Trump's proposed wine tariffs will hurt Americans, not the French

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

2 hours ago, laylalex said:

I was listening to KPCC this morning (local NPR station) and a local wine importer and supplier was interviewed briefly. He specializes in French wine, and he said the 100% tariff will kill his business -- people won't buy a completely legal product they enjoy because it's now double the price. On top of that, he said that this will affect local restaurants, local liquor stores, local bars, etc. who all make profits from French wine. If you have a French restaurant, people aren't coming to you to buy Australian Shiraz to go with their steak frites or boeuf bourguignon. Bottom line is (as others have said over and over) consumers pay, and France won't feel it very much.

 

There may be a legitimate beef with France but this just isn't good for American business. OMG I sound like a member of the chamber of commerce when I say that.  

KPCC in da house..... I have been interviewed by them before

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

2 hours ago, laylalex said:

I was listening to KPCC this morning (local NPR station) and a local wine importer and supplier was interviewed briefly. He specializes in French wine, and he said the 100% tariff will kill his business -- people won't buy a completely legal product they enjoy because it's now double the price. On top of that, he said that this will affect local restaurants, local liquor stores, local bars, etc. who all make profits from French wine. If you have a French restaurant, people aren't coming to you to buy Australian Shiraz to go with their steak frites or boeuf bourguignon. Bottom line is (as others have said over and over) consumers pay, and France won't feel it very much.

 

There may be a legitimate beef with France but this just isn't good for American business. OMG I sound like a member of the chamber of commerce when I say that.  

So you are saying that it will be a boon for the local wine market?

[Dashinka 24,800]

24 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

     Changing the subject?

Nope, just pointing out how many of the folks that are so against this tariff on wine due to the effects on small businesses would most likely be in favor of something like raising the minimum wage that these same small businesses pay.

[laylalex 7,300]

47 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

KPCC in da house..... I have been interviewed by them before

Cool! When were you interviewed and about what? I also listen to KCRW, but KPCC and Air Talk are really the gold standard for me when it comes to NPR. They were also covering the Astros scandal this morning in a lot of detail, which I enjoyed hearing about. Dodgers fans are understandably upset since the whole scandal was at its peak (apparently) during the 2017 World Series between the Astros and the Dodgers. My dad (Dodgers superfan) gave me an earful this morning about it and I was like: I have no dog in this fight. Baseball is YOUR thing.  

49 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

So you are saying that it will be a boon for the local wine market?

Apparently not, according to the news from California wine merchants. People are always going to like what they like, and it's not a strict substitution -- people who like a Bordeaux aren't necessarily going to sub in a Cab from Sonoma. It's like: oh, I love black olives, but now I can't get them, so I'll just eat green ones. Some people that will work with, but for many it won't. The wine producers are going to be fine, it's the people further down the chain (logistics, distribution, retail, etc) who are going to feel this. And of course the consumer, too. That's pretty much what I have been hearing from reports coming out of the industry.

[90DayFinancier 910]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

Nope, just pointing out how many of the folks that are so against this tariff on wine due to the effects on small businesses would most likely be in favor of something like raising the minimum wage that these same small businesses pay.

Okay you are way off in left field but let's help you sort this.  

 

Minimum wage con: expenses increase so consumer will pay more. Some marginal businesses will suffer or not start.( However recent Seattle area minimum wage laws impacted employment negatively in the 12 month term but had a net positive affect in the long run.)

 

Minimum wage pro:

Increases in mandatory wages have a demonstrative increase in the health and mental health if the worker and her family.

Studies were done on the effects of a one dollar raise:

Alcohol and substance abuse dropped, long term career and education prospects increased, job satisfaction increased, divorce and family issues decreased, homelessness dropped, use of public benefits dropped.

 

________________

 

Tariffs pro: revenue goes to Washington DC , domestic workers increase employment and wages (short term),domestic producers who are struggling due to comparative disadvantage have a brief (and I mean brief) window to upgrade and modernize to shorten the gap (no real advantage on the growers front for wine I am afraid, but the winemakers get a bump). Note US steel is struggling more after the recent Tariffs while their competition did quite well, so tariffs are no panacea. Tariffs can be used to negotiate opening new markets and agreements, but folks in this forum are not fans of global agreements so, why put that in the pro.

 

Tariffs con:

The taxes....,

Increases cost to consumer twofold

1. The taxes

2. Decrease in competition

.

Will trigger retaliation on the same or different sector creating lower export revenue and opportunity. Loss if jobs and wages. Lower domestic profits and rents.

 

So if you can demonstrate that the clerk or server who is bringing me my French or American wine will benefit with a better life with these Tariffs, show us. Because that is the reason most people support living wages. Otherwise, we can put this argument in the dust bin.

