Trump Says U.S. Will Purchase Crops to Offset China Losses

[TexasTowelie]

Source: Bloomberg News

President Donald Trump said that the U.S. will boost its purchases of domestic farm products for humanitarian aid in an effort to offset lost demand from China as trade tensions flare between the nations.

Trump said on Twitter on Friday that the U.S. will use its money from the tariffs to buy American agricultural products “in larger amounts than China ever did” and send it to “poor & starving countries” for humanitarian aid. The president indicated potential purchases of $15 billion from farmers. Soybean and grain futures held mostly steady after the announcements.

“In the meantime we will continue to negotiate with China in the hopes that they do not again try to redo deal!” Trump said on Twitter. “Our farmers will do better, faster and starving nations can now be helped.”

Soybean and grain futures plunged this week as U.S. trade talks faltered with China, the world’s top oilseed buyer, and the Asian nation vowed retaliation as the U.S. boosted tariffs on $200 billion in goods. On the Chicago Board of Trade, soybean, corn and wheat futures for July delivery were little changed at 8 a.m. local time.

Read more: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-10/trump-says-u-s-will-boost-crop-purchases-to-offset-china-losses?srnd=premium

[BeyondGeography]

1. Deficits, Schmeficits

I hear the sound of Cheney laughing.

[dalton99a]

2. He's making consumers give their money to farmers

"The U.S. will use its money from the tariffs"

[watoos]

3. I told you!

I said it in another thread. Don't feel sorry for the big farmers Trump already gave them what 12-14 billion dollars.
Not so sure what he is doing is legal or if it makes sense. Isn't what Trump is doing, subsidizing farmers, what he is accusing China of doing?

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Can some economist explain how any of this 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' stuff

helps the US economy? Or creates American jobs? Or aids in worldwide cooperation? What is the purpose?

[TheBlackAdder]

18. It's OK if it's Proletariat Peter who is picking up the tab and not Bourgeoisie Peter!

[CharleyDog]

19. Trump had to say SOMETHING to settle the futures market, it's been tanking for a week

That what he said makes no economic sense, is not sustainable, and not believable.

Who really believes Pres. Fraud cares about hunger? ha ha ha ha. What, no he's going to aid "shithole" countries? Is he going to send the money to Finland? what a joke, what a clown, a fraud.

[meadowlander]

57. Peter is in a blue state and Paul is in a red state.

Since Peter would never vote for Trump anyway, it's fine to rob him to bribe Paul to forget about how deeply shafted he was by Trump's "easy to win" trade war.

[Hugin]

5. Just so long as it isn't one of the four or five countries of Mexico we give the soybeans to.

I'm okay with this.

[Bayard]

6. Afraid of losing the farmer's vote?

I think that's more important to him than any humanitarian aid. He could give a rat's ass about people in those shithole countries, as he's said.

So, who's going to process the goods?

[Turbineguy]

50. THIS.

The subsidies will last until the election.

After that it's AMFYOYO

[lunasun]

7. So basically trump voters are being bribed with our consumer cash .

[Nuggets]

28. Given and accepting socialism.

I can’t stand these royal hypocrites.

Most of rural USA voted for this idiot, they should have to suffer the consequences not use Liberal ideas they crap in daily to pull them up.

[Quemado]

33. I was going to post something similar - isn't this socialism?

The hypocrisy is so blatant.

BTW - I'm being sarcastic here, OK?

[mahatmakanejeeves]

8. I watched "Good Morning America" this morning.

Sheesh, look at all the click bait: https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/news

Anyway, ABC's reporter standing out on the White House lawn took the time to explain that China is NOT paying any tariffs. The tariffs are being paid by importers, who immediately recover their money by adding the cost to the price of the goods being sold.

It is the American consumer who is picking up the tab for the tariffs. This is elementary. Anyone other than "the dumbest goddamn student I ever had," knows this.

