Skip to content

Krebs Wishes Trump’s Unpredictable Trade Policy Were Good for South Dakota

Published 2018-04-19 by Cory Allen Heidelberger

Last updated on 2018-11-30

Shantel Krebs nabs rattler Dusty Johnson
Maybe tariffs will help us sell more rattlesnake meat….

Secretary of State Shantel Krebs is bending over far too far to make excuses for Donald Trump’s impulsive, heedless, destructive policymaking. The GOP House candidate tells radio news that Trump’s crazy trade policies could somehow lead to “opening up new markets for our exports.”

Shantel, we can’t even tell what Trump’s trade policy is from day to day—he reversed himself on the Trans-Pacific Partnership again Tuesday night. No candidate can run on anything Trump is doing, because he might turn and do the opposite tomorrow, based on whatever random urge he gets while thumbing Tweets on the toilet.

But notice that even the SDGOP spin blog, driven by a hatred for Krebs for pushing his incompetent patron off the political stage in 2013, is willing to contend that the tariffs that Trump has promised and the trade war his policies would provoke if fully enacted are bad for South Dakota farmers and ranchers. The SDGOP spinster invokes Senator John Thune, Senator Mike Rounds, Congresswoman Kristi Noem, Governor Dennis Daugaard, and the Koch Brothers to make the point this liberal blog has been making since before Trump took office: the Trump Administration is bad for South Dakota’s and all of rural America’s interests.

Published in South Dakota

9 Comments

  1. Bucko Bear

    Why can’t these candidates simply have their own positions ??
    I believe Tim Bjorkman is way ahead of the curve.

    2018-04-19
  2. El Rayo X

    If we can’t send our pork to China, we can always purchase Smithfield pork products and just send our money to China.

    2018-04-19
  3. mike from iowa

    https://tinyurl.com/yatbeokn

    Drumpf cracking down on Putin. The more things stay the same with Drumpf, the less things change with Drumpf.

    2018-04-19
  4. Jason

    Cory,

    Trump’s policies are just fine for SD farmers.

    China could end up hurting itself with trade action against US farmers. Here’s how

    Beijing has threatened to impose a 25 percent tariff on U.S. soybeans but analysts say China needs all the beans it can get to meet domestic needs.

    “Eventually, China will need our soybeans, and they’ll be in a pickle,” said a U.S. commodity strategist.

    One study estimates China could see a $3 billion economic loss from the soybean tariff as it will raise prices for Chinese buyers.

    China can buy South American soybeans, but there’s a premium price on it now so American supplies look more competitive.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/19/china-trade-action-on-soybeans-could-leave-them-in-a-pickle.html

    2018-04-19
  5. grudznick

    Ms. Krebs is just pretending to be insaner than most. She is really just a copying cat.

    2018-04-19
  6. Roger Cornelius

    If I were a candidate for office, I don’t know if I would want to hitch my star to Trump’s unpredictable trade war. This is a move by Krebs to get one step ahead of Tapio in the race for Trump’s love.

    2018-04-19
  7. Jason

    Roger,

    I just posted a link that says SD pretty much won the trade war.

    Did you not read it? It’s from a democrat source.

    2018-04-19
  8. Jason

    Cory,

    Everywhere I look, Trump is winning.

    “Putin is ready to make numerous, deep concessions, but he has to appear like he’s not losing,” said Mr Igor Bunin of the Centre for Political Technologies, a consultancy whose clients include Kremlin staff. “He understands Russia can’t compete with the West economically and he doesn’t plan to go to war with the West.”

    The Kremlin is still coming to grips with the economic impact of the most punitive penalties the US has imposed since first sanctioning Russia four years ago, over the conflict in Ukraine.

    The latest measures, which Treasury called payback for Mr Putin’s “malign activity” in general, hit one of the country’s most powerful businessmen, billionaire Oleg Deripaska, the hardest.

    Shares of Mr Deripaska’s aluminium giant Rusal have plunged about 70 per cent in Hong Kong since the US basically banned the company from the dollar economy on April 6, erasing about US$6 billion (S$7.87 billion) of value and threatening 100,000 jobs at a time when Russia is limping out of its longest recession in two decades.

    http://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/putin-seeks-to-dial-down-tensions-with-us-as-sanctions-continue-to-bite

    2018-04-19
  9. Kurt Evans

    John Quincy Adams said America should be “the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all” but “the champion and vindicator only of her own.” Citizens of the world’s various nations might ultimately find ourselves with more liberty and independence under tariff-based revenue systems than we would under unlimited free trade.

    This is from the national platform of the Constitution Party:

    Article I, Section 8 [of the U.S. Constitution] provides that duties, imposts, and excises are legitimate measures upon which the United States government may properly rely. We support a tariff-based revenue system … which was the policy of the United States during most of the nation’s history…

    Tariffs are not only a constitutional source of revenue, but, wisely administered, are an aid to preservation of the national economy. Since the adoption of the 1934 Trade Agreements Act, the United States government has engaged in a free trade policy which has destroyed or endangered important segments of our domestic agriculture and industry, undercut the wages of our working men and women, and totally destroyed or shipped abroad the jobs of hundreds of thousands of workers.

    Three-time presidential candidate Pat Buchanan addressed the topic in his March 5 column, “Why Is the GOP Terrified of Tariffs?”:

    The U.S. relied on tariffs to convert from an agricultural economy in 1800 to the mightiest manufacturing power on earth by 1900.

    Bismarck’s Germany, born in 1871, followed the U.S. example, and swept past free trade Britain before World War I…

    The hysteria that greeted Trump’s idea of a 25 percent tariff on steel and 10 percent tariff on aluminum suggest that restoring this nation’s economic independence is going to be a rocky road…

    If we are to turn our $800 billion trade deficit in goods into an $800 billion surplus, and stop the looting of America’s industrial base and the gutting of our cities and towns, sacrifices will have to be made.

    But if we are not up to it, we will lose our independence, as the countries of the EU have lost theirs…

    Assume a Lexus cost $50,000 in the U.S., and a 20 percent tariff were imposed, raising the price to $60,000.

    What would the Japanese producers of Lexus do?

    They could accept the loss in sales in the world’s greatest market, the USA. They could cut their prices to hold their U.S. market share. Or they could shift production to the United States, building their cars here and keeping their market…

    Who consumes the apples is less important than who owns the orchard. We should depend more upon each other and less upon foreign lands.

    We should tax foreign-made goods and use the revenue, dollar for dollar, to cut taxes on domestic production.

    The idea is not to keep foreign goods out, but to induce foreign companies to move production here.

    We have a strategic asset no one else can match. We control access to the largest, richest market on earth, the USA.

    http://buchanan.org/blog/gop-terrified-tariffs-128840

    2018-04-19

Comments are closed.