 

Edited January 15, 2020 by 90DayFinancier

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,382]

4 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   

 

   Foreign governments don't enter the equation. Foreign governments are not selling wine, foreign businesses do. I'm not a big wine buyer myself, but I think the traditional Republican mantra should apply here. The government does not need to be involved. I'm all for leveling the playing field. Start that off by making better wine in the US and then you can charge more for it.  

 

  This may not be rocket science, but some of you still aren't getting it. A tariff is a direct source of revenue for the government paid for by the consumer.  There are legitimate reasons for tariffs, but leveling the playing field between inferior products and quality products is not one of them.

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

You argument augured into the ground the second you said that foreign govts dont enter into the argument.  They do. They impose huge tariffs and trade barriers to our products while we open our markets to theirs. 

 

So tell me why would it make sense to give them way more favorable access to our markets at a fraction of the tariffs. Zero.

Yours and others hatred of all things Trump is making your logic loops short circuit.

 

Inferior products OMG, that straw argument is as lame as middle class families might not be able to afford French wine.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

1 hour ago, laylalex said:

Cool! When were you interviewed and about what? I also listen to KCRW, but KPCC and Air Talk are really the gold standard for me when it comes to NPR. They were also covering the Astros scandal this morning in a lot of detail, which I enjoyed hearing about. Dodgers fans are understandably upset since the whole scandal was at its peak (apparently) during the 2017 World Series between the Astros and the Dodgers. My dad (Dodgers superfan) gave me an earful this morning about it and I was like: I have no dog in this fight. Baseball is YOUR thing.  

Apparently not, according to the news from California wine merchants. People are always going to like what they like, and it's not a strict substitution -- people who like a Bordeaux aren't necessarily going to sub in a Cab from Sonoma. It's like: oh, I love black olives, but now I can't get them, so I'll just eat green ones. Some people that will work with, but for many it won't. The wine producers are going to be fine, it's the people further down the chain (logistics, distribution, retail, etc) who are going to feel this. And of course the consumer, too. That's pretty much what I have been hearing from reports coming out of the industry.

It was about 2014 when I was interview with them in regards to the CA shake alert system. We took the KPCC reporter out with us to a site up in Lancaster to show him how a standard seismic vault looks like. He went on to interview myself and another guy. But it was weird because he was with us all day that day. 

I am quite appalled that you don't think that KFI is the gold standard of radio. I still listen to John and Ken on the podcast mode almost everyday so I don't have to listen to commercials. 

I remember that World Series because everybody and their mom had Dodger fever in LA and we watched the last two games. I still can't believe that put Darvish out there to pitch. I hope that win is vacated for them because they clearly cheated.

[laylalex 7,300]

52 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

I remember that World Series because everybody and their mom had Dodger fever in LA and we watched the last two games. I still can't believe that put Darvish out there to pitch. I hope that win is vacated for them because they clearly cheated.

Yeah, it was kinda nuts. I agree that the MLB should really consider giving the championship to the Dodgers. Really pretty shocking.

 

Speaking of Yu Darvish, did you see this? They were talking about it on Air Talk.  

 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

You argument augured into the ground the second you said that foreign govts dont enter into the argument.  They do. They impose huge tariffs and trade barriers to our products while we open our markets to theirs. 

 

So tell me why would it make sense to give them way more favorable access to our markets at a fraction of the tariffs. Zero.

Yours and others hatred of all things Trump is making your logic loops short circuit.

 

Inferior products OMG, that straw argument is as lame as middle class families might not be able to afford French wine.

 

   Equitable tariffs on equivalent goods have their place. We are not talking about that here. We are talking about a 100% tariff on wine that Trump proposed in response to France taxing tech companies. The only straw man argument in all of this is the one that Trump made (and you apparently fell for). 

 

  So restaurants, importers and retailers will feel the hurt for this one. Consumers may also, if they want to buy imported wine. Turns out good for Trump though. He owns a considerably large winery in the US, but doesn't really like to drink wine himself. Certainly all works out nicely.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

3 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Nope, just pointing out how many of the folks that are so against this tariff on wine due to the effects on small businesses would most likely be in favor of something like raising the minimum wage that these same small businesses pay.

 

   Folks are against this tariff, and many similar ones, because they are nonsense. 

[Dashinka 24,800]

9 hours ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Okay you are way off in left field but let's help you sort this.  

 

Minimum wage con: expenses increase so consumer will pay more. Some marginal businesses will suffer or not start.( However recent Seattle area minimum wage laws impacted employment negatively in the 12 month term but had a net positive affect in the long run.)

