We need to and will be slapping tariffs on Australian goods soon. You charge us ten percent on average. You get a free ride.

America first second third...

Australia doesn't even rank. It's a little defenseless island. A beautiful place I'm sure.

we have a free trade agreement with the US, something Trump would love to overturn but he fails to realise the US benefits more that we do, we would love to see less of the US sourced TV adds, or american football, which is absolutely irrelevant and incomprehensible to us. you can't play football in armor

You say we don't rank but we just might go elsewhere for those fighters and buy something better. If we are defenceless it is because we buy american military crap and help keep your industries going, more than could be said of you by the way, we rank 12th in the world economically and out punch many more populous economies. If we were your size pound for pound we would be the largest economy in the world. Don't worry though we own some of those steel mills Dump is protecting

I wonder what you would do without our defence industries and innovations like wifi

So a twelve pack price would go up 12 cents.

Way I hear it that is a $360 million tax on beer drinkers, so you got a tax break and now you give it back, every can, every auto, every plane, every building. This isn't voodoo economics, it's do do economics and you are right in it

Malcolm Turnbull left Washington DC on Sunday unsure whether Australian steel and aluminium would be exempted from stiff tariffs about to be imposed by President Donald Trump, http://www.afr.com/news/australia-faces-nervous-wait-over-us-steel-tariffs-20180224-h0wlng

Your people come over here and beg for mercy from Donald the Great. But Donald is putting America first. That means more steel jobs in the USA and less in Australia.

Sorry about your luck.

You can cry and whine about it but my side still wins.

I don't drink beer. Except on rare occasions.

If you drink a 12 pack of beer 365 days a year. It would cost you $43.80.

How is that giving back the tax break? That is like a day or a weeks tax break.

Is that some kind of Australian math?

Now we just need to hear more from Poland and Belize. The LF globalists are furious.

If we have no steel and aluminum indusstry then we will be at the mercy of other countries in time of war.

Yeah - like war with Canada, the largest exporter of aluminum into the United States.

" A ten percent tariff would raise the price 1 cent per can. So a twelve pack price would go up 12 cents. "

I am not a beer drinker, I drink Ky Bourbon. I do know a number of people that do drink beer. Believe me, adding 12 cents to a 12 pack, or 24 cents to a case is not going to slow them down. They will be just like cigarette smokers when wholesale / retail prices went up. They will keep buying / consuming.

Other products may be different, but in the beer market, it will be a non event.

Well you being a globalist drug pusher.

No - you're thinking of the CIA.

You post for legal drugs to destroy our youth.

You preach globalism with your anti american anti tariff globalist philosophy.

You post for legal drugs to destroy our youth.

Stop lying. You are way off base here.

I've stated my reasons for ending the drug war - your continual bullshit posts insinuating that I want to see kids hooked on drugs make it clear that you are just a knee-jerk, reactionary blowhard.

You preach globalism

Piss off troll.

Toronto craft brewer Northern Maverick launches “Fake News Ale”

Yeah - like war with Canada, the largest exporter of aluminum into the United States.

The Trumpkins will be drinking cheap Canadian swill.

Apparently you are to dumb to know that your dream of a drug state would do just that.

Yeah - how's that trillion dollar war on drugs of yours doing keeping kids off drugs?

Putz!

Yeah - how's that trillion dollar war on drugs of yours doing keeping kids off drugs?

Putz!

It would be going better if we didn't have people like you telling everyone drugs should be legal.

Treating marijuana like a miracle drug.

You have a serious moral problem with your views on drugs.

You cheer them on like it is some kind of noble cause to be a druggy.

Last time I believe I received 55 cents a pound.

(FRED: "My retirement job might become walking the highways and byways picking up discarded aluminum cans and recycling them. Last time I believe I received 55 cents a pound."

BUCK: "Can't you (at least) get a job flippin' burgers @McKiDees?

Maybe we should set a fund raiser for Fred on LF?"

Ok, THAT wuz funny.

For starters, I'll kick in a few 2 for 1 Mickey D coupons. (that will take care of both you and War.)

