Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: unclewest who wrote (30749)	5/25/2002 7:20:57 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 281500

<<besides it is too late to help the carolinas. most of the textile jobs have already left.>> Back in '78 I owned a men's clothing business. Carried Arrow shirts. They had gone 15% overseas at the time. Union wanted X dollars per hour and Arrow told them at that rate 85% would be overseas. Union oked that.

To: unclewest who wrote (30749)	5/25/2002 10:52:41 PM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

the protectionism demand extends far and wide ... that is going to continue forever it is called voting your pocketbook ... and it ain't just happening in the USA. agreed on all points. all the more reason for the US federal government--which is supposed to represent the national interest, not merely a few local special interests--to do what it can to fight the trend. And while it happens elsewhere as well, the fact is that the US is so far and away the richest and strongest power on the globe that it is uniquely well-positioned and able to afford acting big rather than small... tb@noblesseoblige.com

To: unclewest who wrote (30749)	5/25/2002 11:32:48 PM
From: Gulo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Given that trade is a "Foreign Affair", I'm surprised it is not discussed more here. >unfair canadian subsidies of their lumber exports to the USA As I understand it, the complaint is that the lower Canadian stumpage fees are thought by the U.S. timber lobby to constitute a subsidy. As with any real story, there are a number of points of view. The U.S. timber cutters have to pay high fees for cutting on private land because that is what the market in those areas will bear. There is high demand for the lumber because there is an artificially high number of wood cutters. If we let the market rule, the U.S. industry would be rationalized. Yes some jobs would be lost, but they would be lost from an industry that should shed jobs. Will overall U.S. unemployment rise? No. Total employment will rise because capital will be more efficiently distributed. That said, the Canadian stumpage rates are generally lower than rates on U.S. public lands as well. The fact that costs such as replanting, road construction, surveys, resource assessments, etc. are paid for by the taxpayer in the U.S. means that those costs have to be recouped in stumpage fees on public lands. Those costs are borne separately by the logging companies in Canada. In the big picture, Canadian lumber costs less than U.S. lumber for the same reason that fresh water in Canada costs less than fresh water in Saudi Arabia. There is more of it. Canadian lumber plants also benefit from an economy of scale made possible from the large amount of forest available (many timber licenses in Canada were given out early last century and are positively huge). Aside from much higher U.S. lumber prices, a major side effect of the current 30% duties placed on Canadian lumber will be increasing demand by U.S. lumber companies for timber rights on private woodlots. The woodlot owners will make a killing because they will now be able to charge even higher stumpage fees, especially since the money collected from duties will be given to the lumber companies. The end result is that the U.S. lumber companies will still be money losers. Ah. The beauty of the law of supply and demand. -g As an aside, I'd love to see a slowdown in the Canadian logging industry, especially in west coast old-growth forest, because the current rates are not sustainable.