Live data from Hacker News

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

thetariffcost.com

241–250 of 250 posts

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

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It follows then that the USA also wants to protect its industries, such as timber, oil and gas, and maple syrup, from Canadian producers that are happy to dump their stuff south of the border for cheaper than US competition.

The US sets the price it pays for Canadian oil, a discount from the market price. I don't know about timber, but the US maple syrup industry is healthy, just unable to keep up with demand. I think that's a consequence of geography and the time investment required to get mature trees, not Canada undercutting.

Canadians don't negotiate when selling their oil? US just sets the price? Amazing.

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

#242
post #186
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well there's layers right. If you're going to claim that we're very desperate for such things we would of course have to act as a country of desperation and secure aluminum, oil, and critical minerals perhaps at all costs. I wonder what that would look like? If we don't take desperate measures, maybe we aren't desperate yea? But just as we don't have to take Trump at his word when he says something we disagree with,…

"If I choose to adopt the most extreme definition of the word 'desperate', then I'm technically correct, and I don't have to support my assertions, or argue with facts!" You know very well that the intended meaning of the word "desperate" in the comment you replied to isn't what you're now desperately pretending to be confused about. Stop it. From the HN community guidelines: "Please respond to the strongest plausibl…

  > From the HN community guidelines: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
If you’re going to quote these guidelines then you should at least follow them in good faith. If you believed my interpretation of the word desperate wasn’t what was intended to be communicated you or others can clarify it or ask questions instead of doubling down on what is an incorrect use of the word in this situation.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/desperate

There is nothing uncharitable about my interpretation of the word desperate here.

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

#243
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And don't forget the Greenland threats, those for us Europeans, and in European foreign affairs are a line of non return. Other administrations will not be able to repair the damage, because what was exposed really is that the US system allows for each administration to destroy and 180 whatever the previous one did.

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's the chain of reasoning that this theory of unrepairable relations sends us down. But we've had challenges and issues before. The US…

> 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's the chain of reasoning that this theory of unrepairable relations sends us down.

Irreparable doesn't make it a good idea to increase the damage, in much the same way that a company losing their trademark ("irreparable harm") can have an even worse time if all their banks suddenly refuse to do business with them.

The US taking Greenland by force means either NATO ends, or it collectively is at war with the USA, either outcome within a week or less. Similar but with different timelines for the entire EU due to Article 42(7), even though not all EU member states are in NATO and vice versa. It means maximally escalating trade prohibition (which doesn't mean everything from day 0) rather than simply the absence of deals leading to tariffs.

I will note with Suez, the British and French were humiliated, and by some the crisis is considered to be the end of the British empire. The British are not exactly beloved world-wide, despite what British newspapers will write about all the asylum seekers.

And the French didn't fully withdraw from NATO, but from the US-led unified command and the control of NATO's nuclear arsenal, to approximately quote the Wikipedia page.

Neither world war worked out well for those involved; for the British it was two Pyrrhic victories in a lifetime, for Germany it was humiliation and hyperinflation the first time around and getting quartered the second time around with active economic suppression only ending because of a proxy conflict of brain drain across what became the Iron Curtain. In both wars, Germany was seen as villainous for the next generation. The relative economic damage in Europe is what allowed the USA to become a superpower, and it only really supported Europe as a foil against Communism.

Or just look at how much the borders changed going from pre-WW1 to post-WW2.

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

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, we're talking about different things. What the OP understands "repair the damage" to mean, which I know because I've seen the expectation myself in the wild, is that the next administration can restore the 2024 status quo by just going on a really compelling apology tour. I don't think that's likely; we're still going to see Canadians boycotting random consumer goods, Europeans demanding that everyone should m…

Their lack of specificity does not invalidate my comment. > and countries in general being a lot less willing to negotiate for trade agreements the Americans can't credibly promise to keep. We have a lot of trade deals and have created new ones while Trump has been in office. Countries have willingly negotiated with us and us with them. What you are writing is ideological wishful thinking, not what is reflected in re…

> We have a lot of trade deals and have created new ones while Trump has been in office. Countries have willingly negotiated with us and us with them. What you are writing is ideological wishful thinking, not what is reflected in reality.

Those trade deals aren't worth the paper they're written on while Trump is around. Everybody is aware of this, the only difference is that Trump seems to think he's the only one who knows.

