U.S. Imposes Big Tariffs On Korean Chipmakers 827
dipfan writes "This is serious - the U.S. government has decided to levy steep import tariffs on South Korean computer chips (and Vietnamese catfish). The result is a 44 percent tariff on DRAM semiconductors made by Hynix. The case was brought by Micron Technology on the grounds that the South Koreans were receiving unfair subsidies. Hynix says the tariff is 'outrageous', and the South Koreans plan to appeal to the World Trade Organisation."
Coincidence? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:5, Insightful)
Bush should be trying to stimulate the tech economy. Instead, he's killing the US$ to historic lows, and now this? Pretty weak!
Business as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:North Korea? (Score:1, Insightful)
Club stomped upon (Score:4, Insightful)
Korea, welcome to the club.
------------------
"nosce te ipsum"
------------------
Hmmm Big Bad U.S Government (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:2, Insightful)
This is bad... (Score:5, Insightful)
This gives Micron carte blanche to raise their prices by 44%, which while it may save a few jobs in Idaho, will ultimately cost even more jobs at US companies that buy memory (think the likes of Dell and so forth).
Tariffs BAD! Free trade GOOD!
Our Wonders (Score:2, Insightful)
The *US* complains of Foreign Subsidies? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pot calls kettle black.
The US government is the worst offender on Earth with subsidising industries to kill foreign competition.
Is the free market being peddled by the US so hard to implement on their own shores? Do they hate others using their own tactics against them?
I doubt this will be popular... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like Canadian Softwood. (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly the same thing happened with Canadian softwood lumber even though we have a supposed free trade agreement. It'll go to the WTO, the S. Koreans will win but that'll take years. In that time, their industry is crippled.
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't blame the residents of the White House for everything that goes wrong or assign them credit for everything that goes right. The real world is just a whole lot more complex than that.
Corruption. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone with way more knowledge, please feel free to jump in!
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Well (Score:5, Insightful)
> Free trade? Or free trade only when it's good for us?
For a curious conception of 'us'.
Re:Tariffs are wrong... (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft will be glad to know the Open Source community has come around to its way of thinking.
Thanks.
Re:Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Worst part is tariff goes directly to Micron (Score:5, Insightful)
The rules of the game are there are no rules (Score:2, Insightful)
* just like Japan did with automakers back in the 1980s, look what happened when they finally gave in to free trade--their market had to correct itself
Re:Well (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Blame America
2) Read article*
(*)This step is optional, and not recommended if trolling for karma.
In the first sentence of the article, it says the tariff is in reponse to subsidies provided by the Korean government. The U.S. is re-balancing the field, and is more than entitled to impose a tariff on a subsidized product when it competes with products made in the U.S.
In Other News... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hynix announces high volume trade agreement with major EU computer retail chains. Maybe. If the US doesn't want cheap good stuff, other countries will be happy to take it.
This sort of carry-on is why many countries no longer give a toss about "free trade" agreements with the US - they're not worth the paper they're written on if the gubment feels so inclined.
Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Tariffs are wrong... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the problem here, South Korea got caught giving a subsidy to a failing company which enabled it to continue to operate at a loss when it rightfully should have gone out of business. As a result, Micron got less sales, and that means Micron ends up hiring less Americans. The only fair thing to do is for the USA give Micron a subsidy at the cheater's expense...
Re:The rules of the game are there are no rules (Score:2, Insightful)
Take the steel industry, in a free market it wouldn't matter where the steel comes from, however in the US the local industry is heavily subsidised and imports are hit with massive tarrifs.
As soon as the US starts to practice what it preaches then people might start to take the concept of free trade a little more seriously.
Re:Tariffs are wrong... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Tariffs are wrong... (Score:5, Insightful)
This tariff is just leveling the playing field, but "U.S. imposes chip tariff in response to Korean subsidy" doesn't draw nearly as many eyeballs to the advertisements below the article.
Re:Club stomped upon (Score:5, Insightful)
Thats right, we are paying the lumber industry to not only cut down tree's inside national parks but to ship it below costs.
