The Tariff Cost: analysis of the costs to Americans from new tariffs on Canada • Hacker News Board

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

#31

Post by Marsymars » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:34 PM UTC

bpt3 wrote: post #15

Marsymars wrote: post #2

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.

> Why does it matter? The data sources are cited and are publicly available.

Because I don't want to click through to every data source to verify every figure and need some baseline level of trust about whether they've been correctly used.

If there's an error, I want to be able to contact the author somehow.

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

#32

Post by llm_nerd » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:36 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #6

> And Canada is taxing you back This seems illogical. You can't simultaneously claim that the US is paying higher prices for Canadian goods because of US-imposed tariffs and then turn around and say only that Americans are paying a tax on buying Canadian goods on Canadian-imposed tariffs. Both countries are either paying higher prices or paying higher taxes. Canada's tariffs must also be viewed as America is taxing C…

> This seems illogical.

It is. When Canada imposes retaliatory tariffs, it is of course a tax on Canadians. Though it is also a market inducement, and one of the complaints of the admin is that Canada's retaliatory vehicle tariffs -- literally mirroring the tariffs the US applied to Canada -- caused a 22% drop in imports.

> import duties on American products which also must be treated in the same fashion for this analysis - Canadian imposed tariffs on dairy

Can you tell us if those import duties are in the room with us? Because you know they didn't exist, right?

There have been $0 in tariffs on US dairy. The tariffs only come into play when the US imports pass a certain volume -- and precisely the same tariffs happen in both directions -- and the US hasn't. Now the US has complained that there are administrative barriers, and maybe so, but they sure aren't clear on what they are, and lie about everything constantly.

Prior to this trade war, there was essentially 0% tariffs on products from the US. And the only reason there is a trade "deficit" is because of massive amounts of Alberta oil that the US desperately needs. I mean, it's hilarious that Trump was literally celebrating bringing back Keystone XL, and increasing the flow of Alberta oil, while simultaneously complaining essentially about that very same oil.

This is, as the WSJ named it, the stupidest trade war in history. All for yet another distraction, as Trump's entire base just desperately need to puff their little chests and celebrate when they think he is punching down on someone. Even if it makes their lives worse and their lot worse.

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

#33

Post by voidfunc » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:37 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #4

I'm trying to think of the number of people I (an American) know who considered trade with Canada to be a real issue. The answer I keep coming back to is I know zero people who considered that. Does the US have a trade imbalance that causes problems, particularly in our manufacturing sector? Yes. Can tariffs kind of help with that? Also yes. Really, you need to instill some sort of sense of duty to country in busines…

Its all a precursor to setting up a reason to invade Canada. If Canada moves on with a threat to do something with energy then buckle up.

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

#34

Post by kevin_nisbet » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:37 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #18

lenerdenator wrote: post #4

I'm trying to think of the number of people I (an American) know who considered trade with Canada to be a real issue. The answer I keep coming back to is I know zero people who considered that. Does the US have a trade imbalance that causes problems, particularly in our manufacturing sector? Yes. Can tariffs kind of help with that? Also yes. Really, you need to instill some sort of sense of duty to country in busines…

America's trade imbalance with Canada is basically crude oil. Which they get at a significant discount because it's much more expensive to export anywhere else. America then refines it and exports it as finished product or uses it internally -- one of the reasons why America has relatively cheap gasoline prices. This "trade imbalance" is a massive benefit to America.

I've seen this point in a few different places and I don't know that it's understood as widely as it should be.

So just to expand on why that's the case. As a net producer of energy right now, the US produces more than it consumes. This is why it get's pointed out, that as a net producer, the trade deficit with Canada is also a surplus (or reduction in deficit) on the other side with other countries. Yes it may not be the same physical barrel that is exported vs consumed, but in a fungible way they're commodities. If you separate out that portion, we (Canada) then buy more goods from the US then we sell. And that's also just the goods trade, not including services which the US also sells more of to Canada than the other way around.

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

#35

Post by abeppu » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:41 PM UTC

afavour wrote: post #17

ck2 wrote: post #10

imagine the level of stupid that's going down if the Dems do not also get get the Senate this administration has three boxes it reaches into to sprinkle around daily [CHAOS] [CORRUPTION] [CRUELTY] hope everyone is enjoying the billion spent on golden statues in DC while you can't afford to put gas in your car but don't worry, he still gets to fly around in his billion dollar QatarForceOne while taking $2 Million golf…

> imagine the level of stupid that's going down if the Dems do not also get get the Senate The Senate, literally by design, does not represent the will of the people. Add things like gerrymandering on top and the uphill climb required of Democrats to capture the Senate keeps getting higher and higher.

Wait, wait, gerrymandering messes with the House, but how does gerrymandering impact control of the Senate? Don't senators need to be elected by their whole state?

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

#36

Post by nickff » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:42 PM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #26

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are reading way too much into that "you" in that sentence. I read it simply as a list and total of all the retaliatory tariffs that Canada is imposing, and the site emphasizes that this is obviously bad for American jobs, not that American consumers pay the tariffs that Canada is imposing. This whole trade war with Canada has to be one of the dumbest fucking things I have ever witnessed, and that's saying…

> This whole trade war with Canada has to be one of the dumbest fucking things I have ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot given the complete incompetence and buffoonery of the current US administration. You'd think that, strategically, a decapitation strike is the worst thing that could happen for a nation. However, that would be incorrect: the worst thing that could happen is this, a vain and incompetent buffoon…

>"the worst thing that could happen is this, a vain and incompetent buffoon installed in the top leadership position."

