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

The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

thetariffcost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 254 posts

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#141

Post by ericmay »

kps wrote: post #117
Throaway826 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main reason the Dairy Supply quota is in place is to stop US dairy producers from dumping dairy into Canada. That's why the USA has never reached the tarriff limit. The big producers there would just dump 20 million litres at once if they could. They aren't interested in 1 or two. And if they were able to do that, the Canadian producers would go under. So its kinda simple, the Dairy Supply system is there to prot…

> The main reason the Dairy Supply quota is in place is to stop US dairy producers from dumping dairy into Canada. Yet the same rules apply to European cheese: limited quantities that can only be imported through an established dairy cartel member. Anti-Americanism is a convenient marketing tool, along with the nostalgic myth of the independent family farm. The reality is oligarchs like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…

I’m dumb and misread the comment. Please ignore.

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#142

Post by cryptoegorophy »

From what I researched, Tarrifs that are discussed are impacting about 5% of overall trade between USA and Canada. This seems more political and clickbait than anything meaningful. 5% is not something to be concerned about unless you are directly impacted. “They” (news, politicians) just want your attention.

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#143

Post by trynumber9 »

jszymborski wrote: post #88
declan_roberts wrote: post #52

Canada is very unfortunately caught in the trade war between the USA and China. It's pretty easy right now for certain goods to bypass the US tariffs by being transshipped through Canada and enter the USA without tariff because of minimal processing. Chinese steel is a notable example of this. And a lot of Canada's trade MOUs with other countries basically requires they have this special privilege. So there's gonna b…

Canada generally doesn't have much problem coordinating with the US on tariffs on Chinese goods. A primary example is Chinese Vehicles. The trouble is that by launching a trade war against Canada, the US has lost the willingness of Canadians to participate in such coordination. Re: Canadian dollars, it's the US dollar that I believe is the more salient concern [0] [0] https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-jones/202608…

CAD vs USD is rather stable, varying between 0.70-0.73 the last 12 months though trending down from 0.8 in the last 60 months.

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#144

Post by kps »

ericmay wrote: post #141
kps wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main reason the Dairy Supply quota is in place is to stop US dairy producers from dumping dairy into Canada. Yet the same rules apply to European cheese: limited quantities that can only be imported through an established dairy cartel member. Anti-Americanism is a convenient marketing tool, along with the nostalgic myth of the independent family farm. The reality is oligarchs like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…

I’m dumb and misread the comment. Please ignore.

It sounds like you misread my comment.

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#145

Post by ericmay »

epolanski wrote: post #139
ericmay wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The news isn't threatening allies, offending/mocking them, charging tariffs, subverting the very institutions that have been built together. A human in charge is. No but they're getting you to click on every article where Trump is SLAMMED and Marcon is TOASTED and Canada RETALIATES or whatever. > As long as the system allows for complete 180 degree turns every 4 years making any arrangement bears little value. That…

> To be clear we operate a representative and stable democracy in the United States. It's not a representative democracy. A representative democracy is one where all voters are represented in a branch of government. The US system is exactly the opposite. It's a winner-takes-all democracy. At all levels. And worse, the executive represents only the half that voted him, the other half don't exist. There's many other fl…

> It's not a representative democracy. It's a winner-takes-all one. In US the executive is one single individual representing only those who voted him. Sometimes it's even a minority vote like in Trump #1.

The US is literally a representative democracy as a matter of fact and definition. Winner-take-all in contested elections does not make the US not a representative democracy.

> And no, the US is clearly not stable on foreign politics

No country is then.

> It's a decision that's been made in Washington to revert decades of successful cooperation. We're merely reacting to the reality.

Ok then we should just do whatever we want and who cares about alliances or whatever. Withdraw troops, normalize trade relations with Russia, take over Greenland, whatever. All the decades of successful cooperation are nearby reverted and so we can now take different actions with that in mind.

> That's not how you build stable relations, trust and business.

In that case any time a country or bloc takers abruptly actions they now no longer are building stable relations, trust, and business. For example if the EU takes an abrupt action we can make this same claim.

> Also, I really don't agree with your view of the "acting slowly".

What is my view that you disagree with?

> We don't need big changes, but small compounding ones.

