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

Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 931 posts

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#271

Post by aswanson »

danaris wrote: post #264
aswanson wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the data suggests the opposite. He wasn't in a position of power at the time; the federal government was controlled by the democrats. Elections are run at the state level and are so disparate procedurally that Russia gave up trying to flip them directly. There has been no discrepancy between exit polls and the results. We have to face the fact that this is who the United States chose, and this is who a significan…

Elections are, in many if not most states, run electronically. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't trust all the companies that make the voting machines. For instance, does Musk own stock in some of them? Do their owners vote Trump?

Voting machine integrity was litigated in the election trump lost. Fox, trump's propaganda organ, had to pay $781 million because they could not substantiate claims of electronic fraud. There are adversarial reviews of voting data at all levels, and audits done at the physical and electronic level. 60 lawsuits found no evidence of fraud. You can't just say, "I think this might have happened because it sounds sinister." There is a ton of legal, procedural, monitored, and reviewed data that overwhemingly makes the case that electronic voting fraud did not happen. If you have evidence to the contrary, present it. Otherwise, its just vibes.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#272

Post by pseudalopex »

amelius wrote: post #270
pseudalopex wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaking is vague. What part of what law?

It's not vague. I'm not a lawyer but usually cases of trading with insider information are taken very seriously. It's theft, basically. And the scale here is enormous.

Leaking, insider trading, and theft are different. And laws contain specific definitions.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#273

Post by const_cast »

jader201 wrote: post #251
asadotzler wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So all anyone has to do to qualify is produce some of the most complicated electronic devices and components in the history of the world at the largest scale possible, without which there is zero chance of being sustainable or competitive, and then they can benefit from the gifts to the established giants? What a gift. What a great idea. That'll surely spur innovation and domestic production and have no effect to fur…

> without which there is zero chance of being sustainable or competitive It seems like some of these comments are missing how competition works. Competition happens within the same type(s) of goods, not across them. That is, the companies making the goods still affected by tariffs aren’t in competition with the companies making goods now exempt by tariffs. Yes, its true that they will have a better chance at thriving…

> Competition happens within the same type(s) of goods, not across them.

Not true, for example smart phones replaced home computers for most people. Those are two very different goods, but since they can accomplish the same thing for the average person they end up competing.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#274

Post by JohnTHaller »

amelius wrote: post #183
perihelions wrote: post #59

This reads to me as "we're doubling-down on 145%+ tariffs for everyone else". This is getting frighteningly close to a Russian-style economy. As in, a handful of powerful, connected "insiders" will be allowed to operate businesses, and will dominate... while everyone else gets wiped out, by acts of government. The furthest system possible from the free-market paradigm that built the American economy as it stands toda…

Speaking of which, what are the tariffs for Russia?

Oh, we don't need tariffs for Russia. But we put them in for Ukraine. - the Republican administration

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#275

Post by jonplackett »

zzzeek wrote: post #83
jonplackett wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m British so not that knowledgeable about us politics beyond the big players. How well known is Murphy? I’d never heard of him until I saw this video but he seems very impressive and much more electable than Biden or harris.

he's a US Senator. Senators are very important here

Yeah I get that he’s a senator! I mean how much in the public eye is he. Would a random person know who he is?

We have hundreds of Members of Parliament here in the UK, but probably only 10 that most people could name.

I wondered how big his public profile is.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#276

Post by const_cast »

dtquad wrote: post #185
xbmcuser wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US economy was not built on a free-market. US private capitalists have been built on a free market; now that their profits are under attack because they are being outcompeted by China, so they are running away with the ball. American economy real growth, where most white Americans gained wealth, came after World War II, where it was government led and controlled. It was the same for Europe, where they had to rebu…

>the Chinese economic model of government-controlled economic direction, though not perfect, would work better You want the US government to provide more subsidies to US tech companies so they can stay competitive? Because that is what China is doing for its tech sector.

The US already subsidizes these companies, sometimes more severely.

The problem is these companies are thieves, mostly. They just take the money and pocket most of it. Infrastructure be damned.

And when the house of cards inevitably tumbles down, they don’t pay the price. The gains are private, but the losses are public.

US companies always favor tomorrow, not next week. They look to enriching themselves NOW. But in doing so they take on a debt. They put everything on a metaphorical credit card. Eventually the competition is too hot and they have to pay their debt very quickly, and they shutter despite their subsidies and long-running success.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#277

Post by jonplackett »

prng2021 wrote: post #90
jonplackett wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the only explanation that has made sense to me so far. And it makes even more sense based on these exemptions. https://www.instagram.com/share/_jW_V1hwM This is Senator Chris Murphy explaining it’s not economic policy, it’s an attempt to blackmail corporations into submission by making a deal with him in return for sanctions relief. Keep an eye out for what Apple and nvidia might have agreed to give.

I keep seeing these explanations of “4D chess”. It’s Donald Trump. He has absolutely no idea what he’s doing when it comes to economic policies. Unless you believe he can see into the future of how other world leaders would react and consistently outsmart everyone else, there’s no 4D chess being played.

Exactly but this is NOT economic policy

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#278

Post by const_cast »

bitsage wrote: post #196
energy123 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Russia comparison is the corruption, not the protectionism.

I’d understand if these exemptions applied to companies and not industries. For comparison, Putin unilaterally nationalizes and sells off companies to benefit his inner circle. The US isn’t nationalizing AMD and selling it to Nvidia at the behest of Jensen.

> I’d understand if these exemptions applied to companies and not industries.

Same thing, these companies essentially run these industries and nobody else can get in.

If you want to make a competitor to Nvidia it would take you 20 years if you started RIGHT NOW. Hope you have a few hundred billion dollars lying around :P

The distinction between domains and companies fully disappears in an oligarchy.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#280

Post by throw0101d »

lazyeye wrote: post #265
throw0101d wrote: post #125

There are valid reasons for tariffs: * https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/when-are-tariffs-good Especially when it comes to certain areas of the economy: > Democratic countries’ economies are mainly set up as free market economies with redistribution, because this is what maximizes living standards in peacetime. In a free market economy, if a foreign country wants to sell you cheap cars, you let them do it, and you alloca…

I think we need to also consider that "conventional economic thinking" got us into this mess (de-industrialized, vulnerable economy, hollowed out working/middle class, enormous debt/deficit). There never seems to be any accountability for this though. I suspect it's because a particular section of society has done very well from the status quo.

> (de-industrialized, vulnerable economy, hollowed out working/middle class, enormous debt/deficit).

The debt/deficit is on politicians (and the public who votes them in). See also issues with US Social Security (Canada was on a similar path, but the government(s) sorted things out in the 1990s).

At least for the US, it has not de-industrialized, as exports have never been higher. It makes a smaller portion of total GDP, but that's because of growth of other sectors; and a smaller portion of the workforce, but that's because of automation:

* https://www.csis.org/analysis/do-not-blame-trade-decline-man...

The largest problem nowadays is probably housing costs, and that has nothing to do with trade, but is about things like NIMBY and zoning.

If you want more than "a particular section of society" and more folks to benefit look into redistribution, which plenty of conventional economists will happily agree with.

Post reply on HN