@YorickPiper no a regulator's job is to serve the national interest, not reflexively attack any change to the status quo.
-
-
Replying to @BernardKeane
@BernardKeane it can't be in the national interest to lose industry secotrs or market share because of a deliberate distortion of the market1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YorickPiper
@YorickPiper why not? we've lost industry sectors through eliminating protection before. we seem to have done OK.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BernardKeane
@BernardKeane but dumping is a form of protenction itself. Hence eliminating it requites anti-dumping measures. They are not protectionist2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YorickPiper
@YorickPiper best response to others' protectionism is to ignore it. why punish yourself because someone else is punishing themselves?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BernardKeane
@BernardKeane where dumping is a trade policy, it is not designed by the perpetrator to punish themselves, but to increase market share1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YorickPiper
@BernardKeane do you think OPEC, Chinese steel cos, Indonesionan pulp & paper cos are trying to punish themselves or increase market share?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YorickPiper
@YorickPiper I'm not sure Chinese companies engineered a global glut of steel, which is responsible for 86% of a-d complaints here1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BernardKeane
@BernardKeane many of those instances of Chinese dumping preceded the current glut.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YorickPiper
@BernardKeane thanks for the lively debate. Let's agree to disagree, gotta take the kids to the park!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@YorickPiper a far more civilized pursuit
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.