Maybe. Sometimes you need big changes. Like climate change. We need to make big changes (at least in my view) to address it because small changes won’t save us in time.

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#146

Post by ericmay »

horsawlarway wrote: post #137
ericmay wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you are reading way too much into that "you" in that sentence. Sure that's fair, but on the other hand that's what was written and the framing I think is unfair and inconsistent. Of course, others may go along happily reading it and thinking wow we created these tariffs to raise prices and Canada decided to tax us!? That's worth clearing up and being honest about, in my view. Imagine someone writes another…

I think it's a bit more complicated than you're implying here. Yes - you are technically correct that each country is taxing its own citizens/businesses with tariffs. I also agree that phrasing is more honest than what the article states But for interconnected supply chains, the result can get pretty muddled. Ex - Canada sells wood to a US company. US applies tariff. That US company sells a component made of that woo…

I don’t disagree with you at all. My point was this:

> Ex - you will pay more because of US tariffs, and more again because of Canadian tariffs in response to US tariffs.

Also applies to Canada for the exact same reasons you highlighted. So when they say that Canada is taxing Americans because of tariffs, it goes both ways.

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#147

Post by QuantumNoodle »

I have anecdotal experience that makes the ~$1,600 per house hold feel like an underestimate.

We purchased a Subaru Outback right around the first round of tarrifs. We were in the market for the base trim, no bells & whistles. We ended up getting the highest trim bc all the remaining base trims were post-tarrifs and and cost $3.5k more than the pre-tarrif higher trim that was already in the lot.

Mind you the Subaru outback was assembled in IL, USA so it is not just imported entirely from Japan.

And that's not considering all the other "consuming" we do (which is quite limited being outdoor ppl).

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#148

Post by robocat »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #69
declan_roberts wrote: post #52

Canada is very unfortunately caught in the trade war between the USA and China. It's pretty easy right now for certain goods to bypass the US tariffs by being transshipped through Canada and enter the USA without tariff because of minimal processing. Chinese steel is a notable example of this. And a lot of Canada's trade MOUs with other countries basically requires they have this special privilege. So there's gonna b…

> Canada is very unfortunately caught in the trade war between the USA and China Ottawa is fighting Anchluss . The MAGA wing is entirely serious about annexing Canada. Carney, for a change, is right. Canada is being attacked.

[spelling] EN:Anschluss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anschluss

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#149

Post by ericmay »

tensor wrote: post #126
ericmay wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US automakers wouldn't collapse if Canadiens weren't buying American cars. Canada is too small of a market. On the other hand Canada would lose a lot of jobs. It also wouldn't apply to just American auto manufacturers. Japanese and German manufacturers I imagine ship cars to Canada too so you wouldn't get those either. > Huh? What does this even mean. Well we would enact a quota on imports, and then we'd be free to e…

Maybe you haven't noticed the world turning against you. Canada is forming trade agreements rapidly with other countries. We can get cars from anywhere in the world. You, on the other hand, would only be able to get cars from yourself. If you ban imports other countries will ban your exports. Isolationism is a losing philosophy. The best and wealthiest nations are the ones that do the most trade, not the least.

No the world isn’t turning against the US, just people in the internet who like to think it is.

Canada is forming trade agreements, the US is forming its own as well as we routinely do, including I’m sure a future one with Canada, and we can get cars for ourselves (we don’t need to import) or import them at will. For autos the US manufacturers are primarily domestic anyway so we have way more leverage than anyone else there. That’s partly why Honda, Toyota, BMW, Volkswagen, and more build cars in the US. Those markets (China too) are much more export dependent than we are.

> If you ban imports other countries will ban your exports.

To some degree but the US hasn’t really been banning imports though with some exceptions like Chinese automobiles but Europe will be doing that too.

Re: The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada

#150

Post by ericmay »

kps wrote: post #144
ericmay wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m dumb and misread the comment. Please ignore.

It sounds like you misread my comment.

Sorry, I did. I thought you were accusing American companies (which they can be) of being oligarchies. You’ll have to forgive me, I’ve been doing the lord’s work defending the United States a bit here and trying to clear up confusion that others have with respect to trade.
Post reply on HN