Well, Canada repeatedly elected Justin Trudeau (now departed)... so both countries have made some... interesting decisions...

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

#37

Post by enaaem » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:43 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #4

I'm trying to think of the number of people I (an American) know who considered trade with Canada to be a real issue. The answer I keep coming back to is I know zero people who considered that. Does the US have a trade imbalance that causes problems, particularly in our manufacturing sector? Yes. Can tariffs kind of help with that? Also yes. Really, you need to instill some sort of sense of duty to country in busines…

It became an issue when Canada did not bow down to Trump's 51st state demand. With Trump's vindictive nature and narcissistic disorder, you get this situation. It is actually completely unsurprising if you think about it.

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

#38

Post by ericmay » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:44 PM UTC

llm_nerd wrote: post #32

ericmay wrote: post #6

> And Canada is taxing you back This seems illogical. You can't simultaneously claim that the US is paying higher prices for Canadian goods because of US-imposed tariffs and then turn around and say only that Americans are paying a tax on buying Canadian goods on Canadian-imposed tariffs. Both countries are either paying higher prices or paying higher taxes. Canada's tariffs must also be viewed as America is taxing C…

> This seems illogical. It is. When Canada imposes retaliatory tariffs, it is of course a tax on Canadians. Though it is also a market inducement, and one of the complaints of the admin is that Canada's retaliatory vehicle tariffs -- literally mirroring the tariffs the US applied to Canada -- caused a 22% drop in imports. > import duties on American products which also must be treated in the same fashion for this ana…

Let's set the framing correctly because I think we're starting off on the wrong foot. The US is not in a desperate need of any product from Canada. Nice to have and super important? Yea. Desperate? No. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

> There have been $0 in tariffs on US dairy. The tariffs only come into play when the US imports pass a certain volume

So there are tariffs on US dairy... Maybe the US can just say well once 50 cars are shipped in from Canada we impose 300% duties. I'm not part of team Trump here or anything, but these kinds of arguments are semantics - at the end of the day neither Canada, China, the EU, or others who claim to be free-trade economies (in some sense) are really living up to the hype, whether that's outright tariffs, or complicated regulatory or policy schemes to circle around what amounts to a tax on foreign produced goods.

> This is, as the WSJ named it, the stupidest trade war in history.

Wall Street (and the WSJ) also helped move American jobs overseas. So are you aligning with corporate America's viewpoint on trade? They also want much lower corporate taxes. :)

> All for yet another distraction, as Trump's entire base just desperately need to puff their little chests and celebrate when they think he is punching down on someone. Even if it makes their lives worse and their lot worse.

I don't know that this is a distraction and it would be a mistake to dismiss these concerns out of hand as chest-pumping.

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

#39

Post by llm_nerd » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:48 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #38

llm_nerd wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This seems illogical. It is. When Canada imposes retaliatory tariffs, it is of course a tax on Canadians. Though it is also a market inducement, and one of the complaints of the admin is that Canada's retaliatory vehicle tariffs -- literally mirroring the tariffs the US applied to Canada -- caused a 22% drop in imports. > import duties on American products which also must be treated in the same fashion for this ana…

Let's set the framing correctly because I think we're starting off on the wrong foot. The US is not in a desperate need of any product from Canada. Nice to have and super important? Yea. Desperate? No. Not by any stretch of the imagination. > There have been $0 in tariffs on US dairy. The tariffs only come into play when the US imports pass a certain volume So there are tariffs on US dairy... Maybe the US can just sa…

> The US is not in a desperate need of any product from Canada. Nice to have and super important? Yea. Desperate? No. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

The US oil stockpile is rapidly declining, it is desperately buying up bonds to try to prop up the market ($40T debt, deficit spiralling, and now your orange goblin is talking about using the military to prop up the bond market...which good God), and now Vance is running around trying to make lemonade out of lemons and talking up how no longer being the reserve currency is a great thing. Utter idiocracy.

Canada needs absolutely nothing from the US.

> I'm not part of team Trump here or anything, but these kinds of arguments are semantics

It isn't semantics when $0 in tariffs were applied. What an utterly stupid argument. And this was all precisely negotiated into USMCA -- you know, the trade deal that your hero called the best trade deal ever -- for which we gave concessions.

Trump takes advantage of his base being catastrophically stupid and misinformed, and what a case in point.

>I don't know that this is a distraction

It is 100% a distraction, for a monumentally stupid base.

Personally I want USMCA torn up, as a Canadian. Loads of Americans are catastrophically stupid -- the most impossibly misinformed group of people on this planet -- about how privileged you have been, and what you have to lose.

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

#40

Post by snapcaster » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:50 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #36

mullingitover wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This whole trade war with Canada has to be one of the dumbest fucking things I have ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot given the complete incompetence and buffoonery of the current US administration. You'd think that, strategically, a decapitation strike is the worst thing that could happen for a nation. However, that would be incorrect: the worst thing that could happen is this, a vain and incompetent buffoon…

> "the worst thing that could happen is this, a vain and incompetent buffoon installed in the top leadership position." Well, Canada repeatedly elected Justin Trudeau (now departed)... so both countries have made some... interesting decisions...

oh come on, you can't seriously be comparing those two. One of them can form complete sentences