Column: Donald Trump's biggest flaw: He's not that bright

By Steve Chapman
November 3, 2017, 2:30 PM

Donald Trump has many serious flaws, including incorrigible dishonesty, rampant narcissism, contempt for women and a fashion sense that makes him think that hairstyle of his is flattering. But nothing compares to his most prominent, crippling and incurable defect: He’s dimmer than a 5-watt bulb.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was reported to have called the president a “moron” — emphasizing that term with an adjective I can’t repeat here. Forced to hold a news conference to praise the president’s intelligence, Tillerson was too honest to deny what he had said.

The late William T. Kelley, who taught Trump at the University of Pennsylvania, said, “Donald Trump was the dumbest goddamn student I ever had.” Tony Schwartz, the ghostwriter of “The Art of the Deal,” says Trump had “a stunning level of superficial knowledge and plain ignorance.”

Trump’s feeble-mindedness is on daily view. When an Uzbek immigrant was arrested for allegedly driving a truck down a Manhattan bike path, killing eight people, the president responded in thunderously stupid ways. First, he tweeted that he had “just ordered Homeland Security to step up our already Extreme Vetting Program.” If you can step it up, why didn’t you do that before?

He fumed that the alleged killer wanted an Islamic State flag for his hospital room. Really? The guy reportedly killed eight people, and the flag is what steams you? Trump demanded the death penalty — opening the way for the suspect’s lawyers to argue that the president has made it impossible for him to get a fair trial.

{snip the rest}

[duforsure]

9. What he says , and what he does

Is two completely different things, as most of his career he has been lying, ask the banks and pardners he's screwed over , making empty promises he knows he'll never keep. He's trying to con the farmers again for their support, and for their vote only for them to find out he's conned them again. China understands this well now too , and why they'll never trust him on anything too. He's doing what he does best, heading this country into a recession , and possibly a depression from gross mismanagement , and widespread corruption.

[yerop]

10. Wait what? To cover his China failure, our taxe$ will buy American food to be sent abroad?

What's wrong with this picture

[Snellius]

11. And red states are horrified by socialism?

Tariff bribes, farm subsidies, federal disaster relief. Of the states who contribute the highest federal tax revenue, 9 out of 10 are on the West Coast or Northeast. Blue. Taxation without representation.

[Quemado]

34. +1 This is socialism.

Fox News - where are you?

BTW - I'm being sarcastic here, OK?

[mahatmakanejeeves]

12. Trump argued for taxing consumers to prop up part of his political base that's getting hammered

On Twitter this morning, Trump effectively argued for taxing consumers to prop up part of his political base that's getting hammered in the China trade war.

Link to tweet

#BillionDollarLoser is so dumb that he refuses to understand that tariff increases are paid by consumers and China is smart so their retaliatory tariffs on US goods target Red States, Trumps base😜

Link to tweet

[yaesu]

13. another bailout for his peeps. nt

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Using taxpayer dollars to shore up his base for 2020. . . . nt

[mahatmakanejeeves]

15. The level of factually wrong info from the president this morning is high.

David Fahrenthold Retweeted

The level of factually wrong info from the president this morning is high.

1) Americans are paying tariffs, not the Chinese
2) Trump has now raised taxes on Americans by $62.5 billion
3) Pretty much every economist predicts tariffs will hurt the economy

Link to tweet

[dalton99a]

17. +1

[Locrian]

16. I know trump is an idiot...

but is there a possibility that big agriculture or ??? is taking advantage of this to buy farms in the US at firesale prices? Its almost like they're trying to destroy them - mob style.

Are any trump supporter (big money) waiting or quietly snatching up these? Disaster capitalism at it's finest?

[mahina]

25. Oh man, I bet you are right. Nailed. Who benefits?

[Locrian]

41. follow the money... always follow the money - n/t

[ooky]

47. Yes, of course.

[keithbvadu2]

20. Trump's higher taxes for his socialist policies

Trump's higher taxes for his socialist policies.

Something you won't hear from a Trump-country farmer:
Rejecting Donald's socialism.

[Collimator]

21. Can't really say it any better than anyone else.

We are paying financially for Trump's mistaken policies. We are paying money to the farmers who probably support Trump. (This is not to suggest that many of them don't work very hard.) And then, we will have less money to actually buy the groceries that we need to feed ourselves.

But, hey, as long as Trump can buy votes . . .

