51–60 of 148 posts
> https://xcancel.com/WyzeCam/status/1917662183036706849 They’re getting attacked in the replies.
People reply to the “Good morning Vietnam” post with “OK, so the plan is working” and “you'll do in 60 days what you tried to do for a year.” Who are these people?
Feels like maybe the tariffs are working if they’re talking about moving their production stateside?
> Obviously we’d love to move our factories back home to Seattle. We just need to figure out to make the rain in Seattle power an assembly line.
Could someone explain to an idiot like me what the benefit of this is to the americans?
In the abstract this possibly makes more jobs in the USA for manufacturing these items. It also keeps the entire process conducted in US Dollars that stay entirely within our borders which is theoretically better for currency stability and value.
I'm guessing a ton of new companies will pop up overnight in India, Taiwan, Vietnam, S Korea that simply purchase components from China and resell them to the US. Not exactly helping anyone.
I'm guessing a ton of new companies will pop up overnight in India, Taiwan, Vietnam, S Korea that simply purchase components from China and resell them to the US. Not exactly helping anyone.
Apple is shifting its production to India, but in reality, the phones are just assembled in India. All the components are made in China, shipped to India, where they are put together. China still captures 90% of the value
How much in retail value? I've seen a few small companies that have all their manufacturing operations in China pass on tariffs at cost transparently, and for those that have already adjusted to the current rates, the surcharge is much smaller than I expected (~30%), but I don't know how margins differ by sector.
Let’s assume that this 30% surcharge exactly matches the increased cost due to tariffs (I think 145%?). This would mean that 1.45*manufacturing_cost = 0.3*MSRP -> manufacturing_cost = 0.2*MSRP. The manufacturing cost is 20% of the end price. A higher surcharge would indicate that the manufacturing cost is a _higher_ percentage of the end price. Consider that they’ll also have costs due to shipping, returns, staffing, marketing, R&D, and they need profit on top. In that context, 20% seems quite reasonable to me.
Edit: you should expect to feel the highest percentage price increase in products that have become extremely commoditized, because they naturally have the tightest margins. Off the top of my head, I’m thinking toasters, microwaves, lamps, TVs, electronics cables, batteries, things like that
Could someone explain to an idiot like me what the benefit of this is to the americans?
If they had bought American floodlights they had saved 255k in tarrifs. So if they had paid 200k for the floodlights they would have still been better of. One could argue, that there might be no American Floodlight Company - well here is the incentive to build one. Secondly the money isn't lost, it goes to the state. Like a tax, but it is called differently. With this 255k more the state can now subsidise the local f…
Is that what is planned? The US has a lot of dept internationally I assumed the additional money goes into paying that back, or at least stabilize the dollar somehow
Could someone explain to an idiot like me what the benefit of this is to the americans?
> https://xcancel.com/WyzeCam/status/1917662183036706849 They’re getting attacked in the replies.
The top voted comments I see are all supportive so far. There are a lot of comments asking why they don’t move manufacturing to Seattle. This theme is common among people who don’t understand how manufacturing works right now: They don’t realize that a product like this has many different parts from different places, down to the dozens of little SMT capacitors. You can’t just move the factory and avoid tariffs becaus…
The US is 9th in GDP per capita and has a historically low unemployment rate. I really don't understand what problem they're trying to fix here.