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

681–690 of 814 posts

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

#681

Post by TimorousBestie »

Trasmatta wrote: post #410
TimorousBestie wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no solidarity movement coalescing around Good’s death. When the local police chief invoked “say her name” in a public statement on it, it caused a bunch of acrimony and resentment instead. I think Americans past the point where individual instances of police violence can shock us into taking political action (which is extremely risky in any case). It’s going to take kilodeath crimes, I imagine.

> There’s no solidarity movement coalescing around Good’s death This is clearly untrue, and you must be in a bubble if you think this

I would love to be wrong about this, but alas.

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

#682

Post by Glyptodon »

CalChris wrote: post #546
Glyptodon wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much like I think if any Dem other than Hillary Clinton ran against Trump for his winning term 1, I think if the Dems had a proper primary process for this last election they'd probably have picked somebody who'd also have won. That said, I'm not sure being a woman was worse than being from CA or black with a solid chunk of the electorate. (I'm reminded of how some of my own relatives seemed to want to avoid visiting…

Hillary had 3M more votes than Trump.

That doesn't mean a different candidate wouldn't have had a better electoral map or more votes.

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

#683

Post by 1718627440 »

amelius wrote: post #676
1718627440 wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can understand them, but there is no point for you, since they don't mean anything to you.

Depends on how much "supporting evidence" you give me.

I don't really think I got your point. All "evidence" that the bones in location X are really those of St. Y, won't have any effect on you, when you don't care about St. Y at all, because you don't believe in that religion.

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

#684

Post by jacquesm »

cdrnsf wrote: post #600
jacquesm wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, but it never works long term, it only works for a while.

Given Trump's age and health, I don't think he's worried about the long term.

Every few months adds another five to 10 years of recovery. I am worried about the long term.

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

#685

Post by maxglute »

carlosjobim wrote: post #658
tgtweak wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most have low/no duties on most goods categories from China - aside from a few specific goods categories in developed markets - most goods flow out of China to export countries without tariff/duties. ASEAN markets and most of Africa have zero tariffs. I don't think there are any developed markets (which are China's main export destinations) with double-digit tariff averages except India. Using Germany as an example..…

When I import Chinese goods to Europe as a consumer, I have to pay a 25% VAT, which functions as a tariff. It is officially a tariff as far as the government is concerned, as it is collected by customs and not by internal revenue. That is of course paired by the fact that domestic products also have the same VAT to be paid by consumers, but domestic producers are reimbursed their VAT expenses to varying degrees depen…

>expected outcome is that those consumers get to enjoy cheaper imports from China

That's eco101 expectation, but reality after initial tariff chaos settles is cat-mouse of circumvention - PRC producers would price discriminately, i.e. sell to RoW slightly higher to make up for less sales in US / cover transhipment / diversion costs, arbitrage different tariff rates etc. PRC producers that still sells to US would also simply value engineer / despec more (lower quality), make US SKUs with stripped functionality etc to recoup on $ per value basis, and other shenanigans like value shifting - selling at "lower" cost but recoup via other bundled fees, i.e. buyers buy widgets low, but also have to buy "service" packages in arbitrage jurisdictions so PRC producers still ends up netting same. All these strategies are happening btw. The main issue is PRC producer advantage is so large and the tariff execution so leaky that they can still underprice and get products to US at profit to stunt US reindustrialization. Meanwhile PRC industrial index for manufacturing is increasing while producer index dropping because they have access to cheap renewables / discounted sanctioned fossils, so their input costs dropping vs RoW, allowing them to make more, by selling cheaper, which extends gap of how much tariff shenanigans/engineering they do to mitigate the goal of US tariffs in the first place. Hence PRC exporting record #s and US SME manufacturing index on 3rd quarter of contraction from tariff drama. Meanwhile, much of RoW without PRC god tier industrial chains, simply left with eating straight shit on US tariffs vs PRC who has much more tools to circumvent. It's like how regulations favor big incumbents with most headroom/resources to exploit loopholes. TLDR supply chain manipulation by the worlds largest supply chain skews expected market equilibrium.

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

#686

Post by ceejayoz »

NetMageSCW wrote: post #628
intended wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its an interesting point you end up raising - does it still count as a strategy even if you are doing something patently impossible given the knowledge and intelligence at your disposal? If someone decided to come up with a strategy to do something fanciful, like find the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow to solve their debt problems, would it really be worthy enough to be called a strategy?

What knowledge and intelligence would that be?

Access to the world’s foremost experts in virtually any subject. Including highly classified shit.

Just not the curiosity to seek it out.

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

#687

Post by CalChris »

thrance wrote: post #609
MonkeyClub wrote: post #187

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. 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.

You're acting like Democrats are as deep in the cult of personality as Republicans are, yet outside of the most corporate liberal circles, Harris and Biden are heavily held in contempt by most of the Left.

No, Harris and Biden are not heavily held in contempt by most of the Left. I'm on the Left and voted for both of them. Indeed, as a Progressive, I was pleasantly surprised by Biden for his withdrawal from Afghanistan, student loan forgiveness, his canceling the Keystone Pipeline, etc.

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

#688

Post by gambiting »

1718627440 wrote: post #576
amelius wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relics are only a way of advertising the religion. We should ban advertisements of religions. If their gods are so powerful then they shouldn't need advertising. And if you are a believer AND god turns out to be real then banning advertising could lead to the return of Jesus. Win win.

> Relics are only a way of advertising the religion. I can't follow you here. Relics only have a meaning when you already believe them to be relics and no just random bones. How is that advertising?

Imagine you have no religion, but are feeling spiritual and want to find something real. Do you go to the church of a religion that claims it has the actual remains of their saints, or the one that only has pictures and empty walls?

Actually, maybe that's a stupid question as people absolutely do both. But there is an element of "look how great we are because we have a splinter from the holy cross in our church".

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

#689

Post by groundzeros2015 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #679
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree - she would adopt the stronger position.

I have no idea what you are saying. Are you saying that my aunt would suddenly change her mind about the nature of the Trump tariffs to understand that they achieve a totally different outcome than she thinks over a totally different time frame? She already thinks that Trump has saved american manufacturing and that the deficit problem is gone. Why would she change that opinion?

My understanding is that if she was corrected to the proper understanding of Tariffs, she would not change her support of the tariff. Therefore debunking what "dumb people think" is still pointless. Because they aren't really advocating for a particular policy, they are advocating for a direction which is well represented by a whole family of policies - in particular the strong form.

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

#690

Post by whodidntante »

sigmoid10 wrote: post #652
diydsp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ive done a lot of analysis on the Trump as Putin agent topic. I found he nearly as often acts agents Russia as with. What's more likely is he treats Putin as an inspiration, wrt to converting the country to an oligarchy and offshoring national funds for himself.

Curious. Can you name a few instances where he intentionally acted against Russia and did not just throw around words without following them up?

He is an equal opportunity a-hole, though my personal feeling is that he looks up to Putin, and wants to be like him

Some things he has done that Putin is probably not fond of:

Javelins in his first term, I believe that was the time the us supplied military weapons to Ukraine. These weapons made a big impact during the invasion

Tried to get Europe off of Russia gas, making very public warnings about depending on Russia. This was first term

Tried to get Europe to invest heavily in thru military, first and second term

Syria, Iran and Venezuela, all allies of Russia, especially Iran for military technology and Venezuela as part of its shadow fleet.

Sanctions

Post reply on HN