You sound so sure of yourself. I guess you must be right then. Why don’t you actually answer why you think you’re right? What laws could have been violated but weren’t? Why is Trump wrong? Where are your sources?
Poor sources are only poor when they aren’t accurate. It was a summary that I posted that anyone could check quickly if they didn’t agree with and explicitly stated where I got it from. If I made it up whole cloth and presented it people would rightly point out it was wrong because they’d check it and find it wrong. Yet, the argument here is not that it is wrong, but how I acquired it. Wow again.
So, I’ve spent a minute or two updating the table with links. Is my argument now convincing because of the links that anyone who is interested in could have found easily? I have to tell you, though. I’ve not done a full on detailed analysis on those sources. I haven’t done a due diligence report and have it vetted by PwC for their accuracy. So, keep that in mind if you choose to click on any link.
Or I could just bloviate like many here and not provide any sources at all, let alone be considerate enough to let you know if my source might be considered suspect even when I was pretty sure they were not.
Under 17 U.S.C. § 105, works created by U.S. government employees as part of their official duties aren’t eligible for copyright protection in the United States. Reagan’s weekly radio addresses were official presidential communications, produced by the White House Television Office and preserved by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), which explicitly notes that federal works “are treated as though they are in the public domain.”
From here
The one-minute ad included some of Reagan’s remarks out of chronological order. It also omitted that Reagan recorded the address after imposing duties on some Japanese products. A duty is a tax imposed on goods; a tariff is a type of duty imposed on imported or exported goods.
However, the ad’s overall message doesn’t misrepresent Reagan’s views on tariffs. Reagan said he believed that in the long-term tariffs would lead to trade wars and hurt Americans.
We asked the Reagan Foundation how the ad misrepresented Reagan’s address, but we did not receive a response by publication.
Yes, I agree that the case for copyright is low, after reading comments and doing a bit more research, although it depends on where they got the original copy from. If from the Foundation, then it gets dicey.
Probably the main issue will be foreign influence: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/611
Not sure what they could do other than penalize the ad agency if they haven’t registered under FARA other than use political penalties…such as imposing or increasing tariffs.
I am not disagreeing with you on whether the tariffs are wrong, but to say that Reagan didn’t use them when he deemed necessary is incorrect. He was definitely for free trade. No argument there but to say that was all he was for misses that there were caveats to that.
He also made a comment in that address about congress trying to impose conditions on his ability to make deals with the Japanese. Which seems to be the case that is going to the Supreme court currently. Reagan wanted to be able to make the deals. How is that different than what Trump is doing now other than in scale (and reasonableness)?
Well only one of those strategies could be considered an overall success, and even for that one there is a sound argument that, rather than tariffs, what saved Harley was simply Harley getting better at making it’s signature large displacement motorcycles e.g.
Ultimately, the RIETI (Japan’s Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry) found it was Harley-Davidson’s own initiatives – the modernized factories, the new engines, the better inventory control – that played the biggest role in its turnaround. Indeed, during this time (1981-1983), the number of motorcycles with defective parts Harley produced plunged from around 50% to just 2%.
In Reagan’s case, congress was more protectionist than he was, and he had to cajole them into dropping trade barriers. He did run with some punitive tariffs mostly against Japan, don’t know and can’t be bothered to look up if those were his idea or Congress’s in any particular case, but your cite on the “voluntary” auto quotas makes clear that it was Congress that was protectionist and Reagan’s cabinet split between free traders and pragmatists who thought they had to appease Congressional protectionism to at least some extent, ultimately persuading the Japanese to accept voluntary quotas as a means of avoiding Congress passing a law enacting involuntary ones. If you’ll recall, back in the 80s there was widespread fearmongering about the unstoppable Japanese economy overwhelming the US etc etc, which is where all of this was coming from.
In Trump’s case, Trump is more protectionist than congress, and he’s leveeing illegal tariffs (the emergency national security excuses are transparently bullshit, and absent those he has no legal power to impose tariffs, not that his pet SCOTUS will see it that way) and he is using those illegal tariffs to bully nations into signing deals that to my knowledge are not actually proper trade treaties, and have not been ratified by Congress.
If Trump were just negotiating with foreign nations and then persuading Congress to sign on to them, then he’d be doing exactly what Reagan did. That’s not what he’s doing.
Yeah. Trump is a senile lunatic with the world’s most powerful military under his control, so people are humoring the maniac to keep him from attacking them. Economically or militarily. No doubt hoping that he’ll either be deposed or die before getting around to them. I doubt many of them take any such “deals” seriously. Both because they can’t trust Trump, and because as you say they are not being done in a legal manner.
Anyone with sense is going to be trying to decouple their economy from the US as much as possible, out of self preservation. Buying time helps with that. As the old line goes, “Diplomacy is the art of saying ‘nice doggy’ until you can find a rock.”
Ronald Reagan was, quite literally, the most pro-free-trade, tariff-opposed President to ever hold the office. I cannot believe we are even discussing this.
Yes, Americans, and this administration’s gaggle of grifters, conmen, and fascists, are famous for their desire for nuanced policy discussion while watching a TV ad.
As for the ad being foreign interference I look forward to New Zealand’s Crown corporation New Zealand Tourism’s “100% Pure New Zealand” ad being litigated for informing people of factual things in New Zealand.
Yep! Bowling company (AMF) era Harleys were famous for making new from the factory floor motorcycles that already leaked oil, and would drop a couple bolts on their first ride while Japan was making reliable motorcycles. Once AMF sold HD, they started producing better motorcycles and saved the company (well, AMF saved it to begin with, but then let quality go to crap).
I don’t think the tariffs made much of a difference. People bought a TON of UJMs (universal Japanese motorcycles) during that period. There are still a ton of UJMs on the roads.
Missed some of this. Placing an SPM offshore would negate VLCC/ULCC sized vessels, assuming a market requiring their use, from having to transit narrow passages. Placing it offshore is safer and likely cheaper than upgrading the port. It would need to have enough capacity to justify the expense. Eg. 1M/bpd.