Then the US has the nerve to cry foul when Canada does the same thing.
Re:Well (Score:3, Insightful)
-B
Re:Just like Canadian Softwood. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are going to have free trade, do free trade.
--jeff++
It's our companies vs. a whole government (Score:4, Insightful)
Companies like that deserve to die - if you're not producing a profit, and you're causing U.S. companies to lose money, why should the U.S. continue to allow you to do business with us? It's our semiconductor industry vs. the entire south korean government - that's bad for the people who work at micron and other semiconductor companies. Think about the people trying to make a living here, for pete's sake.
It's hard enough dealing with domestic competitors, let alone an entire foreign government. 100% tariff would do just fine too.
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead of getting blowjobs from the interns, he's putting felons, convicted for wrongful acts in high office (Poindexter), in high office again. I'd rather have integrity as president then integrity as a person, if I'm forced to choose.
The tariff is a tax on us (Score:2, Insightful)
You want more proof? Here it is. (Score:3, Insightful)
The Dubya solution to this problem? Slap heavy tarriffs on imported steel.
So much for fair trade, a free market and a unhindered economy.
It's not like that's the only example either. US lumber mills are less productive and more expensive than their Canadian counterparts, who've spent considerable millions becoming more efficient and cost effective.
The reward for this Canadian efficiency? Tarriffs on soft-wood lumber.
So much for NAFTA.
Opinion on Dubya is heavily polarised (you either love him or hate him and I'm not going to get into that debate here) but even his staunchest supporters would have a hard time arguing that he's an advocate of free trade.
Mod parent up (Score:2, Insightful)
"Not mentioning the number of fantastic things that Bush has done"
name 3
"The man brought much needed integrity back to the presidential position"
um the alcoholic, cocain sniffing, daddy get me a cush position so I don't have to go to war, lying war monger has brought back integrity? please.
"He is a strong leader in the time of terrorism,
of all the people who have been in office when this country was in a time of crisis, he has been the worse.
"Give the guy a break."
he is president of the United States of America, he can have a break when he is no longer in office.
Nobody gave Clinton a break and all he did was get a blow job. was that wrong? I would say so, but is it as bad as the corporate dealing Bush has done?
No.
Re:How about charge extra for labor? (Score:5, Insightful)
U.S. preaches capitalism to the world, and, by the way, I have nothing against that. But, when others show themselves better than U.S. in some tiny economic niche, all the courageous, competitive dogma goes away and "protective tarrifs" come in place.
Wasn't big american companies also subsidized? Airlines, Aerospace companies, etc...? What is so different with South Koreans?
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:5, Insightful)
The complaints against Canada are typically that socialized medicine and so forth lower costs. I suppose that is true to an extent. But, as someone else mentioned, the large number of easily accessable trees also does.
There never is a truly level playing field. Complaining about that and then asking for tarriffs is akin to asking that the kid in class who gets all the A's ought to be penalized a few points because the rest aren't as smart.
Don't get me wrong. There are times when tarrifs are appropriate. But thus far the US isn't doing too well with the WTO.
Re:Tariffs are wrong... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because it's no tariffs on the products they export, but they can put tariffs on anything they decide deserves it.
That isn't free trade.
Personally, I don't want free trade. Most people don't want free trade. But if you are going to ram it down our throats you may as well actually let the populace see the full effect of it.
No gain without pain (Score:4, Insightful)
Why should construction companies, etc have to pay an artificially inflated price for a vital commodity? Why should a shipyard on either coast have to support a steel mill in the Midwest?
What you forget is that by making the US steel manufacturers more competitive, you're making US steel consumers less competitive. Overnight, these steel tarriffs have made it harder for US shipbuilders to compete in the global market. The same is true of other industries too.
So, in essence, Dubya is robbing Peter to pay Paul in the hope that he can secure Paul's vote in the future and that Peter won't notice.
Yay for free trade!
