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

711–720 of 1001 posts

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

#711

Post by ASinclair »

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…

If you believe in these tariffs then the major problem is how he enacted them. Businesses want certainty. It takes years to build factories. The next president could just wipe away these tariffs instantly. Hell, even the current one could. That does not give these companies the certainty they need to commit years of effort to building factories. If the goal is to spur domestic manufacturing then, at a minimum, he would get the tariffs enacted via a new law so they're more likely to stick for the long term.

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

#712

Post by hnthrow90348765 »

macinjosh wrote: post #604
phillipseamore wrote: post #90

A blanket 10% minimum tariff is a great excuse for any local US manufacturing to increase their prices. I used to live in a country with heavy tariffs, every time tariffs were raised the local producers increased prices to be just below the imports. Even after the tariffs were abolished the prices (on local and imports) never really lowered in any significant way.

This is expected and normal? Demand for locally sourced goods will skyrocket which means prices should as well. What you are leaving out is that the US is well capitalized and those sky high prices will be a strong incentive for more competitors to join the market. With competition in place prices will eventually fall. Prices will likely never go back as low but at least our fellow countrymen will be employed, housed…

People will starting fighting against more houses being built to protect their wealth even more than now. You'll be earning like $25/hr at the factory and all the single-family houses are 300k+ with significant interest. Assuming they never have a huge healthcare bill which also shows no signs of becoming affordable, if the factory jobs even offer decent benefits but my guess is they will all be high deductible plans.

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

#714

Post by dfilppi »

TehCorwiz wrote: post #691
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…

Tax corporations and the wealthy since they receive the majority of the benefits. They benefit from a trained healthy workforce, social safety nets, infrastructure like roads and electricity and water. They benefit form the US dollar being the reserve currency for most of the world. I literally cannot list all the ways these two groups benefit in a real tangible outsized way than any other individual. Trump wants to…

[dead]

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

#715

Post by nzealand »

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 United States needs to manage its massive national debt,

> The present uncertainty around tariffs and a potential crisis could create conditions that pressure interest rates downward before those Treasury securities mature, by influencing Federal Reserve policy.

> What are the flaws in this thinking?

Flaw #1:

Massive treasury rollovers isn't new.

22% of all Treasuries have a duration of 1 year or less.

The only new thing is that rates have gone up.

Uncertainty is a short term solution to a long term problem.

Flaw #2:

Economic uncertainty and supply side shocks risks a recession.

Recessions usually increase national debt.

Flaw #3:

The right answer to reducing national debt is to ensure incomes exceed outgoings.

The current administration is so focused on extending trillion dollar tax cuts, no amount of tariffs or government efficiency is going to lower the national debt.

Flaw #4:

Treasuries only really go down during a recession.

Recessions are bad, not good.

If you think finding a tech job is hard now, or that your RSUs are hurting, wait until you see a serious recession.

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

#716

Post by olalonde »

weberer wrote: post #647
phillipseamore wrote: post #90

A blanket 10% minimum tariff is a great excuse for any local US manufacturing to increase their prices. I used to live in a country with heavy tariffs, every time tariffs were raised the local producers increased prices to be just below the imports. Even after the tariffs were abolished the prices (on local and imports) never really lowered in any significant way.

Well yeah, that's the point. Its so factories paying local wages can now compete with factories overseas where wages are much lower.

A laborer in a subsidized, low-productivity industry is one less worker available for a high-tech, high-productivity sector. With a finite workforce, misallocating labor like this inevitably hampers innovation and economic growth. The U.S. should focus on being a powerhouse of technology and innovation, not divert resources to low-value tasks like picking olives from trees.

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

#717

Post by WXLCKNO »

zerreh50 wrote: post #607
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…

An economic crisis will reduce tax income though, reducing the ability of government to pay even if the interest is lower

If the goal of Putin is to destroy the US through illogical fiscal policies by means of using his Puppet, it all makes sense.

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

#718

Post by lenerdenator »

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 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.

No one is mentioning this because no one cares, least of all the guy who just signed massive tariffs.

What you're describing is the end result of 30-ish years of Republicans implementing "Read my lips: no new taxes" and this country refusing to have to a mature conversation about revenues. Also, over that period, wages remained stagnant, meaning more people look to the government for assistance, which then costs money in the form of deficit spending. The numerous expensive wars didn't help, either.

There's no good fix to this other than some serious revenue raising through taxes on people who can afford it. Of course, those people are of the opinion that they're entitled to net worths that measure as a significant portion of a trillion dollars, and will simply push the costs onto consumers in order to maintain share prices since that's what most of the net worth sits in.

You have to break those people of that idea. Talk of interest rates, Treasury securities, Federal Reserve policy, it's all just noise. The money going in must be a larger portion of the money going out, and significantly burdening the average American with more tax debt isn't going to solve the problem before causing social upheaval.

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

#719

Post by [deleted] »

jorge-d wrote: post #358
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...

It's even worse, they literally got their formula from a llm model (probably Grok?) => https://bsky.app/profile/dansinker.com/post/3llunnyfeoj2v "To calculate reciprocal tariffs, import and export data from the U.S. Census Bureau for 2024. Parameter values for ε and φ were selected. The price elasticity of import demand, ε, was set at 4. Recent evidence suggests the elasticity is near 2 in the long run (Boehm et al.,…

[deleted]

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

#720

Post by electriclove »

belter wrote: post #667
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…

> So, to anyone who disagrees with these measures, but agrees that these are issues we ought to solve, what would you propose? The solution is clear, let the tax cuts expire, and increase the taxes on corporations. Make special tax incentives on real investment and innovation. Make a special tax for the four individuals behind Trump at the inauguration, who own more health than 60% of the US population. Stop allowing…

Billionaire boys behaving badly! Let’s teach them a lesson! That will solve all the problems in the world! /s
Post reply on HN