 

Minimum wage pro:

Increases in mandatory wages have a demonstrative increase in the health and mental health if the worker and her family.

Studies were done on the effects of a one dollar raise:

Alcohol and substance abuse dropped, long term career and education prospects increased, job satisfaction increased, divorce and family issues decreased, homelessness dropped, use of public benefits dropped.

 

________________

 

Tariffs pro: revenue goes to Washington DC , domestic workers increase employment and wages (short term),domestic producers who are struggling due to comparative disadvantage have a brief (and I mean brief) window to upgrade and modernize to shorten the gap (no real advantage on the growers front for wine I am afraid, but the winemakers get a bump). Note US steel is struggling more after the recent Tariffs while their competition did quite well, so tariffs are no panacea. Tariffs can be used to negotiate opening new markets and agreements, but folks in this forum are not fans of global agreements so, why put that in the pro.

 

Tariffs con:

The taxes....,

Increases cost to consumer twofold

1. The taxes

2. Decrease in competition

.

Will trigger retaliation on the same or different sector creating lower export revenue and opportunity. Loss if jobs and wages. Lower domestic profits and rents.

 

So if you can demonstrate that the clerk or server who is bringing me my French or American wine will benefit with a better life with these Tariffs, show us. Because that is the reason most people support living wages. Otherwise, we can put this argument in the dust bin.

 

Personally, I am a very big fan of global open fair trade, and in general am against tariffs.  That being said, it is time for the US to stop taking it in the rear with respect to international trade, if other countries want to install tariffs or subsidize their industries for protection, then the US should not be assisting that by allowing those foreign products an uncompetitive position in our own market.  It is called a trade war for a reason.  Unless we are talking about a very niche market like passenger aircraft where there are few suppliers, something like wine where there are a plethora of makers, the market will survive.

 

As to the minimum wage argument, the simple fact is that any artificial regulation put on a market impacts the cost of doing business.  Just like tariffs that raises the cost of goods/services, mandatory and not market driven wages will also raise the cost of goods/services.  Then of course the negative you pointed out that tariff proceeds go to Washington, doesn't Washington also collect income taxes?

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Personally, I am a very big fan of global open fair trade, and in general am against tariffs.  That being said, it is time for the US to stop taking it in the rear with respect to international trade, if other countries want to install tariffs or subsidize their industries for protection, then the US should not be assisting that by allowing those foreign products an uncompetitive position in our own market.  It is called a trade war for a reason.  Unless we are talking about a very niche market like passenger aircraft where there are few suppliers, something like wine where there are a plethora of makers, the market will survive.

 

As to the minimum wage argument, the simple fact is that any artificial regulation put on a market impacts the cost of doing business.  Just like tariffs that raises the cost of goods/services, mandatory and not market driven wages will also raise the cost of goods/services.  Then of course the negative you pointed out that tariff proceeds go to Washington, doesn't Washington also collect income taxes?

Destroy American productivity, prowess, and self-reliance, acquiesce to supranational bodies, meet wrecking ball.

[90DayFinancier 910]

7 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Personally, I am a very big fan of global open fair trade, and in general am against tariffs.  That being said, it is time for the US to stop taking it in the rear with respect to international trade, if other countries want to install tariffs or subsidize their industries for protection, then the US should not be assisting that by allowing those foreign products an uncompetitive position in our own market.  It is called a trade war for a reason.  Unless we are talking about a very niche market like passenger aircraft where there are few suppliers, something like wine where there are a plethora of makers, the market will survive.

If you want to talk turkey about EU Trade, The real beef is not French wine and a tax on Facebook. 

 

The real beef is with Airbus and how they subsidized operations.  Trump's pronouncements are simply playing to his base.

 

Quote

 

As to the minimum wage argument, the simple fact is that any artificial regulation put on a market impacts the cost of doing business.  Just like tariffs that raises the cost of goods/services, mandatory and not market driven wages will also raise the cost of goods/services. 

 

 

Then of course the negative you pointed out that tariff proceeds go to Washington, doesn't Washington also collect income taxes?

Yes and when people earn a living wage they send more instead of using services.

Edited January 15, 2020 by 90DayFinancier

[90DayFinancier 910]

Uh oh

 

U.S. wine consumption drops for first time in 25 years

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/478060-us-wine-consumption-dropped-for-first-time-in-a-quarter-century-last-year

 

[Dashinka 24,800]

34 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Uh oh

 

U.S. wine consumption drops for first time in 25 years

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/478060-us-wine-consumption-dropped-for-first-time-in-a-quarter-century-last-year

 

Isn’t that a good thing?  Sure, there are studies that say a little red wine may be beneficial health wise, but in general, alcohol consumption dropping would seem a positive.