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

#245

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 o…

I wouldn't say that's an underestimate. It just sounds like you're the one bringing the average up

Not everyone is buying brand new cars

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

#246
post #15

This site looks good, and it's nice that it has data sources, but it would also be nice if it was clear about who built the site.

Why does it matter? The data sources are cited and are publicly available. It's basically just documenting the utter stupidity of a trade war with a close ally with whom we are tightly coupled economically.

Because people want to turn absolutely everything into an excuse to argue about AI

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

#247
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their lack of specificity does not invalidate my comment. > and countries in general being a lot less willing to negotiate for trade agreements the Americans can't credibly promise to keep. We have a lot of trade deals and have created new ones while Trump has been in office. Countries have willingly negotiated with us and us with them. What you are writing is ideological wishful thinking, not what is reflected in re…

> We have a lot of trade deals and have created new ones while Trump has been in office. Countries have willingly negotiated with us and us with them. What you are writing is ideological wishful thinking, not what is reflected in reality. Those trade deals aren't worth the paper they're written on while Trump is around. Everybody is aware of this, the only difference is that Trump seems to think he's the only one who…

> Those trade deals aren't worth the paper they're written on while Trump is around. Everybody is aware of this, the only difference is that Trump seems to think he's the only one who knows.

But they are still real trade deals, the rules are still followed, &c.

Your personal distaste for Donald Trump (I believe he belongs in jail and didn't vote for him either time) doesn't change that fact.

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

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

shrug If people feel that way then there’s no reason to do anything besides whatever we want. We are untrustworthy, unreliable, highly volatile (anything else we should add?) and every Canadian/European is proudly chanting death to America. At that point, who cares? It reminds me of those abusive relationships where some girl (EU/Canada) hates the boyfriend (America) but keeps coming back to him despite all these fla…

What an incredible way to miss the points and what an incredible bit of logic.

"Sure, I am an abusive asshole. But you need me, so I'm going to continue to be an abusive asshole. Why wouldn't I? You need me."

At this point I'm just going to assume you're trolling. Well done, I guess.

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

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

shrug If people feel that way then there’s no reason to do anything besides whatever we want. We are untrustworthy, unreliable, highly volatile (anything else we should add?) and every Canadian/European is proudly chanting death to America. At that point, who cares? It reminds me of those abusive relationships where some girl (EU/Canada) hates the boyfriend (America) but keeps coming back to him despite all these fla…

What an incredible way to miss the points and what an incredible bit of logic. "Sure, I am an abusive asshole. But you need me, so I'm going to continue to be an abusive asshole. Why wouldn't I? You need me." At this point I'm just going to assume you're trolling. Well done, I guess.

> At this point I'm just going to assume you're trolling. Well done, I guess.

Every accusation is a confession.

> "Sure, I am an abusive asshole. But you need me, so I'm going to continue to be an abusive asshole. Why wouldn't I? You need me."

Well, then why are, idk what to call some folks, I guess anti-American pro-EU? still trying to convince us of anything?

It's like you keep repeating "we don't trust you", "we don't like this or that", "the relationship will never be the same"! Ok got it, we've moved on and we're flying solo now, why haven't you moved on?

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

#250
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have a lot of trade deals and have created new ones while Trump has been in office. Countries have willingly negotiated with us and us with them. What you are writing is ideological wishful thinking, not what is reflected in reality. Those trade deals aren't worth the paper they're written on while Trump is around. Everybody is aware of this, the only difference is that Trump seems to think he's the only one who…

> Those trade deals aren't worth the paper they're written on while Trump is around. Everybody is aware of this, the only difference is that Trump seems to think he's the only one who knows. But they are still real trade deals, the rules are still followed, &c. Your personal distaste for Donald Trump (I believe he belongs in jail and didn't vote for him either time) doesn't change that fact.

> But they are still real trade deals, the rules are still followed, &c.

No, that's the point, they're not.

> Your personal distaste for Donald Trump (I believe he belongs in jail and didn't vote for him either time) doesn't change that fact.

Same in reverse. He could be everyone's favourite uncle and it would still be rendering the US's word worthless.

Me, I'm not eligible to vote for him, what with having repeatedly turned down opportunities to move to the USA.

Post reply on HN