SB 107-01: Atlasian Steel Act (Rejected)

[Saint Milei]

[Senator-elect Spark]

Nay

[Kuumo]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I must profess my astonishment at the mindset that has been used to justify this action.

> the steel industry has been in decline because of gov't policy
> the government should take over the steel industry.

If you have already set the stage for failure with your government policies, then nationalization isn't going to stabilize the steel industry, it is going to prop up with borrowed money of the already way over stretched general fund an industry that government policy has crippled in the first place.

It was a policy choice of the government to eliminate the American System after World War II.
It was a policy choice of the government to bail out and rebuild the steel industry of Germany.
It was a policy choice to recognize China, give China MFN status and all the rest.
It was a policy choice to laden the industry with any number of regulations, taxes and unionized burdens and such that crippled its ability to adapt and compete in the modern world, a modern world which was largely created by the policies of first the United States and then Atlasia.

The premise here is that because the private sector has failed to withstand all of these burdens heaped upon it, and ignore the overwhelming incentives in part created by government, that it has thus committed a crime against the workers and needs to have its property seized and run by the government instead.

It would be my contention that the original crime against workers was committed by the misguided "good intentions" of the New Deal (on trade at least) and the Nixon Administration to spread, peace, prosperity and freedom from want, while failing to adequately consider the negative consequences from a systematic based mindset in areas like manufacturing, especially the steel industry, long term.

We should not be compounding these grievous errors with more of the same logic, nor should we seek to fix a problem created by a failure of government policy with another policy of government failure.  The private sector will shape itself in response to the incentives that you create for it, and the simple reality is that the policy of the government whether intentional or unintentional had been the deindustrialization of the country and the dismantling of the domestic industry. A good part of this you could argue was even carried out with the express purpose of neutering the political power of private sector unions.


What we need is a 21st century conceptualization of the American System, absent the overt tariffs and corruption that such entailed in the 19th century, but preserving the critical aspects that built the greatest steel industry in the world. Entrepreneurship and free enterprise were key elements of that, ensuring that we could outproduce the entire world and help save the world from Fascist and Imperialism, twice.

If you want to revive the domestic steel production it requires a focus on these core areas:
1. Assertively combating trade violations, dumping, currency manipulation etc at minimum
2. A focus on technology for the sake of advancing both the productive efficiency and also the quality of the product sold
3. A focus on the skills and trades based education since a number of the steel manufacturing positions will require certain skill sets
4. Considering the whole effects of a range of government policies and the adverse effects they have on the industry and making sure that if such impositions are necessary, they are mitigated in their cost to the extent practical and where such is not necessary, the removal of such impositions is advisable.
5. The development and expansion of markets for Atlasian made steel, based on the cost and efficiency relative to price.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Well, some Labor senators won't be very happy with me, but what else is new.

A restructure of existing trade relations, not nationalization of industry, was my stated goal and strategy entering the presidency of rebuilding domestic industry. And reflecting on that in light of Yankee's post makes me realize how, first of all, truly arbitrary this bill is. If our answer to all the market's problems for one industry is "nationalization", why stop at steel? Why not nationalized lumber? Why not nationalized agriculture? Why not, hell, nationalized tech? The RGND at least had nationalization of energy as part of a broader strategy to transition from fossil fuels. Assuming the liability and costs of a failed industry with no real policy prescriptions will serve no function other than to flush taxpayer dollars down the toilet.

Yankee mentioned trade violations, such as dumping. I wrote the law we passed under President Sev last year which makes it easier for farmers to report incidents of illegal dumping. This is a policy which helps our farmers because it specifically addressed a problem in our markets that impedes on their ability to compete with foreign producers.

Also, we don't currently have a VAT, so we definitely should consider that issue separately from the question of seizing an entire industry.

[WD]

Let me just say, reforms to trade policy have my full support, but I do not believe it is enough. Simply put, the core cause of the industry’s decline is surging (cheap) steel imports from places like China (specifically targeted towards the Atlasian market) which has greatly damaged the value of Atlasian steel. Our steel industry cannot compete with these unfair import prices and cannot survive these gross market distortions. The damage has been done, but nationalization allows us to chart a new path forward.

The report which I linked mentions specifically how; “The excess capacity plaguing the steel industry stems largely from massive government support for, and direct government involvement in, the steel industry in other countries. In 2011, half of the world’s 46 top steel companies were state-owned, and these state-owned companies accounted for 38 percent of global production”. Quite ironically, the situation the industry finds itself in is in part due to the aggressive government support lended in other countries for their own steel industry. This begs the question, why should we not do the same? Why should we disarm and allow this? If we allow the industry to spiral into its grave this country will be weaker for it. That is not an option. Steel is such an important and vital industry, for both our economic health and for national security, that it needs full government support, backing and management. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This is the classic centralist mindset, WD is presenting.

He is saying there is a problem, a problem that is in fact real. Then turns around any says "the only way to fix it is our centralist answer".

Again the problem is a result of trade imbalance/distortion and you can counter that through trade policy. While across the board protectionism is not advisable, you have to counter to the extent necessary with all of the tools at your disposal in terms of trade policy, even tariffs if it comes to that.

It still doesn't necessitate nationalization, which implies that is the only way to combat these imbalances.

There is also the prospect of multi-lateral diplomacy as an option depending on the politics of the administration and the willingness of the other parties to come to the table. That comes down to carrot and stick at that point.

[Former President tack50]

I still do not see an argument for nationalizing steel. Nationalizing a dying industry like Yankee says will just shift the burden into the government's hands and become a literal sink hole.

We could make a better use of that money by simply giving the workers money directly if it came to it lol.

I am fine with a rescue plan for steel but this seems like it would do nothing other than light money on fire

[Schiff for Senate]

I agree with Yankee. It's almost bad faith of the government to not trust the steel industry and help them out (and regulate them too), but instead want to take them over to fix them. Yes, it needs to be fixed, but that doesn't mean the government can/should take it over.

[Former President tack50]

Aye I guess

[Dr. MB]

Abstain

[Joseph Cao]

Nay, but as others have said I'd like to see this reintroduced as a bill so we can debate that in its own right.

[If my soul was made of stone]

AYE

[WD]

Vote on the S019 amendment to the Atlasian Steel Act:

Aye (7): Western Democrat, S019, OBD, CentristRepublican, Kuumo, Tack, Discolovante

Nay (6): West Midlander, Muad’dib, DeadPrez, Spark, North Carolina Yankee, Joseph Cao

Abstain (1): MB

Not voting (4): Dabbing Santa, Pericles, Ishan, Old School Republican

The amendment is adopted, debate resumes.

[Schiff for Senate]

Unsure how to go about this, and feel free to disregard this if I'm going against any procedural rule, but I would like to motion for a final vote (i.e., just get a vote on the final bill once and for all).

[WD]

Opening a vote in 24 hours

[WD]

A final vote is now open. Senators, please vote AYE, NAY, or Abstain.

[West_Midlander]

Nay.

[DabbingSanta]

Nay

[WD]

Aye

[Schiff for Senate]

Nay

[OBD]

Aye

[If my soul was made of stone]

AYE

[Saint Milei]

Nay