[NBachers]

22. We've already done several tariff-related price increases at the store I work in; higher ones are

coming up in the near future. I hate changing the tags on the already-high prices, but I've been warned that even higher increases are coming. Every time our suppliers raise their prices, we have to, too.

"Just buy American-made products?" I'd love to. But the mass-distribution system isn't set up for it. Our office is not enthusiastic about setting up new accounts for lots of small vendors. Faucets we'd be selling for $325 would be competing against sub-$100 faucets.

So it's the customers, contractors, home-owners and business-owners who end up paying the higher prices. I'm afraid that this is setting us up for a double whammy when the economy goes south again- higher prices will cut into purchasing ability; tight and expensive borrowing rates will make it harder to finance credit and projects.

When the change happens, I just hope it's before the 2020 elections, and not after. Eventually, this economy-pumping will lose it's effectiveness.

[Retrograde]

23. This sounds like the sort of business acumen

that leads to multi-billion dollar losses.

Actually, I can see cases where the government would want to prop up specific industries in specific circumstances, but given trump's record I think this is more a case of "try to keep as many balls moving as long as possible so the voters can't figure out what you're really up to"

[underpants]

37. He handles money like it's coming out of a cigar box

Money here money there then oh crap! There’s no money left !!! 🤯

[stillcool]

24. it's so confusing...

pay farmers to send food to poor nations. At the same time cut aid to poor Americans.

Trump Administration Seeks to Redefine Formula for Calculating Poverty
By Annie Karni
May 7, 2019

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is proposing regulatory changes that could result in cuts in federal aid to millions of low-income Americans.

The proposal by the Office of Management and Budget on Monday would change how inflation is used to calculate the official definition of poverty used by the Census Bureau to estimate the size of the country’s poor population. The measure is also often applied to determine eligibility for government benefits.
---------------------------------
“This policy would, over time, cut or take away entirely food assistance, health and other forms of basic assistance from millions of people who struggle to put food on the table, keep a roof over their heads and see a doctor when they need to,” said Sharon Parrott, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. She also noted that the reductions stood in contrast to the administration’s 2017 tax law, which gave new benefits to high-income households.

[roamer65]

26. This should be challenged in court.

Also through the WTO. It constitutes dumping when a government buys a product, then dumps it on the open markets at a loss. If I were the EU, I would immediately apply punitive tariffs to American agricultural products.

[vlyons]

27. Not without a bill from the House

His proposal is more welfare for Big Agriculture. But small family farms? I'll bet you won't hear any GOPers calling it "socialism."

[MontanaFarmer]

29. WTO isn't going to like this much.

This is known as a PL-480 purchase, and we've been doing them for years, but if they rise above a certain number it's viewed as anti- competitive. Should be interesting. The fact that the commodity markets didn't surge on this news, despite being near or at contract lows, might indicate how much weight this idea carries.

[yonder]

52. +1.

[Vinca]

30. Hmmm . . . isn't that socialism?

[Kurt V.]

31. i watch the farm report every sunday morning. this is not what the farmers want.

[The Liberal Lion]

32. Another example of trump fucking up and making others pay for it.

When President Obama put forward a proposal to underwrite the transition of the country to green energy by subsidizing things like solar panels to bring down the cost for consumers republicans screamed "socialism". Now trump is actually using socialism to bribe farmers to vote for him. However, in this case the wound is self inflicted, this will do nothing to bring down cost for consumers and the actual returns from such a policy the will be next to nothing.

[SCantiGOP]

35. This is a fantasy

Trump can’t “spend” a dime unless Congress appropriates it.
The press just keeps reporting this bullshit from Trump like it has the force of law.

[underpants]

36. Hey! YooHoo! Starving people here

Just saying.

[Thomas Hurt]

38. sounds like that dreaded socialist wealth redistribution to me.

why does my money have to go to farmers who voted for that idiot.

[onenote]

39. Trump doesn't understand tariffs.

The tariffs that Trump is imposing on imported Chinese goods will raise the cost that US consumers pay for those goods in one of two ways. Either US companies that purchase those goods (for resale in the US market) will pay more them and pass that additional cost to consumers or US companies will find alternative sources for those goods, presumably paying more than they were paying before the tariffs were imposed.

