511–520 of 560 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course you can. Competition means exporters can lower their prices to help mitigate the tariffs in order to beat their competitors.
They can do that without tariffs too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has nothing to do with stupidity. Stop painting people as idiots because they exist in one of the most information hostile environments in human history. This isn't some natural state that's unrecoverable. The people you describe have been given a highly addictive media environment tailor made to engender outrage and drive behavior. It shouldn't be a shock when most people cannot resist it. The first step to chang…
> Stop painting people as idiots 1/3 of the voting population elected a known criminal, known sex predator, suspected child rapist, and known economically illiterate imbecile. The information may be hostile but it was widely and easily available. At least 1/3 of the US voting population are idiots . Obviously there is a subset of that voting base that made an intelligent decision knowingly and complicitly elected Tru…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>so the logical conclusion is that American consumers will end up paying the tariffs. That’s been the point all along… they are significantly raising taxes on the bottom 90% of Americans and most are too stupid to even understand it. Gotta pay for those tax cuts for the wealthy somehow.
it feels fair to call tariffs a VAT that goes away if the manufacturer produces things domestically which seems… reasonable? raise revenue and encourage domestic manufacturing. yeah, it sucks that I can’t buy a JetKVM right now. otoh being dependent on (often) adversarial nations for everything we buy is also not ideal.
Like, assemble domestically? Or actually source 100% of the parts, supplies, building materials, machinery, etc domestically?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Honestly, you have no idea what you're talking about. > The idea that people in authoritarian countries are clueless about what’s really going on is arrogant and frankly ignorant. You can't comment like this on Hacker News, no matter what you're replying to. The guidelines clearly ask us to avoid swipes and name-calling like this. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and t…
Unprecedented rapacity by the United States - not only forced tech transfer, and then having to pay for the privilege of being robbed; the hegemon is consuming its vassals, as it withdraws from its commitments.
Well China has been forcing tech transfer for 30 years now.
Ask yourself what the benefit is of having the US as a diplomatic partner if you can get the same deal from China but with a more stable and predictable leadership.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We couldn't make an iPhone because apple would refuse to cooperate, not because of a technical limitation. We could make a similarly capable phone though.
> … because apple would refuse to cooperate… Apple’s putative refusal to cooperate is surely not the only barrier here. I doubt U.S. consumers would pay a premium for a U.S. iPhone whether Apple thought it wise or not. But when the U.S. president’s branded Made in America phone comes out later this year I guess we’ll see. I’m sure the release is just around the corner.
If tariffs really raised money in the way Trump pretends then the US government could surely just grant Intel a direct share of all tarrif revenue raised from sales in to the US from Tawain? Of course the reality is you're just taxing Americans to subsidise Intel at that point, since tarrifs are a tax on Americans and not foreigners.
So it really does raise money like trump "pretends"? Unless global trade ends, those tariffs will raise lots of money for the government. Even if it is the american consumer who ultimately pays the tariff.
It seems like they're asking the wrong company to take a stake in Intel. It would make more sense to try to get companies like Apple & Nvidia to take stakes in Nvidia - US based companies that need the product that Intel can supply.
Honestly AMD makes the most sense, given they sold off the foundry stuff years ago, which is the part of the process Intel will be doing next. The board brought on a chop shop guy, you don't do that when there is a future, and TSMC would be smart to wait Intel out and pick it up cheap. The USA wouldn't last a month without TSMC chips, Tim Apple wouldn't let that happen. There is no way this demand has any teeth