Funny mod is right (Score:2, Insightful)
Besides, your post does nothing to show Bush isn't a hypocrate when it comes to free trade which is what the above poster was pointing out.
Re:Corruption. (Score:3, Insightful)
So, if the South Korean tax payers gave us a hundred million dollars as a gift, you'd be angry, too? Because that's, effectively, what they are doing.
Sure, this gift may cause job losses at Micron, but that would be made up for by job gains elsewhere. On balance, we are still better off.
Let's just hope everybody is as stupid as the Koreans--let them waste their money. (Of course, we are similarly stupid ourselves with our farm, defense, and airline subsidies.)
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, that doesn't parse at all. Perhaps you are referring to the minor recession in 1991, which ended well before Clinton took office? At any rate, although the economy appeared strong under Clinton, we now know this was due to massive corporate fraud and the unsustainable tech bubble. Yes, I'm sure it's the Republicans' fault somehow, but to blame Bush for the downturn requires believing that he's capable of time travel.
my state -- along with the vast majority of the states -- are poor as hell now due to tax cuts that lead to a drastic cut in federal funding...
Where do you think federal funding comes from? If your state needs money, it can raise it from its own taxpayers rather than having the federal government extort funds from taxpayers of other states. Or your state could try something wacky like cutting spending.
Because getting laid is much more shameful than inciting a war that lead to the death of thousands of innocent people
Considering Saddam was murdering many times more than that, the Iraqis are better off today. Look, I want to know what happened to the WMDs too, and if Bush did in fact mislead us then I'll be pissed. But remember that Clinton and many Democrats made exactly the same claims about Saddam's weapons programs. Were they also lying?
Re:Hmmm Big Bad U.S Government (Score:3, Insightful)
Cursing America isn't always the answer.
How to respond to a troll (Score:4, Insightful)
Hmmm. Let's outlaw the U.S. Post Office then. Seriously, does this bit of extremism apply to U.S. companies that aren't turning a profit, and competing with other U.S. companies? Or just foreign companies?
For that matter, what makes a U.S. company a U.S. company? Most of the big corps are technically out of The Bahamas or similar countries who've found a nice little niche by shielding companies from the tax men of the countries in which they do business.
I'm no economist, but I think it's pretty obvious that whatever governmental assistance Seoul provides Hynix is pretty much being met tit-for-tat, and then some, with this tarriff. Not surprising that Washington would choose this tactic, though, since they've already imposed tarriffs on Canadian lumber and European steel. While these tarriffs certainly protect American jobs, a cynical view is that the imposition of these tarriffs is not so much about protecting our economy, it's more about protecting electoral votes in Pennsylvania. Though that argument doesn't make a lot of sense when applied to Washington timber. It does make sense in Micron's home state(s) of Idaho (and Virgina, after acquisition of Toshiba's facilities there).
Political cynicism aside, one thing I did learn (Bueller? Bueller?) is that the Hawley-Smoot Tarriff Act was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back and led to the Great Depression. Is saving the White House worth a repeat of that?
Finally, you end with the statement "It's hard enough dealing with domestic competitors..." Which domestic competitors are you talking about? Who else makes DRAM in the USA? I was under the impression that Micron was it.
To sum up: I guess we should go ahead and slap a huge tarriff on Airbus as well! Because surely the American consumer will benefit when Boeing, protected by exorbitant tarriffs, can charge the airlines whatever they please for a new 737.
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:1, Insightful)
If you google around a bit, you'll find that chemical weapons are pretty hard to destroy and require very large incinerators that would easily be spotted by satelliete.
Nobody, not the French or Hans Blix or anyone else has any kind of coherent evidence that indicates that these weapons were destroyed.
If you are so retarded as to think that it is impossible to hide a bomb in a country the size of Iraq... you have other issues.
Re:Tariffs are wrong... (Score:5, Insightful)
Um.... US is one of the world's largest exporters. (Score:5, Insightful)
Man. Are you lost.