According to Recycle USA, 31 empty cans = ONE POUND of empties. How many pounds did you turn in, Fred?

GI, what's the usual policy from LE when they see something like that?; People NOT in orange, cleaning the highway of debris independently?

People NOT in orange, cleaning the highway of debris independently?

Fred is a free market capitalist who rejects Federal Reserve fiat currency, and measures his wealth in cans.

How is that giving back the tax break?

It is you who are not bright, you are speaking of aluminium cans but who drinks a 12 pack a day? only the not so bright. The tariff will feed into the cost of groceries through steel cans, auto's, aircraft, ships, construction and with inflation comes higher interest rates. Basic economics, so we have done the math obviously Dump is incapable of

When I worked the road, if I found people walking down the side of any highway, I'd check them for warrants and if there wasn't any file 5's, give them a free ride with the coolest cop they'll ever meet.

Trump's fake "economist" Peter Navarro gets taken to the woodshed by Chris Wallace.

"It's the economy, Stupid!" ~Slick Willie, just prior to beating Herbie Bush like a rented mule.

We've been getting it shoved up our ass with unfair trade for years. Only non Americans and traitors would argue any different.

What an agenda driven hotdog hider you are.

Ping to #36.

McGreevy called the proposed aluminum tariff "a new $347.7 million tax on America's beverage industry" and warned that imposing those added costs could trigger more than 20,000 in job losses.

On the other hand, employees of the US Steel industry will be able to buy more beer than they can now.

It's quite natural for US companies to complain at any law change that increases their production costs. That's the only thing they will see, and understandably so.

But what they won't see on any of their finance charts is that in the bigger picture, promoting job growth in the USA will better enable Americans to buy beer even though it costs a little more.

Though any exports of beer, however, won't see that benefit. But exporters are the only ones who have any business complaining.

The US Trade deficit has to be addressed, and tariffs are the only way that can happen.

When I worked the road, if I found people walking down the side of any highway

Hey dipwad, I'll work both sides of the highway.

You've got the center.

Believe me, adding 12 cents to a 12 pack, or 24 cents to a case is not going to slow them down. They will be just like cigarette smokers when wholesale / retail prices went up. They will keep buying / consuming.

They may be looking at no price increase in which case sales remain the same but their shareholder profit margin drops by the gross amount of tax (and who wouldn't complain about some $300 million in reduced profits).

But while the manufacturing cost increase of a penny a can may not sound like much, that increase gets leveraged up every time that can changes hands on it's way to the consumer. It wouldn't surprise me if it adds a nickle to the final retail price which would be a $1.20 for a case of beer. At that point, consumers start going to the competition.

I was thinking though. It should be less since the aluminum is only part of the price. The production and distribution costs are already in the equation. So it seems it should be less than one cent per can.

I read some beer distributor or whatever organization Google gave me said it costs them ten cents a can. So ten percent would be one cent like I mentioned earlier.

So if you drank 3 beers or sodas per day, that's under $11 a year.

Of course, that won't take into account all the other uses of aluminum. Those beer guzzlers could pay out a lot more in other common products. It's even conceivable that some group of people would pay more in increased steel and aluminum tariff costs than the tax break they got this year. Some of those new tax cuts added up to very little for some people even if the vast majority got a decent bump in take-home pay.

That means more steel jobs in the USA

Sounds good.

Well, except for...

"Parent of Pueblo steel mill sold to Russian firm"
https://www.denverpost.com/2006/11/20/parent-of-pueblo- steel-mill-sold-to-russian-firm/

But, it'd be nice to see that place operating again anyhow.

I was thinking though. It should be less since the aluminum is only part of the price. The production and distribution costs are already in the equation. So it seems it should be less than one cent per can.

