Donald Trump says there is no trade war. Tim Bjorkman rejects that Newspeak and says Congress should save rural America from Trump’s destructive ignorance:
Small South Dakota businesses are being “shoved into the front lines of a trade war,” congressional candidate Tim Bjorkman declared Wednesday in Mitchell, reacting to news reports that China intends to slap a 25 percent tariff on U.S. soybean imports.
Trade policy is the kind of thing that calls for prudent, deliberate action and forethought, achieved in collaboration with Congress, he said.
“It looks like that is not happening.”
…Bjorkman said Congress could stop Trump’s trade war.
Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution places the duty and authority for international trade on Congress, he said. The president’s powers result from a ceding of authority by legislative action, and Congress could rescind it, he said.
South Dakota’s current congressional delegation, however, “is not willing to do any more than wring their hands,” Bjorkman said [Mark Andersen, “Bjorkman Berates Inaction on China ‘Trade War’,” Mitchell Daily Republic, 2018.04.04].
Bjorkman’s Republican opponents in the U.S. House race, Shantel Krebs, Dusty Johnson, and Neal Tapio*, don’t appear to be saying much about the economic destruction their party leader is wreaking on rural South Dakota. The hand-wringer Bjorkman seeks to replace, Kristi Noem, says China’s retaliatory tariffs may make life on the farm “a little tougher” and has voiced her concerns to the White House:
Times likely will get a little tougher in the short term thanks to new Chinese tariffs on U.S. farm products including pork and ethanol, which is a big driver of corn prices, which in turn are one of South Dakota’s biggest crops. The Chinese tariffs were precipitated by new U.S. tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum pushed for by U.S. President Donald Trump.
“These are very concerning to me,” Noem said. “If we lose another 20 or 30 cents per bushel, that’s devastating.”
Noem defended the Trump administration’s actions, saying the president’s goal is to get better trade deals for the country as a whole. Noem said she’s been in close contact with U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Purdue on the issue and has voiced her concerns to the White House about the potential impact of the tariffs on farmers and ranchers [Nick Lowrey, “Noem Makes Campaign Stop in Pierre,” Pierre Capital Journal, 2018.04.05].
Wait—Noem’s worried the Chinese tariffs will hurt South Dakota, but she defends the actions Trump took that caused those tariffs? Good grief.
Prior to the tariffs, in February, the trade deficit reached a nine-year high. Under Trump, the trade deficit has increased for six straight months, something that hasn’t happened since 2000. According to Census figures, during President Barack Obama’s eight years in office, U.S. imports were 47.76% larger than exports. Under the thirteen Trump months counted so far, U.S. imports were 52.03% larger than exports.
*Update 12:47 CDT: Neal Tapio has sent out a press release wholeheartedly endorsing the Trump tariffs, calling Chinese retaliation a “tactic from a stale Communist playbook” and saying, “Patriotic American farmers understand that America needs a fighter like President Trump to right the ship.” Translation: if any of you farmers complain, you’re not patriots! Shut up, you pinko pansy farmers, and support your Dear Leader!
Tim Bjorkman is correct. What’s really weird is that farm income rises when there is a Democrat in the White House and a congress that can be bi partisan with that president. Look at these dates and times and then look to see who was president.
“U.S. farm income experienced a golden period during 2011 through 2014, due to strong
commodity prices and agricultural exports. In 2017 agricultural exports are forecast to be up 8%,
at $139.8 billion, due largely to an improving economic outlook in several major foreign
importing countries—but still well below 2014’s record of $152.3 billion. U.S. agricultural
exports are projected to account for 33% of farm sector gross earnings in 2017.
In addition to the outlook for slightly higher net farm income in 2017, farm wealth is also
projected to be up 4% from 2016, to $3,075 billion. Farm asset values reflect farm investors’ and
lenders’ expectations about long-term profitability of farm sector investments. The outlook for
slightly higher farm income has reversed the decline in farmland values experienced in 2016.
Because they comprise such a significant portion of the U.S. farm sector’s asset base (81%),
change in farmland values is a critical barometer of the farm sector’s financial performance.
At the farm household level, average farm household incomes have been well ahead of average
U.S. household incomes since the late 1990s. In 2015 (the last year for which comparable data
were available), the average farm household income (including off-farm income sources) of
$119,880 was about 51% higher than the average U.S. household income of $79,263.” https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40152.pdf
The problem now is a trade war, with complete support of NOem/Thune/Rounds/Krebs and Opie will upend the projections for the ag industry. In addition to the trade war to manipulate markets for insiders, we will now see higher vegetable pricing because of these congressional hooligans regarding immigration as well. Does it make anyone wonder why agriculture was chosen as targets in the farm belt with pork, corn and soybeans to go along with not only California’s fruits, wines, and vegetables, but also other farm states productions as well? I only see Bjorkman expressing concern, why is that? Are farmers and ranchers just so easily cast aside to be ignored because of poor representation in Washington? Look at who the biggest nothings are in Congress and you will see they come from the farm states that are being trampled on by their do nothing congress. Ask them about why that is in a town hall or debate maybe with Bjorkman for sure.
Our correspondent, Old Corporal, will love this statistic — the US manufacturing sectors’ profits are DOWN from the highs they had in Obama’s second term. The trumpster tariffs will cause the US manufacturing sector will give back half, or more of its paper gains from the corporate tax reductions.
https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-arplant-042916-041049
wrong link: https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2018-04-04/trump-tariffs-stick-it-to-u-s-manufacturers-not-china