The US is one of the world's largest manufacturers and exporters. Why do you think most large US companies have sales offices all over the world. Think IBM, Microsoft, Oracle. Equipment manufacturers like Caterpillar. Telecom like ATT. All these firms bring in a large amount of money from foreign countries.
Get this straight. The problem is not that small countries rely on the US for handouts. The problem is unfair trade policies that actualy hinder these countries ability to compete.
Policies like demanding they open their markets while protecting yours.
The Simpsons, from whom all wisdom flows... (Score:5, Insightful)
Homer: Lisa, a guy who's got lots of ivory is less likely to hurt Stampy than a guy whose ivory supplies are low.
-- Simpsons [1F15] "Bart Gets an Elephant" [snpp.com]
Re:Just like Canadian Softwood. (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you have any opinions on the tarriffs the E.U. applied to Hynix?
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Corruption. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, absolutely ecstatic. It would be great for US computer manufacturers and US consumers.
They now have a monopoly since no one can compete. Sure, they gave us cheap memory, but at what cost? We now need them and have no DRAM industry.
And we'd rebuild it within a few years; after all, new fab lines are built constantly, and the tools and software come from the US anyway.
And Here is the Hypocrisy... (Score:3, Insightful)
Is that how I should view things? Because if that is what you are saying it is extremely two faced! Other countries are saying the same thing btw. However to the American politicians they are viewed as "isolationist", etc..
You know that is what trade is about. Specializing in specific tasks that the other one cannot do as efficiently. But I suppose it only applies until "national interests" come into play...
This is the problem of the current administration. They are two faced and see things using only one perspective. It is going to get them burned...
Re:Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Protectionism is a harmful and ultimately self destructive practice. Unfortunately there are always self serving groups pushing for these sorts of measures. Protectionism should not be accepted as a "fact of life".
Protectionist policies were one of the reasons the great depression was so deep and long. When things started to go sour countries all over the world starting implementing these kinds of policies to "protect themselves" and international trade came to a grinding halt.
On the other hand world trade treaties do recognize a right to retaliate to unfair trade practices. I don't know much about what's going on with the South Korean chips, but if they are in fact dumping them below cost then tariffs are permitted.
-
Re:Well (Score:5, Insightful)
As a stockholder of Micron, when a vested interest in seeing Micron able* to make a profit, I do.
As a resident and homeowner in the Treasure Valley (Boise and surrounding area for non-Idahoans) where 12,000 people are employed by Micron, I do.
As a resident of Idaho, where (supposedly) one out of every twenty people is employed by Micron, I do.
As a resident of the US, where Micron is the *only* remaining US company producing dram, I do.
As a guy who's done his econ. homework and realizes that there are two outcomes from the current situation: eventual failure of all but a couple dram companies and resultant (bi|mo)nopoly pricing *or* return to free competition and fair pricing, I do.
But go ahead and demand 512Mb sticks of PC2700 for $30. I mean, after all, why should *you* care?
*not gaurunteed, just able. As Appleton is fond of saying, we'll compete with any company out there, but we can't compete against governments.
$50 Billion/year is little?!?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes and.. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's also exactly what the US said with respect to Canada's grain industry, despite the nine previous times they've said so, and being proven wrong each and every time.
So you'll excuse me if I don't believe the US BS.
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:5, Insightful)
So where are they?
Nobody, not the French or Hans Blix or anyone else has any kind of coherent evidence that indicates that these weapons were destroyed.
So where are they?
18 chemical-factory trucks.
Where?
1550 R-400 bombs.
Where?
7,000 gallons of anthrax.
Where?
572 gallons of concentrated aflatoxin.
Where?
15,000 gallons of botulinum.
Where?
500 tons of mustard gas, sarin gas and VX nerve gas.
Where?
If you are so retarded as to think that it is impossible to hide a bomb in a country the size of Iraq... you have other issues.
