on 3/13/02 8:18 PM, Russell Chapman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Not really - different countries export different types of steel, and > shouldn't fall to the lowest common denominator.
I think a country's overall steel production should closely match what their needs are. One reason we are at this point is that everybody overproduces. I think the estimate is 250 million tons worth of overproduction. Over here we only produce about 75 percent of what we need. China is the other needy country. Other factors include the strong dollar and soft economies. > The other thing (and > you mentioned close), is that west coast steel consumers can buy Pacific > Rim (Australia, Korea, China, Japan) steel cheaper than US East Coast > steel, but East Coast factories wouldn't consider Pacific Rim steel. > Perhaps infrastructure is as much an issue as mill efficiency? It costs about $60 dollars a ton to get AU steel over to the west coast. But I think the price break for AU steel ends at the west coast. Any additional shipping costs would make it more expensive on the east coast than steel produced there. Again, more research is necessary. > But shipbuilders, auto-makers, roofing suppliers etc will all pass on > their costs to the consumer, and they won't be as trivial. Shipbuilders and the Automakers have such huge contracts of such length that they are not even effected by this. (Metal roofs aren't as big over here as they are there...I would like one however) My company's contracts are reviewed on a yearly basis. > I think the problem will be in the precedent: It always is.... > a. US Mills again delay the massive pain the steel industry has gone > through in other countries (there are lots of rust belts around the globe) US companies have been in pain since the 80's. They are still in pain. The US is in no position to lose any more integrated mills. > b. These things have a habit of being renewed at expiry (remember the > recent discussion on farm subsidies which were implemented to alleviate > the dust bowl crisis in the 1920s, and which have just been renewed for > a further 3 years) I would be against any renewal of the tariffs. If they have a plan, I want them to carry it out. In three years I think they could get it done. > c. If the steel industry gets this treatment, other industries can ramp > up their protection lobbying significantly, and probably succeed-plenty > of industries as just as important to the USA Steel is special. It is backbone. The only other industrial material as important would be silicon wafers. Everything else I would be highly skeptical. > d. It puts the US in a weak position when pushing for free trade from > other countries, or indeed any negotiations with other countries > None of these are about the steel industry, they are about applying any > new protections. Are we really the only country on the face of the planet who has placed restrictions on imports? I know that ours are the only ones people remember. The bad will always outweigh the good. I'm used to the concept by now, but it still stings. I'm tired now, time for my head to hit my pillow....and no, it's not made of steel :) Matthew Bos
