Trump's trade agenda on the verge of imploding

[mark46]

If that is true, the courts would overthrow the emergency order. It is not the case. Also, and at least as important, Congress has the power to override.

You have stated your opinion with regard to intent and abuse. All three branches disagree with you.

This is what is called an abuse of our system. Congress never intended to give the President national emergency powers to dictate corporate activity like this.

 

[variant]

If that is true, the courts would overthrow the emergency order. It is not the case. Also, and at least as important, Congress has the power to override.

You have stated your opinion with regard to intent and abuse. All three branches disagree with you.

Not really they only last agreed to it on the wall funding.

We'll see.

I also don't think this will be the last of it if congress and the courts don't draw any line on this action. Trump will predictably continue to claim greater and greater power.

 

[mark46]

Folks oppose because it is Trump. See below for a poster who doesn't want the post office to perform this function.

BUT, LET'S BE CLEAR
Are you all OK with the president ordering that ALL packages from China be inspected for drugs; and yes, I'm fine if it is the customs service that does these millions of inspections.

Obviously, it is much more efficient to delegate and coordinate this task to the carriers. But, I suppose if Democrats and the courts insist, the customs folks can perform the inspections.

He ordered the carriers to do it, not customs. Why defend this idiocy?

 

[Desk trauma]

BUT, LET'S BE CLEAR
Are you all OK with the president ordering that ALL packages from China be inspected for drugs; and yes, I'm fine if it is the customs service that does these millions of inspections.

All shipping is already subject to inspection at the boarder.

Obviously, it is much more efficient to delegate and coordinate this task to the carriers.

In what way is that obvious? The private carriers are not in the business of incepting shipments for contraband, that's the job of customs, and the post office is in most cases forbidden to open packages as they run into fourth amendment issues. There is nothing obvious about having third parties do customs job for them based on the whim of our mercurial president.

 

[mark46]

Personally, I think that it is within the scope of the power of the presidency (subject to Congressional over-ride) to declare that US companies should make no future contracts to purchase certain goods from a given country.

We have done in it the past for contracts with Iran, Russia. North Korea and lots of others. Some of these restrictions have been initiated by the Congress, others by the president.

I don't think that Trump will follow through. However, he would be basically declaring that China was an enemy of the US and that we should eliminate some or all trade with the enemy.

Not really they only last agreed to it on the wall funding.

We'll see.

I also don't think this will be the last of it if congress and the courts don't draw any line on this action. Trump will predictably continue to claim greater and greater power.

 

[variant]

I don't think that Trump will follow through. However, he would be basically declaring that China was an enemy of the US and that we should eliminate some or all trade with the enemy.

I don't think that should be a unilateral power with mere congressional oversight but rather something the Congress should do with his approval.

Declaring China an enemy or regulating how we do business with them should never be left to the whims of someone like Donald Trump.

 

[mark46]

Really?

You believe that every package and letter is inspected by customs? You think that every item that you order from Asia is inspected when it comes through the postal service or Amazon? You think that the $20 order of ink that I got last week was inspected?

Obviously, the president made a controversial statement. As always, both sides ignored the underlying issue, and either supported or opposed the president and his statement.

The OPEN QUESTION is what further inspections should be made to reduce the amount of Fentanyl that come into the US from China?

All shipping is already subject to inspection at the border.

 

[mark46]

What you seem to be saying is that we should have a new law with regard to emergencies powers. I agree. However, for now, we have a law passed by Congress. I believe that there were others passed after 911 that gave the president extraordinary powers.

BTW, having a tariffs and restrictions being moved back to Congress for initiation would be a MAJOR change in the balance of powers. I agree that the presidency has been increasing in power for a century.

HOWEVER, and it is a big however. We should be very careful when we request changes in laws merely because we oppose the current president. For example, folks want to get of the filibuster because of the current situation. This is a major mistake.

I don't think that should be a unilateral power with mere congressional oversight but rather something the Congress should do with his approval.

Declaring China an enemy or regulating how we do business with them should never be left to the whims of someone like Donald Trump.

 

[Desk trauma]

Really?

Yes, really. 100% of the items that cross our boarder are subject to search.

You believe that every package and letter is inspected by customs? You think that every item that you order from Asia is inspected when it comes through the postal service or Amazon? You think that the $20 order of ink that I got last week was inspected?

Please read what I wrote, I said that they were subject to search. Going beyond random inspection, for cause inspection and moving to opening every last thing then pawing thought it would cause trade to grind to a halt.

Obviously, the president made a controversial statement.

He made a statement demanding that people without the authority or infrastructure do the job of a government department that is already in place.

OPEN QUESTION is what further inspections should be made to reduce the amount of Fentanyl that come into the US from China?

No.

 

[mark46]

One of us doesn't understand what border inspections mean.