On the flip side, the tariffs that China imposes on US agricultural goods will hurt farmers to the extent that China finds other sources for those goods -- which may be easier for them than it will be for US purchasers to find alternatives to the tariffed Chinese goods.

If US purchasers reduce their purchase of Chinese goods (and instead find other sources), there isn't going to be this big pile of money to pay to farmers to offset their losses. And to the extent that there is a pile of money, it's not coming from the Chinese, it's coming from the US companies (and their consumers) who ultimately pay the tariff.

[Yavin4]

40. BTW, this is not Socialism. Don't fall for that frame.

Government buying something does not make it Socialism, and saying that it does is a negative framing device.

That is all.

[yellowcanine]

42. Corn and soybeans are mostly fed to animals

The amounts needed for humanitarian aid would be a drop in the bucket. And it would wreck local markets and hurt farmers in recipient countries. Most food development aid is purchased locally. Helps local farmers and you get food that people want and know how to cook.

[Brother Buzz]

43. I guess the orange anus skipped Tariffs 101 at his highfalutin business college

[Cold War Spook]

44. Does Trump think that tariffs are a type of tax that goes to the government?

The government doesn't see any of this money. The tariff is paid by the importer and passed along to the consumer. So now the consumer pays more for this product leaving the consumer less money to buy other goods. This hurts the economy.

[Honeycombe8]

46. It is? I thought it was a tax. nt

[Mosby]

53. I don't think thats how it works

Tariffs are collected by the feds, and the increase cost for the seller may or may not be passed on to the consumer depending on the elasticity of demand for the product.

A lot of people don't seem to understand that Liberals used to support tariffs. Now I guess we are supposed to be free trade globalists.

If done properly, tariffs provide incentives to developing countries to improve environmental, safety, building and wage standards.

Howard Dean on trade:

NAFTA and the WTO only globalized the rights of multinational corporations, but they did not globalize the rights of workers. They are not going to globalize human rights, environmental rights, the right to organize. That needs to happen. And if it doesn’t happen, NAFTA and the WTO simply aren’t going to work. Right now, we’re exporting jobs.

We need to have a level playing field. We need to have the same kinds of environmental protections, labor protections, human rights protections and worker protections if we’re going to have open borders. That will not disadvantage exports.

......

Unfortunately, our free trade policies have also had the effect of hollowing out our industrial capacity, and most worrisome, undermining our own middle class. All through this country, including in Vermont, I’ve seen factories move to China and Mexico, leaving American workers to learn new skills & earn lower wages.

Free trade must equal fair trade. We are subsidizing the sometimes awful environmental practices of our trading partners, and we are subsidizing the profits of multinational corporations by not having international labor standards. If free trade allows General Motors to set up a plant in Mexico, free trade should allow the UAW to organize that plant under conditions similar to those in the US. This isn’t wage parity; I am asking for shared ground rules.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Howard_Dean_Free_Trade.htm

[MoonchildCA]

54. Yes, they are paid by the importer...

...and the cost is passed along to the consumer, but the government receives those dollars.

It is a tax, collected by the U.S. Treasury.

[Cold War Spook]

55. Okay. I got it now.

The importer pays the government the tariff and then charges the consumer the cost of the tariff. So the importer pays the government and then gets his money back from the consumer so actually, it is a tax on the consumer even though the consumer does not pay the government directly. The Democrats have got to make that very plain to the people that they are being taxed.

[Honeycombe8]

45. He doesn't know what the h** he's doing. Someone get this clown out of office. nt

[ooky]

48. This charade will go on for as long as President Sigmund Fraud is in office.

The day he leaves everybody will be ready to go back to normal again.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

49. That's Socialism

[blueinredohio]

51. That's exactly what I was going to say.

[BlueIdaho]

56. He's going to give the crops to "Shit Hole Countries?"

I thought he was trying to cut aid to countries he considers “Shit Holes.” Now he want to increase their aid? Shitler lacks a coherent operating strategy.

My apologies for quoting such an abhorrent phrase...