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

US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#651

Post by no_wizard »

TaurenHunter wrote: post #599

I don't see anyone mentioning that the United States needs to manage its massive national debt, currently in the trillions, by issuing Treasury securities. These securities mature at varying intervals and require continuous "rolling" or refinancing to pay off old debt with new borrowing. Significant rollovers are expected from April through September 2025, with additional short-term maturities due by June. Higher int…

I know there is a crowd that talks about debt alot and these are all legitimate concerns

However they could also raise taxes on capital gains and top end income brackets - which are at ludicrously low levels for folks of significant wealth - which would go a very long way here. Some estimates suggest it could put the US back in a surplus quite quickly

edit: I'm saying there is an argument for raising taxes. I don't think its off the table like some people suggest. I know it may not be popular with some but we could discuss the merits.

Cutting fundamental government services feels wrong too

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#652

Post by Ragnarork »

lumb63 wrote: post #625

Everyone is quick to deride this move as stupid. I don’t disagree that there are downsides to the approach, but there is a set of very real national problems that this might address. For instance, globalization and offshoring of production has made goods cheaper for consumers, but what about the former domestic producers who could not compete, and do not have the skills or capital to find a new job which pays as well…

According to the Bureau of Labor statistics, there are 7 million unemployed in the U.S. currently.

I don't know how you expect these to cover for all the manufacturing you imply might come back to the U.S. with these tariffs, and that's assuming the space and the production means (factories, etc.) are here already. They aren't, and not for a couple years.

Combined to the fact that the U.S. is clearly sending a signal that coming there is dangerous now, especially for any other category than white males, and I don't see how you can even imagine that this situation is going to be working out.

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#653

Post by yodsanklai »

lumb63 wrote: post #625

Everyone is quick to deride this move as stupid. I don’t disagree that there are downsides to the approach, but there is a set of very real national problems that this might address. For instance, globalization and offshoring of production has made goods cheaper for consumers, but what about the former domestic producers who could not compete, and do not have the skills or capital to find a new job which pays as well…

Progressive taxation, better public services, universal healthcare, free education for all

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#654

Post by xxs »

mkoubaa wrote: post #555
roxolotl wrote: post #479

Aside from everything else one thing what strikes me as particularly insane is how it’s not even defensible as a protective measure. My favorite everyday olive oil comes from Tunisia. They now have a 38% tariff on them. There are no out of work olive farmers in the US. The orange man wanted tariffs, the orange man is going to get tariffs. Now we have to hope the American people aren’t so dumb as to still be convinced…

I would happily pay 38% extra for high quality Tunisian olive oil, it is already super undervalued because it's reputation is lower than it should be. It's gotten so bad that Tunisian olives are shipped to Italy, pressed into oil, and labelled as Italian Olive oil.

If anything those Tunisian folks would have to reduce the price to compete. The tariffs go straight to the US coffers at the customs, nothing to do with the farmers.

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#655

Post by flawn »

mkoubaa wrote: post #555
roxolotl wrote: post #479

Aside from everything else one thing what strikes me as particularly insane is how it’s not even defensible as a protective measure. My favorite everyday olive oil comes from Tunisia. They now have a 38% tariff on them. There are no out of work olive farmers in the US. The orange man wanted tariffs, the orange man is going to get tariffs. Now we have to hope the American people aren’t so dumb as to still be convinced…

I would happily pay 38% extra for high quality Tunisian olive oil, it is already super undervalued because it's reputation is lower than it should be. It's gotten so bad that Tunisian olives are shipped to Italy, pressed into oil, and labelled as Italian Olive oil.

https://www.oxfordeconomics.com/resource/tariffs-101-what-ar...

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#656

Post by generalpf »

no_wizard wrote: post #651
TaurenHunter wrote: post #599

I don't see anyone mentioning that the United States needs to manage its massive national debt, currently in the trillions, by issuing Treasury securities. These securities mature at varying intervals and require continuous "rolling" or refinancing to pay off old debt with new borrowing. Significant rollovers are expected from April through September 2025, with additional short-term maturities due by June. Higher int…

I know there is a crowd that talks about debt alot and these are all legitimate concerns However they could also raise taxes on capital gains and top end income brackets - which are at ludicrously low levels for folks of significant wealth - which would go a very long way here. Some estimates suggest it could put the US back in a surplus quite quickly edit: I'm saying there is an argument for raising taxes. I don't t…

It's been argued a lot that such a move would cause a good portion of American billionaires to just pack up and move to another country. Rich people are mobile in a way that poor people are not.

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#657

Post by TomK32 »

thiht wrote: post #220
mcoliver wrote: post #92

Here's a csv and google sheet of the data. Turns out they aren't tariffs countries charge us. They are trade imbalance percentages. Unreal: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xK0OQ5VGl8JHmDSIgbXh... https://gist.github.com/mcoliver/69fe48d03c12388e29cc0cd87eb...

Funny how Russia is absent from the list

Besides the sanctions, the G7+EU hold something around 300 billion $ of funds so far owned by the Ruzzian central bank. Not enough to rebuild Ukraine, but it will be a decent start. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confiscation_of_Russian_centra...

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#658

Post by bagels »

joshdavham wrote: post #643

The goal of the world now is to specifically target red swing states with counter tariffs so that the democrats will win the midterms, pass legislation to prevent the president from being able to unilaterally impose tariffs in the future and thus put a swift end to the golden age.

Pass legislation? That will be vetoed or ignored?

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#659

Post by wat10000 »

TaurenHunter wrote: post #599

I don't see anyone mentioning that the United States needs to manage its massive national debt, currently in the trillions, by issuing Treasury securities. These securities mature at varying intervals and require continuous "rolling" or refinancing to pay off old debt with new borrowing. Significant rollovers are expected from April through September 2025, with additional short-term maturities due by June. Higher int…

The flaw is that it's like setting your house on fire because it's cold outside. It may well achieve your goal in the short term, but it won't last, and it's just going to make things much worse in the longer term.

Re: US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China, 20% on EU

#660

Post by rawgabbit »

lumb63 wrote: post #625

Everyone is quick to deride this move as stupid. I don’t disagree that there are downsides to the approach, but there is a set of very real national problems that this might address. For instance, globalization and offshoring of production has made goods cheaper for consumers, but what about the former domestic producers who could not compete, and do not have the skills or capital to find a new job which pays as well…

I agree with the goal. I disagree with the execution.

First, from the outside looking in, it appears these tariffs were implemented in an adhoc basis which disrupt supply chains potentially bankrupting companies and result in more layoffs in the short term.

Second, there should be a carve-out on tariff policy to respond to national security interests. e.g., if and when the US wants Ukraine to rebuild its fledgling export economy, the US should set the tariff on Ukraine's products to zero as it is in the US' interests that Ukraine is financially strong. Similarly, the US should use tariffs to protect industries it deems strategic such as manufacturing advanced computer chips.

In other words, instead of using a purely political process to set tariff policy, I would argue tariffs should be managed by an impartial semi-independent agency such as the Federal Reserve. The governors of such a tariff agency should be tasked with the goals of advancing long term US interests, economically, employment-wise, and national security interests.

Post reply on HN