If it was a bomb, I could buy it. But we've been told there are many more weapons. That they were a threat to America, and the world. You'd think we'd have found something by now. We knew what they had, right? How come we can't find a single thing? Not one goddamn thing. And don't waste my time with the fucking 'chemical trailers.' I want to see barrels of anthrax. I want to see warheads with mustard gas, on missiles that can reach Washington. Show me. Just one. I'll believe you then. Just one.
And if you tell me they're in Iran, I weep for the world.
As far as I am concerned, (Score:3, Insightful)
If the South Koreans think no competitor will rise up after they stop dumping, then they're delusional. If on the other hand, the South Koreans believe they can subsidize my US lifestyle forever, then I wish them all the best.
Long live South Korea !
Sincerely,
Selfish And Proud of It
It's WMD quiz time!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
And, one more question... how did Sadam get that nerve gas in the first place?
A) after a bad fart, he had an ingenious idea
B) stole it from someone
C) those freedom hating French gave it to him
D) his pal George Sr. was quite happy to sell it to him, and probably his taliban friends too
enter sig here
Re:Well (Score:5, Insightful)
You're fundamentally mistaken. Protectionism on their part doesn't justify, necessitate, or in any way indicate the wisdom of protectionism on our part. They're (assuming the allegations are true, and they probably are) shooting themselves in the foot, so therefore we must shoot ourselves in the foot also? How does that work?
If you want free trade, drop your trade barriers. Simple as that. If other countries do not then they will pay for that decision. You don't need to do anything to make that happen, it's just like jumping off a building makes you go splat. If the vietnamese want to lose money selling catfish (and that particular allegation I don't believe for a moment, but assume it's true for sake of argument) then let them! Enjoy the cheap catfish while it lasts. Mothball those catfish farms and do something more productive with your time and capital. When they wise up or run out of money and the price goes back up to where it makes sense to compete again, then jump back in. That's just economics 101.
Micron Troubles...Due to Own Stupidity. (Score:2, Insightful)
Micron Sees Improved PC Demand, Even Though Dell Doesn't(http://biz.yahoo.com/tsp/030611/10093006_
Hmmm...which of the two companies mentioned has a better track record at the PC industry? Does Micron even make PCs anymore?
This Hynix dumping thing is really just a lame attempt to cover up some very stupid decisions on part of Micron.
When the Hynix acquisition didn't pan out, what did Micron do? Go and buy Toshiba's DRAM operation instead.
All this in 2001, during a time of falling prices (http://news.com.com/2100-1001-271208.html?legacy
Now they're saddled with overcapacity and lost something like $900million on sales of almost $2billion. Nobody to blame but themselves.
Re:Well (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Well (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Blame the world
2) Blame ourselves*
(*) This step is optional, and not recommended if you are collection BushPointsâ. The U.S. re-balances the field when it is threatened, but it is more than entitiled to practice protectionism of (said before) Agriculture, Forestry etc.
labour dumping (Score:2, Insightful)
Why isn't the US government doing anything about all the cheap labour being dumped onto the market by the mid/far east?
Isn't that far more damaging to the economy?
Saddam's WMD intentions (Score:2, Insightful)
Think about it. He said for years that there were no more WMD in Iraq. He also had 4 years to put them anywhere he wanted to. Anyway, since he did not use them in the war, even though he was backed into a corner, everyone's automatically going to think he didn't have them available.
He's counting on wearing down America like Vietnam. He's put a bounty of $350-$1500 for each American soldier killed by a loyalist. So just about everyday since the "official" end of hostilities, at least 1 American soldier has been killed by sniper, RPG, or ambush.
When the Americans leave, he can come back in from Syria or Jordan and set up shop again. He's counting on Americans to get tired of soldiers getting picked off, one at a time, every day. He's playing off the media, the EU, and skeptics of Bush to get his power back. Saddam is not an idiot. He's survived a lot longer than he should have, and there's good reasons for that.
Why tariffs are bad in almost every case (Score:3, Insightful)
While this tariff would benefit Micron, it would cost lots of other companies money. What I would prefer to see is for the US to push the threat of a tariff. Let South Korea take their case to the WTO. Send in a team of vicious attack lawyers who will readily agree that both the tariff and the South Korean subsidy are wrong. Let's see Micron and Hynix compete head-to-head without tariffs or subsidies.
