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

Bikes in the age of tariffs

renehersecycles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 121 posts

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#31

Post by mmooss »

9rx wrote: post #25
mmooss wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there are enormous benefits to globalization: economies of scale, efficiency and lower prices, quality from specialization (wine from France, beer from Germany, etc), increased competition, etc. To think protectionism will benefit the economy is ignorant. The global system of free trade and human rights has been the most free, prosperous, and peaceful era of humanity by far. Whole nations lifted from deep p…

> Why are we throwing it away again? Because we haven't figured out how to square allowing people the freedom to work in the industries they please, no matter where in the world that industry has found itself, with allowing countries to strictly limit who is allowed inside its borders. The "just learn to code" message never sat well with those who have no interest in coding and now they are rising up to try and take…

I've never heard that. I don't think many people migrate for specific industries. People migrate to have any job and some income, regardless of industry. Am I not thinking of some population?

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#32

Post by mmooss »

bilbo0s wrote: post #17
mmooss wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. It still would increase costs, maybe not as much.

You forgot the part about going from China to Japan and the associated costs. It could be cheaper? Could also be more expensive as well. In any case, if too many people play that game, then it only raises the tariff on Japan. I wouldn't assume these tariffs are fixed. They seem to be tied to trade deficit. So.. yeah. No real way around them over time. Might even piss the US government off if you try that. Which is ki…

> You forgot the part about going from China to Japan and the associated costs.

That was my point.

> It could be cheaper?

Why would it be cheaper? Wouldn't they do that without tariffs?

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#33

Post by teddyh »

mmooss wrote: post #14
giraffe_lady wrote: post #4

> That is a factor that’s often overlooked: The Civic Type R—and also many high-end bicycle components—barely make sense from a strict business perspective. ... International trade has made it possible to pool the global demand for such niche products and make them all in one place, achieving economies of scale that make them (almost) cost-effective. This is such an interesting insight that would never have occurred…

Of course there are enormous benefits to globalization: economies of scale, efficiency and lower prices, quality from specialization (wine from France, beer from Germany, etc), increased competition, etc. To think protectionism will benefit the economy is ignorant. The global system of free trade and human rights has been the most free, prosperous, and peaceful era of humanity by far. Whole nations lifted from deep p…

If your country outlaws slavery and child labor, but imports freely (i.e. without tariffs) from countries which allows it, why does your country even have those laws? It’s certainly not to protect children or people from slavery; they’ve just exported the negative effects to other countries.

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#34

Post by Wumpnot »

whynotmaybe wrote: post #22
mtmail wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That phrasing is weird indeed.

As a non native English speaker, "rulers" isn't problematic for me. Is it really that pejorative ?

It means like king/queen/emperor, you wouldn't use it for an elected official, so here it is more sarcastic because Trump is acting like he is an emperor.

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#35

Post by metalman »

the article ends with a FUD statement about certain products bieng no longer financialy viable in the world market due to them bieng priced out of the US, and insuficient demand, elsewhere. This can only be accepted if there is no question about the obscene profits generated by all large manufacturers, where "not financisly viable" means double digit profit and growth, rather than actualy unprofitable. If there is real demand, and no way for large established industrys to meet it, then this will spur the creation of countless small manufacturers.,..............everywhere. And that once it picks up speed, will be a good thing for comunitys worldwide. Globalisation, only works for the biggest players and sharpers, and for the smallest least developé countrys, there will still be the things they need on.the world market. But ,ha!, that just me trying to see a brite side, the whole thing could be just the first stage in something much much worse. early floyd...."Ive got a bike...you can ride it if you like" excellent sound track for this world now

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#38

Post by mmooss »

teddyh wrote: post #33
mmooss wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there are enormous benefits to globalization: economies of scale, efficiency and lower prices, quality from specialization (wine from France, beer from Germany, etc), increased competition, etc. To think protectionism will benefit the economy is ignorant. The global system of free trade and human rights has been the most free, prosperous, and peaceful era of humanity by far. Whole nations lifted from deep p…

If your country outlaws slavery and child labor, but imports freely (i.e. without tariffs) from countries which allows it, why does your country even have those laws? It’s certainly not to protect children or people from slavery; they’ve just exported the negative effects to other countries.

Could you apply your hypothetical? What countries are you talking about? How do you balance the benefits and the costs? If you wanted to improve human rights, what would be the best strategy?

Do you think Trump and the GOP are doing it because of labor rights?

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#39

Post by toomuchtodo »

mullingitover wrote: post #13

I've never been a political donor, I might've thrown $20 into a small donation a couple times. However, it seems financially irresponsible not to pour everything up to the legal limit into punishing everyone involved in this tax hike to the maximum extent.

The politics are important, and that effort must continue, but also directly targeting conservative voters economically. When they have distressed assets to sell, farmland, homes, businesses, I am ready to buy at a substantial discount. I have prepared to lever up with access to debt for this opportunity, and I recommend others who can do so. I want to buy when there is blood in the streets (economically), but only taking from those who caused this.

Re: Bikes in the age of tariffs

#40

Post by davidw »

eesmith wrote: post #24
mullingitover wrote: post #13

I've never been a political donor, I might've thrown $20 into a small donation a couple times. However, it seems financially irresponsible not to pour everything up to the legal limit into punishing everyone involved in this tax hike to the maximum extent.

All I've gotten from my donations has been being added to mailing lists asking for more money to help fund the next election. Not for building grass roots organizations. Not for building resiliency. Not for active protests, and organized opposition by the politicians. I'm sure the political consultants got paid well though.

Depends where you send your money. I've used this in the past and as a huge bonus, I don't get added to 29494494292 mailing lists https://app.oath.vote/
Post reply on HN