands for the publication of national positions, blocking of communications or of departures of delegations" during the days of the Ministerial Conference.
Canadian NGOs are coming together under the Common Front against the WTO (CFWTO at: http://www.wtoaction.org/cfwto/) to organise protests in 26 spots all over Canada. The CFWTO is also currently running two cross-country caravans that have been holding public events in over 60 cities and will converge in Ottawa on 9 November for the global day of action.
In addition, several hundred delegates from Labour Unions, Women's Groups, Environmentalists, Youth Activists, and civil society organisations are meeting in Beirut from 5-8 November for the World Forum on the WTO. The Forum, hosted by NGO Network for Development and The Lebanese Platform on the WTO, will include three days of meetings, workshops, teach-ins, and cultural events (see: http://www.worldforumbeirut2001.org)
The Greenpeace flagship, SV Rainbow Warrior, is expected to harbour in front of Doha during the Ministerial Conference with about 35 activists on board. "We are taking our ship to Doha to bear witness and provide a platform for NGOs -- including local people and indigenous communities from five continents -- to speak to how trade affects them, their health, their livelihoods", said Andrea Durbin, National Campaigns Director for Greenpeace.
This brings us to this week's discussion of TRUMP ERA TARIFFS and their goals of making sure there is no way for 99% of US WE THE PEOPLE to rebuild a REAL US manufacturing economy.
This is why national media propaganda creates FAKE NEWS connecting Trump with RUSSIA and SOCIALISM----the goal will bring MAO CHINESE far-right, authoritarian, militaristic, extreme wealth extreme poverty LIBERTARIAN MARXISM---global corporate campus socialism just as in Asia these few decades.
TRUMP MADE IN CHINA MADE IN AMERICA.
Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs will mean fewer goods “Made in America”
Collateral damage. (AP Photo/Erik Schelzig)
March 01, 2018
Donald Trump is launching a defense of US steel and aluminum producers by imposing tariffs on imports of the raw metals from foreign producers.
The president said today that his administration will set tariffs of 25% and 10% for imported steel and aluminum respectively. He provided no other details on the plan, except that he expects to make it official next week.
The decision followed intense behind-the-scenes wrangling over the issue between different factions within the Trump White House, with advisers like National Economic Council chair Gary Cohn and Secretary of Defense James Mattis reportedly urging the president not to impose the new import taxes.
The president’s “America First” outlook apparently won out.
“You’ll have protection for a long time in a while,” Trump said after a meeting with steel and aluminum executives who stand to benefit from the new rules. “You’ll have to regrow your industries, that’s all I’m asking.”
What he didn’t consider is that the proposed measures will actually undermine American job growth. That’s because American companies that make things out of steel represent a much broader sector of the economy than than the raw metal industries Trump is trying to shore up. Because of the tariffs, manufacturers of steel goods will have to pay higher prices for their raw materials.
American-made finished products could also become less competitive if the US trading partners impose their own tariffs in retaliation. Several countries, including China, Mexico, and EU members, have already signaled they would raise tariffs for US products in response.
As a result, US manufacturers are likely to produce less—and hire less—in the US. A similar policy rolled out by the George W. Bush administration in 2002 resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of jobs in the Rust Belt.
To get a sense of the difference in magnitude between steel makers and industrial steel consumers, consider the size of the auto industry’s labor force compared to that of the steel industry.
Completely unrelated industries, such as agriculture, would be affected as well. Members of Trump’s own party immediately questioned the wisdom of the move. “Every time you do this, you get a retaliation, and agriculture is the number one target,” Kansas sen. Pat Roberts told reporters. “This is terribly counterproductive for the ag economy.”
The tariffs, therefore, have the potential of hurting a lot more workers than they will help.
When we talk about US labor unions morphing into DARK AGES TRADE GUILDS-----this is what Chinese labor unions have been these few decades of FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE global factory enslavement. The Chinese labor unions are operated by the Chinese global 1% owning those factories and these unions simply worked to enforce brutal, enslaving conditions installed by those Chinese global 1%.
