Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

simpleflying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–219 of 219 posts

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#211

Post by bluecalm »

mywittyname wrote: post #200
bluecalm wrote: post #138

If the whole Covid situation taught us something it's that we need to be more independent of other countries and encourage local production of many goods. Tariffs sound like an easy way to do just that. Tax imports, help local producers. I don't see the problem tbh. All those free trade models ignore the scenario of everyone getting dependent on one exporter and then that exporter either going rouge or having problem…

> It works and is needed. Where is the problem? The problem is, tariffs don't really work. Not in the long-term. Tariffs can hurt local producers too. If a company is just so efficient at producing good that they can produce cheaper products inclusive of the tariff , then the local company has no chance. They have no hope of expanding outside of their local markets and they will eventually give up. Most of the time,…

Your argument again misses the issue of security. Yes, tariffs hurt efficiency on a global scale and they hurt consumers in your country (as they now will have to spend more to get the same goods they could have get cheaper). Creating or keeping less efficient industry gains in scenarios where foreign actor you depend on for imports stops meeting demands (either on purpose to hurt you or if disaster like a pandemic hits). It's a trade-off between efficiency in a perfect world and security in a real one.

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#212

Post by _ea1k »

arethuza wrote: post #105
missedthecue wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Ford has a reasonable market share in the EU. They sell a little under a million units a year there. https://www.statista.com/statistics/642946/eu-ford-car-sales...

I suspect most Fords sold in the EU are manufactured in the EU or its former member state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_of_Europe

And the EU tariffs are a part of the reason for that, though perhaps not the main reason.

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#213

Post by rad_gruchalski »

alkonaut wrote: post #210
rad_gruchalski wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airbus Americas, Inc. headquarters is located in Herndon, Virginia. The parts are 100% sold.

Is that the case for all assembly taking place abroad? i.e. is that a requirement for being able to do the export/import, that the importer is a US company? Even so, what forces them to charge for it at all? If Airbus says a plane hull is $10 who challenges that?

If the hull costs the US company $10 but $1m to manufacture, who covers the loss? There is a loss of profit so airbus needs governmental bail out. The US has now two reasons to be further upset. Or do I see it wrong?

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#214

Post by ouid »

SllX wrote: post #209
ouid wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The fairest trade of them all is going to be between two people that can make an exchange without state interference and without feeling like the other person got more than they did, and tariffs interfere with that type of exchange. Why does your definition of fairness include a clause about state interference? I don't think you can argue in good faith about whether or not governments can act to increase fairness if…

Trade won’t occur if the costs incurred from government or State action increase the price to a level I am unwilling to pay, or else get me to reconsider a producer or service provider that doesn’t incur these additional costs. State interference isn’t a non-factor you can dismiss out of hand, honestly it probably is present in most transactions, but tariffs introduce an additional cost that specifically targets fore…

I would say that you're talking about how tariffs are imposed at the moment, which is a different question from "do there exist tariffs which increase fairness?".

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#215

Post by SllX »

ouid wrote: post #214
SllX wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trade won’t occur if the costs incurred from government or State action increase the price to a level I am unwilling to pay, or else get me to reconsider a producer or service provider that doesn’t incur these additional costs. State interference isn’t a non-factor you can dismiss out of hand, honestly it probably is present in most transactions, but tariffs introduce an additional cost that specifically targets fore…

I would say that you're talking about how tariffs are imposed at the moment, which is a different question from "do there exist tariffs which increase fairness?".

The tariff imposing party always feels justified in their actions and can tell themselves this is “leveling the playing field”.

How does the counter-party nation feel about the tariffs imposed on their exports?

You’re right to bring in why existing tariffs exist, there’s always a reason, but when fairness is the cited reason, what you are really talking about is a retaliatory tariff. “Fairness” is the rhetorical justification when people ask why the fancy cheese is more expensive than it used to be; “our cheese is worse” and “it costs them less to make it” are just harder sells.

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#216

Post by cmehdy »

u678u wrote: post #170
cmehdy wrote: post #8

"Among the goods to see an impact from the widened net of additional duty are European made wines, which will attract a 25% duty, and French and German-made aircraft parts, attracting a 15% tax." As a French person, I can't help but feel like there's some sort of personal attack happening there. Wine and airplanes? Hey, I think you guys forgot to tax cheese and sarcasm while you're at it! Let's hope that a new US adm…

Dude we make our own cheese. You can get a kilogram for just a few bucks and any warehouse store. (lol)

Compare it to this rudimentary map of the most well-known French cheeses though: https://vinepair.com/wine-blog/map-the-iconic-cheeses-of-fra...

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#218

Post by esyir »

cycrutchfield wrote: post #189
esyir wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wine is weakly fungible. Specific wines, not so much, but I believe that the category of French wines can be effectively cross supplied by domestic American. Demand for wine should, in theory, shift there.

>I believe that the category of French wines can be effectively cross supplied by domestic American For the majority of the population, maybe. But for people that actually care about wine, this couldn't be farther from the truth. It's kind of like saying that domestic American whiskeys are roughly equivalent to Scotch.

Sure, not denying that, especially for the more hardcore wine aficionados out there. That's why I said weakly fungible, and not perfectly. However, I do believe that the intended result will happen still, and there will be a shift of spending from French -> US domestic.

It's bad for the consumer, but that applies to anything that isn't fully free trade.

Re: Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force

#219

Post by jeffreyrogers »

akira2501 wrote: post #163
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU subsidized Airbus for decades to enable it to compete with Boeing. China does the same with many of their industries. Japan and Korea did the same before them. Every country has an interest in having strong industry.

> Every country has an interest in having strong industry. And if you don't already have one and have to incentivize someone to take on that challenge, that makes sense. If you already have _several_ manufacturers, the last thing you should do is allow them to consolidate down into a single monopoly. The US has played it's hand exceptionally poorly.

Yes, the US's industrial policy over the past several decades has been a disaster that squandered most of the benefits we accrued from being the only major country that didn't have to rebuild after WWII.
Post reply on HN