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

Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 259 posts

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#221

Post by JeremyNT »

tmpz22 wrote: post #99
johnnyanmac wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, going to r/conservative, top answer in a tarriff thread: >To influence companies to produce their goods domestically instead of internationally. What is so hard to understand about this? So they are stuck in Just World Land. another top comment linked this: https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-pr... So they more or less buy into "The extraordinary threat posed by illegal aliens and drugs, i…

r/conservative is a bad litmus test. Between AI-driven bots (read comment histories!), flair-only posts, and chronically online users it's a terrible reflection of the average American who identifies as conservative. We need to stop reaching for the easiest data source just because we're desperate for a data source. There's a reason great research is hard - mostly because it requires stupendous effort (and funding!)…

> r/conservative is a bad litmus test. Between AI-driven bots (read comment histories!), flair-only posts, and chronically online users it's a terrible reflection of the average American who identifies as conservative

Sure, the average American who identifies as conservative just shows up every 4 years and hits the R without giving it much though. Thinking about them doesn't really give us much either.

I think /r/conservative tells us a lot, even if it's not representative of the constituency. The President is driven by memes and is extremely online. The "vibes" in /r/conservative (and on X, The Everything App) are extremely relevant, because these are the audiences Trump plays to.

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#222

Post by move-on-by »

dalyons wrote: post #43
move-on-by wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it will be Biden’s fault for ruining the economy and causing inflation. Trump didn’t have a choice, just trying to save the economy really. Doing what’s best for the people.

Imagine actually believing this. Contrary to every economist and qualified takes.

I’m answering a question:

> Any bets on how this will be justified by Trump voters?

This is not what I believe

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#223

Post by move-on-by »

watwut wrote: post #187
move-on-by wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it will be Biden’s fault for ruining the economy and causing inflation. Trump didn’t have a choice, just trying to save the economy really. Doing what’s best for the people.

Trump promised to lower inflation and eggs prices. Are those lowering?

I’m answering a question:

> Any bets on how this will be justified by Trump voters?

This is not what I believe

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#224

Post by verdverm »

rsynnott wrote: post #204
verdverm wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free trade and globalization have been around a lot longer than most of us here have been alive, maybe all of is It has been a rising tide that lifts all boats on our blue marble

All of us, presuming that there's no-one here aged over 200.

I hear the bicentennials are happily collecting social security or serving in congress

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#225

Post by Aloha »

Marsymars wrote: post #176
Aloha wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pro tariff - but 25% tariffs are absurd, at most you need 10%-12% in narrowly targeted categories to ensure re-onshoring of production.

I’m curious - I wouldn’t describe myself as “pro tariff” at all, but I can see a good case for them in a couple circumstances; 1) in cases where production is important for national security - e.g. sufficient production of Calories and 2) in cases where off-shored production isn’t meeting standards around human rights, environmental protection, etc. Do you see a case for tariffs otherwise?

Cost adjustment tariffs is my argument -

You use tariffs to equalize actual costs plus a little (environmental/climate rules, labor costs, regulatory environment, human rights, etc) between the US and a foreign country. It doesn't have to be a huge amount of increase either, 5-12% - and probably wouldn't apply to most developed countries, because it is based on that matrix of total cost of doing business.

As far as rationale here - I personally want to onshore as much production as I can - but you can't start with finished goods necessarily, you often have to start with the base supportive industries needed - but even I acknowledge that may not be practical for everything.

But, to do what I want to do is a decades long process and must be done strategically and carefully - blanket tariffs dont do that, and are just a blowtorch to the delicate interconnections of a modern economy. Like targeting agricultural goods is absurd, for example - and will just raise prices for no tangible good.

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#226

Post by aaronbaugher »

misterjensen wrote: post #197

Right, like they are not going to take the opportunity to raise margins. I recall seeing the exact same windshield mounted phone holder for 25 USD at Best Buy and 1 USD at the dollar store. Prices are not only set based on percentual margins, they are also set based on what the consumer is ready to pay for perceived value.

Yep. "Translation: CEOs see opportunity to raise prices and blame it on someone else, figuring consumers don't understand how prices work." And they're mostly right.

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#227

Post by emodendroket »

chii wrote: post #195
emodendroket wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're clearly thinking much bigger, like returning to a model where tariffs are the primary mode of funding the government, and nuking whole sectors/devaluing the dollar to make US exports more competitive with a desperate potential workforce. Not a particularly compelling plan in my view but it has its own internal logic.

why would tariffs make US exports more competitive? It would make other countries under tariff to retaliate, which makes US exports less valuable. Unless, of course, the US has some sort of monopoly on an export that others have no choice but to take. I dont think the US has such a resource.

Import substitution industrialization is a pretty well established method to foster industries and frankly works really well for developing states (or did until the entire international system started conspiring to turn you into a pariah state for trying it). You can't export something you're not making in the first place. But it is quite unusual for a fully developed, post-industrial economy to try and move back down the value chain and manufacture more stuff again so who knows what happens when we try that.

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#228

Post by emodendroket »

toxicunderGroov wrote: post #210
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US does have such a monopoly, in tech. But because that's services rather than goods, it seems to be ignored.

I propose ASML raised prices for US customers by 30%, and maybe give China some freebies to thank them for the panda's.

Supposing they did, is there somewhere else their customers are going to buy from?

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#229

Post by Marsymars »

Aloha wrote: post #225
Marsymars wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious - I wouldn’t describe myself as “pro tariff” at all, but I can see a good case for them in a couple circumstances; 1) in cases where production is important for national security - e.g. sufficient production of Calories and 2) in cases where off-shored production isn’t meeting standards around human rights, environmental protection, etc. Do you see a case for tariffs otherwise?

Cost adjustment tariffs is my argument - You use tariffs to equalize actual costs plus a little (environmental/climate rules, labor costs, regulatory environment, human rights, etc) between the US and a foreign country. It doesn't have to be a huge amount of increase either, 5-12% - and probably wouldn't apply to most developed countries, because it is based on that matrix of total cost of doing business. As far as r…

> I personally want to onshore as much production as I can

What's the rationale for this? Like if you're already close to full employment, this isn't even zero-sum, you're throwing away your comparative advantage and spending part of your economy on production rather than higher-value services.

I'm willing to spend part of my country's wealth to counteract, say, other countries' lack of environmental protections, but if you're spending that wealth on counteracting lower offshore labour costs... in effect, the net impact is that you're just reducing the value of your own labour to match the offshore labour. (ergo, tariffs are a real clunky way to support local labour that isn't competitive with offshore labour costs... you could achieve the same ends more efficiently via income taxes and UBI.)

Re: Best Buy and Target CEOs say prices are about to go up because of tariffs

#230

Post by Aloha »

emodendroket wrote: post #175
Aloha wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pro tariff - but 25% tariffs are absurd, at most you need 10%-12% in narrowly targeted categories to ensure re-onshoring of production.

They're clearly thinking much bigger, like returning to a model where tariffs are the primary mode of funding the government, and nuking whole sectors/devaluing the dollar to make US exports more competitive with a desperate potential workforce. Not a particularly compelling plan in my view but it has its own internal logic.

The issue with trying to do this is tariffs are both extremely regressive and wont generate enough revenue to move the needle.

It'd be one thing if we were combining tariffs with a UBI - that can balance out most of the regressive effects of it, but we're not doing that.

Post reply on HN