When Clinton 1994 GATT AGREEMENT revisions were known all our US labor unions KNEW they would be killed by Clinton as a FAR-RIGHT WING REAGAN NEO-LIBERAL. Yet, our US labor union leaders never stopped supporting Clinton neo-liberals in all elections. This got rid of our strong REAL left social progressives across the nation and filled the DEMOCRATIC PARTY with far-right wing global banking 1%. These labor policies MOVING FORWARD in US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES mirror Chinese labor unions-----the unions are owned and work for the global 1% corporate owners and will be brutal and enslaving.
PLEASE NOTE CNN AS FAKE NEWS-----THERE IS A GREAT MOVEMENT IN INTERNATIONAL MEDIA TO MAKE CHINA AND OTHER ASIAN FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES LOOK TO REFORM LABOR ---CREATING LABOR UNIONS -----BUT THIS IS PROPAGANDA. THESE CHINESE LABOR UNIONS ARE THE SAME CORPORATE OWNED ----AND GLOBAL FACTORY-WORK IN CHINA IS NO LESS ENSLAVING AND BRUTAL.
The changes MOVING FORWARD as regards labor with 1994 GATT----is US citizens as EX-PATS being those Asian sweat shop workers---this is why propaganda makes it sound like workplace conditions are changing. The import to US-----global 99% of labor pool to work in TRUMP's MADE IN CHINA MADE IN AMERICA.
Today, 99% of WE THE PEOPLE need to fight what is the goal of our US labor unions being rebuilt to look just like those CHINESE global 1% corporate owned labor unions.
Protests, suicide: China's labor unrest leads to reform
By Han Yan Yuan, for CNN
updated 1:18 AM EDT, Fri September 5, 2014
(CNN) -- On the morning of her suicide on July 17, Zhou Jianrong came into work earlier than usual.
No one knew what went through her head in those quiet hours before other workers arrived, but as CCTV footage later revealed, she first took 20 minutes to walk around the empty factory before leaping off the fourth floor window.
The 49-year old was found dead shortly before 6 a.m., marking the end of her 12 years at the GCL Footwear factory.
Zhou had just been fired the previous night for participating in a strike that was part of a long-running labor dispute. She was one of more than 100 workers sacked for their involvement.
The tragedy of her death overshadows the surge of labor activism in China. Of the more than 1,000 recorded strikes and protests that took place from June 2011 to the end of 2013, 40% were amongst factory workers, according to employment watchdog China Labour Bulletin.
In China, unions are sometimes ridiculed by Internet users as a "laoban gonghui," meaning they are the "boss' union."
Every factory union belongs to the government-controlled All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU), a mega-institution with an extensive chain of command.
"The ACFTU is first and foremost aligned to the Communist Party and secondly to the local government. It has never seen itself primarily as a workers' organization," says Geoffrey Crothall, a spokesperson for China Labour Bulletin.
Activists have called for July 17, the day worker Zhou committed suicide, to be named "Chinese Laborers' Day of Suffering"
At GCL Footwear though, the factory union was heavily involved from the very first day of the strike, pushing owners to negotiate with the workers.
Most surprisingly, workers directly elected the union vice-chairman, Luo Xiangxun, and according to him, the supervising trade union initially approved of their work.
"In the past, elections of union leaders were controlled by the enterprise; workers can vote but not nominate. Often times, workers don't even know about the elections," says labor academic Wang Jiangsong. "This case is different."
Such developments are fraught with uncertainties. On June 24, Luo was busy organizing workers when the supervising union suddenly pronounced his election illegal, detaining him for seven days. After his release, he has continued to lead workers, demanding their reinstatement.
"The fact that we have seen individual trade union officials leading workers is a sign that the union is beginning to move in the right direction," says Crothall. He observes that the level of local union involvement in this case is unusual but not unique.
In early March, trade union chairman of Walmart's Chengde store in Hebei Province led workers in a fight for fair compensation when the store closed down.
And in May, women from the Japanese-owned Sumida factory in Guangzhou successfully formed a democratically elected union after some deliberation.
