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

American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

kielinstitut.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 814 posts

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#551

Post by jbm »

greenavocado wrote: post #378
jbm wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article we are commenting on literally says 96% is paid for by Americans. Do you have a reason to accept Lutnick's position?

Section 1 Paragraph 4: Every dollar of tariff revenue represents a dollar extracted from American businesses and households. Why am I not paying substantially more year over year for the wide variety of things I purchase?

I feel we should have an independent source by now if that was true. Thousands of Chinese suppliers all taking losses to keep market share seems unlikely. A government program would have been clearly shown too. I think it is more likely that goods are being labelled with different origins and being imported through preexisting treaties like NAFTA (I forgot the Trumpian name for his negotiated version), or that Economists are shameless modern tortoise shell baking shamans that we need to sacrifice to appease angry dead ancestors.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#552

Post by agumonkey »

treis wrote: post #110
agumonkey wrote: post #49

The issue is that the USA are in 100% post truth and 0% of the recent potus voters are able to reflect on economic policies level-headed.

I think it's the opposite. These were announced 9 months ago and none of the doomsday predictions have come to pass. There's been major impact to some things but for the most part the economy has hummed along without a blip. Certainly not the everything in Walmart is going to get 34% prognostications that some were making: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43561253

I could agree that it wasn't the doomsday event some people said it would be, still people are now struggling for food.. so well.

Also, i was hinting at the fact that issue is larger than economics.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#553

Post by FrustratedMonky »

duxup wrote: post #16
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the justification for Obama Care was by calling it a 'type of tax'. Which actually was the reason to negate the rights argument at the time, they were using to cancel it. The government is allowed to create 'taxes', and since it was a 'type of tax', it is allowed.

I think the opposition wanted to toss the entire ACA system calling it a tax. However, SCOTUS took a more piecemeal approach than the opposition wished and removed the bit they felt was a tax and left the ACA unaffected generally.

I don't think the opposition was using 'its a tax' as argument to cancel ACA, since the SC Ruling that saved ACA was made by saying congress is allowed to created taxes, and this was a 'type of tax'.

If calling it a tax saved it, that would then not be a good argument to get rid of it.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#554

Post by rootusrootus »

wjfuu32984 wrote: post #445
rootusrootus wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We honest users of the emdash are sad at LLMs making it unwelcome.

Most honest users of the em-dash use it in pairs. I have never — not once — seen an LLM use it in pairs.

That's a good point! I nearly always use it in pairs.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#555

Post by CalChris »

MonkeyClub wrote: post #187
PaulRobinson wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of Americans believed the guy they wanted to believe in, because they didn't want to believe the people they didn't want to believe in. You're assuming that modern politics across most of the World has something to do with rational, logical thought. Russia, China, Europe, the US, the Middle East - they are all in a quagmire of irrational fractures between the public and the political classes who want power/cont…

> A lot of Americans believed the guy they wanted to believe in, because they didn't want to believe the people they didn't want to believe in. It's sad but true. Deep down, political thinking is influenced by tribal thinking, a rigid us versus them mentality. This is, after all, how the "divide and conquer" method gets to be so effective. A house divided amongst itself and all that.

That’s a clever bothsiderism. However, these two tribes are not alike.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#556

Post by groundzeros2015 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #519
kryogen1c wrote: post #168

Almost all the comments acting like this is some truth bombshell, like people in trumpistan all thought raising tariffs magically made the us economy better. This is a straw man, no? Tariffs are a mid-long term strategy to encourage onshoring business, for reasons including military, national security, and political influence on foreign powers. This is a complicated topic involving the global economy and evolving int…

My aunt is a republican lobbyist. She is also a drunk. This means that she gets drunk and texts my family her unfiltered thoughts all the time. She absolutely thinks that tariffs magically make the US economy better in a very short time period. She thinks that the governments of the countries that she hates are paying them and that the tariffs are solving the deficit problem. She thinks that the number of manufacturi…

The dumbest person supporting a policy is not the reason for supporting it.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#557

Post by FrustratedMonky »

vlovich123 wrote: post #61
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the justification for Obama Care was by calling it a 'type of tax'. Which actually was the reason to negate the rights argument at the time, they were using to cancel it. The government is allowed to create 'taxes', and since it was a 'type of tax', it is allowed.

Specifically Congress. The President doesn’t have the right to create taxes which is one key difference here. The argument is whether Congress abdicated their power here and whether that’s something they can do in the first place.

Sorry. Yes. This is the crux of it.

Congress can create taxes. ACA was created by Congress not the president in isolation.

Tariff issue is because president is making taxes unilaterally.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#558

Post by rsynnott »

bartread wrote: post #56

I'm glad they've done the work here and put a figure on it - the impact absolutely needed to be quantified - but I also have to say... to the surprise of absolutely no-one with even the most basic grasp of how economies function. People, lots of people, lots of people who have a really deep understanding of national and global economics (unlike me), have been warning about this since talk of tariffs became common cur…

> What were you thinking? What was going through your heads? I'm genuinely curious.

See Brexit. As Michael Gove said, the people have had enough of experts; for a certain sort of person, not understanding things is a badge of pride, and they're more liable to trust people like Trump, who transparently do _not_ understand things, than _experts_.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#559

Post by rsynnott »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #236
bartread wrote: post #56

I'm glad they've done the work here and put a figure on it - the impact absolutely needed to be quantified - but I also have to say... to the surprise of absolutely no-one with even the most basic grasp of how economies function. People, lots of people, lots of people who have a really deep understanding of national and global economics (unlike me), have been warning about this since talk of tariffs became common cur…

to the surprise of absolutely no-one with even the most basic grasp of how economies function. No, it is surprising, as noted in the article, because basic economics suggests that suppliers will adjust pricing, and eat some of the tariff to keep their products competitive. Page 5: This finding was initially surprising to some observers. Standard economic models suggest that the incidence of a tariff depends on the re…

> If foreign exporters face highly elastic demand (meaning buyers can easily switch to alternatives)

That's a huge 'if'.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#560

Post by CGMthrowaway »

wasabi991011 wrote: post #503
CGMthrowaway wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you saying then, that you wouldn't want to live in Monaco (assuming you had median Monaco income)? That you think large oil & gas resources is good (Venezuela)? I'm struggling to figure out which side you're on

I'm on the side of "looking at top 10 GDP per capita PPP countries is not good evidence for what type of government is better for a country's economy, at least not without far more analysis"

OK can you share more?

You called out per capita GDP as not a great metric but you didn't seem to deny that living in Monaco on a Monegasque income (for example, or any of these other monarchies) would be a bad thing, despite their type of government.

And you called out vast oil & gas resources as essential, or scale-tipping, for the goodness of a monarchy but I'm assuming you are against the US intervention in Venezuela for the purposes of securing such resources for American interest.

Did you have other factors in mind that you did not mention?

Post reply on HN