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

What if tariffs?

swatch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 286 posts

Re: What if tariffs?

#261

Post by tracker1 »

avaika wrote: post #135
sojournerc wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it's all that new. During the Bush Jr. years America was not highly thought of. I'm an American traveling through Scandinavia and Northern continental Europe for the last three weeks, now in the UK. I haven't experienced a bit of grief. Their opinion of our politics is generally separate from how they treat me personally, and I do the same for people of other nationalities. American cultural dominance is…

> Their opinion of our politics is generally separate from how they treat me personally, and I do the same for people of other nationalities. That is such a sane thing to do. I was always astonished and sad how often strangers in foreign countries instantly link my origin to the actions of the people in power. As if this is completely under my control and with no doubt I support and approve whatever they do.

Like assuming the U.S. has control over what Israel or Russia does.

Re: What if tariffs?

#262

Post by tracker1 »

M95D wrote: post #246
Tiktaalik wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what happens in a FPTP two party system. If you don't like one party what other option do you have but to vote for the other party? So as a result it's enormously easy for radicals to take over a big tent party and still achieve remarkable support.

Bernie was a 3rd option. Very few voted for him.

Bernie still runs/ran/supports the DNC umbrella... The socialists are embedded in the DNC, not a separate party.

That said, most Libertarians are now under the RLC (Republican Libertarian Caucus) as disaffected neo-socialists have come into the separate party, and the Democrat party has become more Socialist itself.

Also, Bernie should have one, but the DNC leadership absolutely cheats... this was incredibly apparent in 2016 and 2024. Talk about an oligarchy/autocracy...

Re: What if tariffs?

#263

Post by corimaith »

illiac786 wrote: post #255
corimaith wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Virtually every single one of Europe's prized industries are in China's crosshairs.

that is true of every country with a significant industry… and if the US had the capability, they would try to do exactly the same. And that’s also a good illustration of sentiment toward the US today.

The US did have that capability from 1945 to the 80s. Clearly Reagan and Clinton were willing to transition to a financialized service based economy and offshore the supply chains elsewhere.

Well for the OECD it worked out pretty fine, Japan and Korea provided new markets for USA while standards of living improved. But when you are realistically not expecting to maintain balanced import dependency or public foreign ownership, then it becomes zero-sum. A cynical projection from those less fortunate.

Re: What if tariffs?

#264

Post by illiac786 »

corimaith wrote: post #263
illiac786 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that is true of every country with a significant industry… and if the US had the capability, they would try to do exactly the same. And that’s also a good illustration of sentiment toward the US today.

The US did have that capability from 1945 to the 80s. Clearly Reagan and Clinton were willing to transition to a financialized service based economy and offshore the supply chains elsewhere. Well for the OECD it worked out pretty fine, Japan and Korea provided new markets for USA while standards of living improved. But when you are realistically not expecting to maintain balanced import dependency or public foreign o…

Fully agreed, they did. They would not anymore, this is my perception/sentiment.

Re: What if tariffs?

#265

Post by tracker1 »

tzs wrote: post #206
intermerda wrote: post #9

The number 39 refers to the 39% tariff rate on Switzerland. Kind of insane that the American President just made up a lie that tariffs are paid by foreign countries and rest of the administration just went along with it. It flies in the face of any common sense.

It's even worse than that. Their argument against corporate income taxes is that any tax imposed on a corporation is just passed on to consumers. Hard to see why companies would pass on a government imposed tax if it is an income tax but not a tariff. If anything you'd expect it to be the other way around, because an income tax allows deductions for much of the cost of making that income which generally means the amo…

Both are passed to consumers... the difference is a tariff is a point for international negotiation, there are competing options to a tariffed product, and it's a relativistic approach.

The U.S. has lost so much in terms of even being able to produce anything that it's in a weak position not just in terms of trade, but in domestic security in and of itself. The lesson from COVID should be that ensuring domestic production of at least SOME of everything that CAN be produced domestically in the US should be ensured to exist.

As examples... IMO, all prescription medications/devices should require dual sourcing and at least 50% domestic production. This ensures actual patent licensing as well as being able to ramp up from 50% in case of a need (war/pandemic). It's nearly impossible to ramp up from 0, but easy to ramp up from 50%. This can/should be extended to essential infrastructure, communications and technologies.

Most countries don't have the size/scale/scope to do this... the U.S. and a handful of other countries are and should take advantage of that and ensure it for their own critical security.

I don't say any of this from an isolationist PoV, I think trade is important... I think diplomacy is important... I just feel that a level of domestic security in terms of self-reliance at a certain level is more important.

Re: What if tariffs?