Factory workers rally in Zhejiang province in February following the closure of 4,500 factories that were violating safety regulations. (Getty Images)
For now, these might just be isolated cases, but changes are also happening on a policy level.
The Shenzhen Trade Union Federation announced in 2012 that it would move enterprise trade unions towards direct elections, beginning with 163 factories.
On July 2, Xinhua reported that the Guangdong Federation of Trade Unions aims to have all enterprise unions become democratically elected within five years.
Labor academic Wang Jiangsong thinks its premature to believe these efforts to democratize the unions will lead to real change, but he still sees it as a step in the right direction.
"Good officials do exist in the government-controlled ACFTU and reform will begin with them," says Wang. "But most importantly, it is the bottom-up activism that puts pressure on the government to make changes."
Wang explains that most workers have a deep-rooted mistrust of unions.
When an issue arises, they often skip over them and organize through their hometown networks or social media instead.
The government realizes the old way no longer works and is desperate to change the image of the ACFTU, opening enterprise unions for democratic election.
China has reached a point where it needs to rely more on consumption. It's the largest exporter in the world, so it's not realistic for it to grow much faster than the world market
Economist David Dollar
Activists have called for July 17, the day Zhou died, to be named "Chinese Laborers' Day of Suffering," but her suicide did not dampen the efforts of the factory workers who have filed for arbitration and are awaiting results.
Recent developments are worrying some in the business community.
A group of Hong Kong manufacturing and business associations have opposed a proposal by the Guangdong government to give workers the right to demand meetings with employers to negotiate for better benefits.
One of the signers of the opposition, The Chinese Manufacturers' Association of Hong Kong turned down an interview request, but in an editorial for the China Daily, vice-president Eddy Li called the proposal "disastrous."
He points out that China's import and export business has weakened in recent years, environmental policy has increased production costs and other labor requirements have already become a heavy burden for employers.
However, data released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) on July 27 shows that profits on a whole are rising.
David Dollar, senior fellow of Thornton China Center at U.S. think tank Brookings Institution, explains that the growth of production is higher in the medium to high-tech sectors, where higher wages have pressured manufacturers to have productivity gain and move up the value chain -- a healthy structural change for the Chinese economy.
However, in the low-end manufacturing sector, such as footwear or garment factories, it is very hard to find productivity gains and some of those sectors are starting to move out of China to Vietnam and Bangladesh.
A survey of Pearl River Delta manufacturers by Standard Chartered suggests that while manufacturers prefer to move their business inland than to move it abroad, 13% will consider leaving China to save costs, most of which the study believes are low-end producers.
Factory workers view terms of an agreement reached with their employer after a stand-off in 2007. (Getty Images)
Towards a domestic consumption economy
The government might not see this as a negative change -- China no longer wants to be in the market only for its cheap labor. Premier Li Keqiang has long championed a consumption-led economy.
"China has now reached a point where it needs to rely more on consumption. It's the largest exporter in the world, so it's not realistic for it to grow much faster than the world market," says Dollar.
He believes what's important for China now is reforms that will encourage consumptions. For that to happen, wages have to go up.
"I view it as a positive thing that in recent years, wages have been rising very rapidly."
Who needs who?
The one-child policy has slowed down the growth of the labor force, and more young people are going to university rather than factory work.
More than a decade ago, hundreds would line up outside a factory looking for work, but many manufacturers today struggle to find enough workers. With this labor shortage, better working conditions might just be a natural next step, as these days, it is the manufacturers who need workers and not the other way around.
But with 260 million migrant workers in the country, this progress might take some time -- a progress that Zhou will not see.
"It's obvious to me that Madam Zhou didn't fully understand her rights," says He Yuancheng, a legal adviser to former GCL Footwear workers. "If she was aware of her options and knew about the upcoming actions, she would not have jumped."
He Yuancheng further speculates that Zhou might have been disheartened that the company fired her in a heartbeat despite her 12 years of service.
He believes that would explain the 20 minutes she spent quietly circling the empty factory floor before she ended her life.
For the remaining GCL Footwear workers though, He Yuancheng is optimistic.
"Even if we don't win this arbitration, the workers will have contributed to the reform of the system."