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

221–230 of 252 posts

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

#221

Post by marcus_holmes »

wahern wrote: post #215
marcus_holmes wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don’t forget, the US alongside anglosphere allies liberated Western Europe at the same time Japan was being fought Let's not forget the Soviet Union, who did most of the actual heavy lifting of liberating Western Europe. If D-Day had never happened, the Soviets would have rolled right through Germany and then occupied France and the low countries. The Nazis would still have lost, but all of continental Europe would…

> "If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view l several times in conversations with me." > - Nikita Khrushchev, political commissar oversee…

fair points, but it still doesn't add up to "the USA beat Germany" or even "the anglosphere beat Germany". The Soviets beat Germany and we helped.

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

#222

Post by marcus_holmes »

defrost wrote: post #216
wahern wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view l several times in conversations with me." > - Nikita Khrushchev, political commissar oversee…

In addition, the UK and loose European merchant fleets repeatedly ran the gauntlet of German Navy, ice, and bad seas to deliver that material - so much so that World War Two: Russian medals for last Arctic Convoys veterans - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-51726647

yeah, they were heroes and I don't think I could have done that in the face of those odds.

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

#223

Post by gmerc »

gruez wrote: post #211
maest wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not wild to imagine Canada wants to protect a domestic food producing industry. Same how all countries, including the US, heavily subsidize and protect their agricultural sector. I'd call this strategic, not political (although ofc it involves lobbying, again, like in every other country including the US)

>It's not wild to imagine Canada wants to protect a domestic food producing industry. It's still protectionism, even if it's for a "good cause". During the mercantilist era protectionism was considered the obvious thing to do. After all, why would you want to make yourself poorer and enrich your enemies in the process? That doesn't mean it wasn't protectionism. >I'd call this strategic, not political (although ofc it…

Pray tell, what's with the whining about Chinese overproduction then?

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

#224

Post by dgellow »

sobellian wrote: post #49

Imagine you want to build a factory in the US. You pay tariffs on the factory equipment you need - much of it is made overseas. You pay tariffs on your input goods. And then when you try to export your customers get hit with a retaliatory tariff. I don't agree with tariffs but even if we accept some level of protectionism you can't tariff everything the way this administration wants. You have to pick what you actuall…

Trump tariffs aren’t for economics reasons. He’s using that as a bullying tactic. It’s pretty obvious given that each tantrum is followed by a new tariff

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

#225

Post by dgellow »

epolanski wrote: post #220
gruez wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Ship building should be one of those for countries like US or UK. Yet, protectionism for that, as practiced in the US (ie. jones act), was a massive failure. There might still theoretically a domestic shipbuilding sector, but it's bloated, inefficient, and as a result is totally not up to the task of standing up to China, which does have a competent shipbuilding sector.

That's one of the negatives, the industries involved have no reason to evolve or invest, work is guaranteed.

See German car manufacturers as the perfect example

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

#226

Post by epolanski »

dgellow wrote: post #225
epolanski wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of the negatives, the industries involved have no reason to evolve or invest, work is guaranteed.

See German car manufacturers as the perfect example

What do you mean? German manufacturers have always competed on the global market and they have always been against tariffs because they rely heavily on exports.

Germany was in fact the country that most opposed tariffs on Chinese cars because German automakers hated it.

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

#227

Post by snayan »

vintermann wrote: post #218
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…

Maybe it's obvious, but you left out subsidized. US dairy production is extremely subsidized compared to Canada's. It's not in any sense "free trade". The subsidies would allow the US dairy industry to destroy Canada's (it might even without the subsidies, but the subsidies guarantee it). Once the local industry was destroyed, the US producers/government would be free to increase the price. No country wants that, whi…

That's just a convenient talking point for our government. The model in Canada is effectively a regressive tax on consumers in the checkout line. It conveniently allows for our government to talk about how they don't subsidize farmers, and have a clean budget on that front, but I would prefer to see a model that was actually funded by government taxes such that it could be a progressive tax born more by wealthier Canadians rather than lower income ones being hit hardest.

I also have doubts that our current model is the best way of achieving the goals we had in mind when the programs were created in the 1970s. I know the error bars are quite sizeable, and it's not quite apples to apples, but recent studies that suggest our supply chain management in dairy, eggs, and poultry, costs approximately $244pp per year in higher costs. That's over $10billion per annum Canada wide, equivalent to 2% of the federal budget! I have been discussing this with someone in another thread for days, and the more I look into it, the more I feel like we really need to take another look at the implementation of this program. Dollar amount breaks my brain.

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

#228

Post by dinfinity »

ericmay wrote: post #140
dinfinity wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They can be repaired - but if you think they can't be, then the US should act accordingly which would mean yea go ahead and take over Greenland, withdraw forces from Europe, &c. because as you say they can't be fixed so we might as well do whatever we think we want or need to do That is a very black and white view of the world. There is actually a very large area between acting as a close ally and acting as an impe…

> That is a very black and white view of the world. > The USA has proven to be highly volatile, highly unreliable, and highly unreasonable. Right, black and white haha. Well if we are highly volatile, highly unreliable, and highly unreasonable why would we do anything besides whatever we decide to do? Can’t trust us, can’t reason with us, and can’t rely on us. In that case, who gives a shit about alliances with Europ…

> Right, black and white haha. Well if we are highly volatile, highly unreliable, and highly unreasonable why would we do anything besides whatever we decide to do? Can’t trust us, can’t reason with us, and can’t rely on us. In that case, who gives a shit about alliances with Europe?

So, what's the plan? The USA imperialistically conquers land of former allies and rules the world forever with force? All countries are forced to trade with the USA? Or will the USA just operate as an island? How is this gonna work?

I don't think you realize how bad things have already gotten. We're not at the level of Europeans or Canadians burning American flags and chanting "death to America" in the street yet, but we are definitely speedrunning towards that. According to polling a large majority of the countries in the world now see the USA as the biggest threat to world peace [0]. A lot of people have also come to simply really, really hate (most) Americans. The complacency and impotence in stopping the utter madness and stupidity (or worse, doubling down on it) are damning. I wish it were different.

[0] https://www.niradata.com/global-pulse-2026 ("Global threat" section)

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

#229

Post by TitaRusell »

We're rapidly approaching a time in which America doesn't make anything that can't be replaced.

If Carney was serious he'd fly to Beijing and shake Chinese hands. That would utterly terrify the few responsible adults left in Washington to back the fuck down.

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

#230

Post by bdangubic »

ericmay wrote: post #132
bdangubic wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To be clear we operate a representative and stable democracy in the United States. We most certainly do not, the system is just nicely setup to make us believe that this is the case. In 2020 for instance, we were given an amazing choice to choose between a senile grandpa and the most vile and corrupt human being ever to walk the earth. all us elections boil down to this, the establishment decides who their 'best on…

Well, in that case I’d say our version of Democracy is just the better one and European democracies are just one step away from Russia/China and are very unstable and unrepresented in comparison to the US because of the EU. We have only 720 members of the EU parliament representing over 600 million people. In the US we have more people representing fewer people, ergo we are more representative. How is the president o…

EU is not a country :)
Post reply on HN