recockulous-too

recockulous-too t1_j1a28iz wrote

Yes I agree with your other reason but it wouldn’t be a National security reason.

Subsidizing the steel industry is the same as tariffs as far as the WTO is concerned. But instead of the tax payers paying for it, it would be by companies and end users of the steel and aluminum. You can say that the consumer ultimately pays the same but the main difference is that the consumer has a choice whether or not to use it without increasing national debt.

9

recockulous-too t1_j19b9al wrote

My Opinion is I feel the US is correct, the US steel industry has been decimated by low cost imports from other areas of the world. They can’t compete. Especially in wages and energy costs. The tariffs reverse this. So imagine if all or most of the steel becomes imported and therefore shutters the US steel industry. In case of War time how long would it take to restart and train the employees needed to supply domestically if imported steel becomes scarce or blocked. This is why I think this is a national security issue.

28