When folks in Nebraska receive a letter from a company in Hong Kong, do you believe that this letter is searched, or even a percentage is searched?
=======
In any case, what you seem to be saying is that we need no more inspections, because that would hurt trade. The fact that the current system is wholly in adequate in preventing Fentanyl from entering the country (especially from Canada) seems not to matter.

Yes, really. 100% of the items that cross our boarder are subject to search.
.

 

[Desk trauma]

When folks in Nebraska receive a letter from a company in Hong Kong, do you believe that this letter is searched, or even a percentage is searched?

Please read what I wrote, subject to search not searched.

In any case, what you seem to be saying is that we need no more inspections, because that would hurt trade.

Whatever the level of inspections are they are to be done by the department we have set up to handle such things, not private companies nor the post office as the presidents remarks call for. Odd that this point keeps getting breezed past.

As for more inspections for drugs, total wast of time in my view but that ties into my larger issue with prohibition itself.

The fact that the current system is wholly in adequate in preventing Fentanyl from entering the country (especially from Canada) seems not to matter.

We can't keep drugs out of anything short of super max prisons. Stopping them elsewhere is a fools errand.

 

[mark46]

OK, you stated your real objection. You don't believe in searching for drugs. Others strongly disagree, understand the dangers of Fentalyl and are willing to do a lot to reduce the amounts coming into the US.

For us, the issue is not whether we should bother to try to reduce the flow. Ours is where efforts should be made.

Please read what I wrote, subject to search not searched.




Whatever the level of inspections are they are to be done by the department we have set up to handle such things, not private companies nor the post office as the presidents remarks call for. Odd that this point keeps getting breezed past.

As for more inspections for drugs, total wast of time in my view but that ties into my larger issue with prohibition itself.



We can't keep drugs out of anything short of super max prisons. Stopping them elsewhere is a fools errand.

 

[Speedwell]

One of us doesn't understand what border inspections mean.

When folks in Nebraska receive a letter from a company in Hong Kong, do you believe that this letter is searched, or even a percentage is searched?

It is all subject to inspection. If it evidently contains more than a piece of paper then a certain percentage will be opened.
=======

In any case, what you seem to be saying is that we need no more inspections, because that would hurt trade. The fact that the current system is wholly in adequate in preventing Fentanyl from entering the country (especially from Canada) seems not to matter.

We need no more inspections by employees of private companies who are not necessarily competent to carry them out. If the government suspects that increasing amounts Fentanyl are being shipped to this country illegally, the first step is to direct Customs to devote more resources to stop it.

 

[Desk trauma]

OK, you stated your real objection. You don't believe in searching for drugs.

As I stated, and you ignored repeatedly, my first issue is the absurdity of demanding that those without the infrastructure nor authority start searching packages.

 

[mark46]

OK, then we should credit the president with wanting to do something. Folks need to get together an suggest alternatives, including increased inspections, sanctions against China and Chinese companies.

Apparently, folks want to increase the level of federal US employees, rather than have involvement by the carrier (after training). Fine, then we probably need to double the number of inspectors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...ehicles-crossing-southern-border/?arc404=true

US imposes sanctions on suspected Chinese fentanyl producers

Maybe Trump is wrong in method, but he IMHO is right in wanting to attack the traffickers, their companies, and their countries.

It is all subject to inspection. If it evidently contains more than a piece of paper then a certain percentage will be opened.
=======
We need no more inspections by employees of private companies who are not necessarily competent to carry them out. If the government suspects that increasing amounts Fentanyl are being shipped to this country illegally, the first step is to direct Customs to devote more resources to stop it.

 

[Desk trauma]

OK, then we should credit the president with wanting to do something.

The president is not due credit for spouting off ignorant nonsense.

 

[mark46]

Clearly not, since his name is Trump, and he is a Republican.

The president is not due credit for spouting off ignorant nonsense.

 

[Desk trauma]

Clearly not, since his name is Trump, and he is a Republican.

It's not a matter of partisan ship on my part no matter how much you may wish it to be so.

 

[mark46]

Apparently, some of it is not partisanship.

Perhaps. you believe that trying to end drug trafficking is ignorant nonsense whether it is by Obama or Trump.

It's not a matter of partisan ship on my part no matter how much you may wish it to be so.

 

[Speedwell]

OK, then we should credit the president with wanting to do something. Folks need to get together an suggest alternatives, including increased inspections, sanctions against China and Chinese companies.

Apparently, folks want to increase the level of federal US employees, rather than have involvement by the carrier (after training). Fine, then we probably need to double the number of inspectors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...ehicles-crossing-southern-border/?arc404=true

This line of argument is sounding eerily familiar. Before it was that if you don't want a 35-foot high concrete monolith wall from coast to coast then you must be in favor of completely open borders where anybody can just walk in. Now, it's if you don't want employees of private shipping companies to be carrying out 100% inspections of the packages which pass through their hands, you don't care if illegal drugs come into the country.