One example in this case where costs get leveraged up is that distributors normally do a percentage mark up on the price of the things they deliver. So lets say they do a 30% markup on the price of something they distribute. If the manufacturing cost of something were, say, $100,000 then they apply their 30% markup that means the people they deliver to pay $130,000. So then if the manufacturing costs go up 5% making it $105,000, then the distributor adds in a 30% mark up making it 105k x 1.3 = $136,500, meaning a $5K increase to the manufacturer results in a $6500 increase to the next link in the distribution chain.

Remember it is not normal for resellers of goods to simply add a fixed amount of profit to the things the resell. They instead add a percentage. That's not gouging. That's the way it works. Resellers are forced to accept risk with the goods they resell in the event of loss or damage, for example, and only by marking up on a percentage compensates them for that risk.

So every time beer changes hands from the manufacturer to the end consumer, there's a markup. That means 1 penny more on the source manufacturing side will get amplified to the end consumer.

Maybe it wouldn't make it to a nickel a can as I suggested previously, but it will definitely be more than a penny.

"Parent of Pueblo steel mill sold to Russian firm"

Unless they intend to import Russian workers, which would also be allowed by Trump's permission, they'll need to hire US workers to run it.

So if you drank 3 beers or sodas per day, that's under $11 a year.

It should raise the price at scrapyards like Mertz hinted at.

Thereby lifting the standard of living of homeless people and Fred Mertz.

When this kicks in Fred will his sanity back and get on the sane Trump train.

FireIsland still has the center line of the highway.

One example in this case where costs get leveraged up is that distributors normally do a percentage mark up on the price of the things they deliver. So lets say they do a 30% markup on the price of something they distribute. If the manufacturing cost of something were, say, $100,000 then they apply their 30% markup that means the people they deliver to pay $130,000. So then if the manufacturing costs go up 5% making it $105,000, then the distributor adds in a 30% mark up making it 105k x 1.3 = $136,500, meaning a $5K increase to the manufacturer results in a $6500 increase to the next link in the distribution chain.

Yeah I was thinking that too. But I didn't want to type anymore so I left where I did.

Anyhow coca cola, anheiser Busch and other are big smart companies. They aren't going to just be suckers when they know that high of a price raise isn't necessarily justified. They can get it from the competition which would like a new contact. Heck the big companies probably make their own cans.

Can estimate: $0.01/can

Aluminum soda cans are around $0.05 - $0.10 per can for orders of less than 100,000 units.

Prices decrease substantially as quantity increases, so I suspect that Coca-Cola is paying less than $0.01 per can, given that they distribute 1.9 billion servings of coke per day. Granted, some of these "servings" are from soda fountains and glass bottles, etc, but it gives a good picture of the scale at which they are operating.

The Sugar

Sugar estimate: $0.005/can (Please note that lots of coke use corn syrup instead of cane sugar, but my price estimate is for cane sugar)

Sugar runs $200/ton for orders for orders of less than 50 tons.

There's roughly 33 grams of sugar in one can of soda. Given the same logic, let's make an educated guess that 1.9 billion servings * 33 grams = ~63 billion grams

There are 907,185 grams in a ton, so that's about 72,250 tons of sugar. Let's give them a 30% discount on the cost of sugar, which brings us to $140/ton, or ($140/907,185)*33 = $0.005/can for sugar.

Water, CO2, Food Coloring, Flavors

Everything else estimate: $0.00075/can

mentions that Coke pays "10$ for 100,000 liters of water". There's roughly 34 fl oz in a liter, and 12 fl oz in a can. Given some losses, let's just say that there's 2.5 cans of coke in every liter. That translates to $10 on water for every 40,000 cans of Coke. That's $0.00025 spent on water per can.

Let's add $0.0005 for all other things, like food color and flavoring.

https://www.quora.com/How-much-does-it-cost-to-manufacture-355-ml-12-fl- ounces-of-Coca-Cola-Do-we-pay-much-more-than-that-What-accounts-for-the- difference-How-do-they-get-so-many-people-to-pay-so-much-more

[H.R.170 - Protect and Grow American Jobs Act]
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house- bill/170

Looks like thats wobbling across the "3d chess board" at 'bout the same pace as "You'd be in jail" and "I'll repeal Obamare".