#266

Post by projectazorian »

jenadine wrote: post #160
lreeves wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly right. There are trade deals forming between countries that in unprecedented ways to avoid dealing with the constantly changing tariffs while one country says they'll take their ball and play alone.

But the US is the bigger country just next to it, also the most practical to trade with. Trading with country further appart means less efficient in transport. Is it not still self inflicted harm?

The Econ 101 view would say yes, note most countries haven't imposed 1:1 retaliatory tariffs.

But economic considerations are not the only ones. Opposition to the American Revolution is a fundamental theme in Canadian history. People shouldn't be surprised when Canada acts accordingly.

Re: What if tariffs?

#267

Post by charcircuit »

exe34 wrote: post #188
charcircuit wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please pretend that the exporter hypothetically pays the tariff. It just changes who is paying who. The end result is the same.

We don't have to pretend. We know who's paying. It's the consumer/importer.

You are not listening to what I am writing. I am saying that they are equivalent. If you are not going to engage with my comment, why comment?

Re: What if tariffs?

#268

Post by brailsafe »

brailsafe wrote: post #193
CoastalCoder wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s actually quite shocking to leave the U.S. and experience the drastic fall in respect. My only vantage point is from inside the U.S., but I find the loss of prestige completely believable. What amazed me was discovering that my own countrymen would vote in, and continue to support, someone like Trump. My political views are pretty centrist, and I thought I understood the views of most liberals and conservatives…

> My political views are pretty centrist, and I thought I understood the views of most liberals and conservatives. I think that effect comes from astroturfing, algorithms, and tribalism. The only way imo that a person gets any kind of genuine small sample of the varying vibes outside their circle is to speak with randoms in different geographic regions with a sense of humility, curiosity, and friendliness, in real li…

I'd add that I'm not assuming the person I was replying to doesn't do this, just that it's my hunch in a general sense that people basically stick to their circles and don't realize how differently people see the world outside it and why, because only the most emotionally charged, opposing, or niche topics make their way across someone's radar unless they speak to those people in real life. People are broadly much more alike than they are different, and the reasons they're different come down to familial, regional, or circumstantial variation that aren't as much of a barrier to forming common bonds as the internet or media would have us believe. That's also not to say that there aren't insurmountable differences like economic class that influence outcomes in a major way.

Re: What if tariffs?

#269

Post by burnerRhodov2 »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #259
burnerRhodov2 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone keeps screaming recession, i see an extreme bull market across all asset classes...? Am i missing something?

The very short of it is that a lot of bus bull market is propped up by AI. To such an extent that the top 10 companies of the S&P 500 have half the value right now. Combine this knowledge with some maneuvers as of late that reflect the Dotcom bubble and we're rife for a crash that will take the world economy with it once the bubble pops. Its a bull asset market right now, but its certainly not a healthy one And that'…

I don't think thats true at all...

These companies are absolutely money printing machines at the scale we have never seen.

Some of the individual standout figures:

Apple’s trailing 12-month net income is around US$99 billion. Microsoft’s trailing 12-month net income is about US$101 billion. Alphabet (Google) is estimated around US$111 billion net income.

On revenue, one list shows: Amazon ~$670 billion, Apple ~$408 billion, Alphabet ~$371 billion, Microsoft ~$281.7 billion.

Have you ever read the soverign individual? He kinda predicted this. Tech companies will rise into unfathomably rich while the countries inability to tax foreign revenues will lead to the collapse of the nationstate.

Re: What if tariffs?

#270

Post by johnnyanmac »

burnerRhodov2 wrote: post #269
johnnyanmac wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very short of it is that a lot of bus bull market is propped up by AI. To such an extent that the top 10 companies of the S&P 500 have half the value right now. Combine this knowledge with some maneuvers as of late that reflect the Dotcom bubble and we're rife for a crash that will take the world economy with it once the bubble pops. Its a bull asset market right now, but its certainly not a healthy one And that'…

I don't think thats true at all... These companies are absolutely money printing machines at the scale we have never seen. Some of the individual standout figures: Apple’s trailing 12-month net income is around US$99 billion. Microsoft’s trailing 12-month net income is about US$101 billion. Alphabet (Google) is estimated around US$111 billion net income. On revenue, one list shows: Amazon ~$670 billion, Apple ~$408 b…

> don't think thats true at all...

Its all speculation, so it's not really going to be true or false until it happens (or the economy recovers without a crash).

Listing tech companies who have all pledged into AI certainly isn't reassuring me otherwise, that's for sure

>Tech companies will rise into unfathomably rich while the countries inability to tax foreign revenues will lead to the collapse of the nationstate.

So, we're going to crash but the tech companies will be okay for a little longer? Sure, we can phrase it that way.

Post reply on HN