Their subsidy is at least as harmful to their economy as a tariff would be to ours. Simply put, we have the option of avoiding the tariff by not buying the goods. The citizens of South Korea pay for the subsidy regardless of their own individual choices, and at least in the short run, regardless of whether the chips even get sold.
Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, however they did not shove it down the rest of the world's throat and pretend as though the US is going to be nuked next week if we don't bomb the hell out of Iraq. He took care of what he apparently thought was an issue on his own. Bush on the other hand pulls out his primate logic of, "You're with us or against us." and then asks who is going to support our war effort, and on top of it his administration mocks the democratic process by threatening retaliation towards nations who did not vote in a way he saw fit. (e.g. Slashdot is holding a vote to see if advertisements should be removed, however it is made clear that those who vote for the removal of the advertisements will recieve a swift punch in the face. Alright everybody, line up and "vote"!)
At times, however, it was fairly obvious that the Clinton administration used, or attempted to use, attacks as a distraction from the scandal that was going on. At least in my mind, killing innocient people to help your political agenda (e.g. a distraction from bad PR) is a FAR worse travisty than getting head. If Clinton should be remembered for doing anything wrong, it should be his using war as a distraction (much like Bush is doing right now), because that was the
Re:Finding 15,000 Gallons of Saddam (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I wouldn't be suprised if wherever Saddam is hiding right now occupies at least 15,000 gallons worth of physical space. So his argument is pretty valid. I honestly believe that Iraq did have WMD. Why? We helped Saddam get them. You know, back in the days when he got they key to Detroit(I think).
Regardless of your stance on the war, it's silly to pretend that Iraq never had any WMD. They've used chemical weapons before, that's an undisputable fact.
I don't agree with the way the Bush administartion has handled things, but I don't really care if we find WMD. Do we really have to find a nuke for people to concede that he was actively trying to build them? Only then should we act, once he has nuclear capability? Or should we wait until he actually uses one? Or should we wait until he takes over a few neigboring countries?
Saddam being in power was bad. Do we really need to find WMD to prove that?
Re:Finding 15,000 Gallons of Saddam (Score:1, Insightful)
Do we really have to wait until he sets of an a bomb or starts WW3 before we act?
But ok, in your argument if it does not matter, about the WMDs, and the only thing that matters ist that darn it, he is soo evil.
Then Bush has a list of mile long of everybody he has to go invade and depose, in countries all across the world. but of course he wont do that...
Several of those countries do not have oil, and an existing infrastructure that can be sold of the low bidding american companies, and large ammounts of money that can be siezed and distributed to americans who sued before a certain time, (before the Iraqi ppl who have suffered far more, and far longer get anything)
Furthermore where was your activism, where was your concern, where was your humanity back in 1988 or so, when he did kill all those kurds.
Where was your humanity, and activism when Saddam, guided by Bush the first, and his generals, killed the uprising in the south of Iraq, and then killed the Kurd uprising in the North.
The US deliberatly refused the generals who were rising against Saddam access to captured Iraq military equipment, they refused to stop the Saddam loyal gunships that flew over them and massacered them by the thousands.
But now, in 2003, your REALLY concerned about how he treats his people, your REALLY concerned about how evil he is.
Please give it a rest.
Re:Good article - "Enslaved by free trade" (Score:4, Insightful)
So while these countries certainly engaged in government-lead industrial policy, without being able to trade with other countries (especially the US), they would still be poor today.
Moreover, it is looking like once countries achieve a certain level of development, government-lead industrial policy begins to fail them. Korea and Japan came a long way, but are now stagnating and trying to reform into more fully free-market economies, but the siren song of protectionism keeps them from moving forward.
Meanwhile, I can assure you there is no benefit to the US limiting trade with anyone. If they want to sell us cheap DRAM, damn, let's buy it up!