Live data from Hacker News

Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

bloomberg.com

741–750 of 931 posts

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#741
post #542

I suspect it would be a good idea if the US abolished the presidency and moved to a parliamentary system. Turns out that concentrating so much power in a single position is a bad idea.

Our current system should allow Congress to control this.

They’re not. That’s the problem.

You could swap it out for a parliamentary structure with the same characters and you’d get the same result. There’s a weird personality cult thing going on and everyone is waiting to see who will break ranks first, lest they get crushed by the retaliatory wrath of Trump calling his followers to oppose a person and Elon Musk dumping a mega war chest on them.

There are signs that people are starting to break ranks, but it looks like they want to see him have to face the consequences of his decisions before they jump in to save him.

This current policy is so bad that they’d be doing him a political favor by jumping in to disallow it. The problem for them is that he would be guaranteed to turn around and blame it on Congress. “My tariff plan was going to work, but Congress interfered!”

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the opposite! A universal tariff is a tariff on all inputs that manufacturers need to be competitive. How will Ford or Tesla ever be competitive if all their inputs are 24% more expensive than Toyota's inputs? Autarky doesn't work. Juche doesn't work. Comparative advantage works, both theoretically and in practice if we study economic history.

Do you really believe in the comparative advantage argument though? Surely it’s only true if comparative advantage is fixed over time. And surely in order to leverage comparative advantage, an economy would need to know how good they would be at producing every possible good. There are good reasons to trade, but comparative advantage doesn’t feel like the correct theoretical underpinning to me.

Comparative advantage makes sense, with a national security overlay. That’s where I’ve landed anyway, and is a very simple explanation for all the more complex perspectives out there.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#743
post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the current state of affair has exposed a fundamental bug in the consitution. Sure, the US has three branches of government that are supposed to be checks and balances on each other. Which has, mostly, worked really great. But turns out there is no way to enforce this. If we get a president that doesn't care about any of this and is happy to ignore everyone else, there isn't actually any way to enforce the se…

The problem we have today is that the one runaway branch has support from at least one of the branches meant to act as a check on power (the legislative). Congress should be stepping in if the president is overstepping his legal authority, or if they wish to reduce his legal authority. The Republican party has control of Congress and our political system has devolved into a game of blind faith in your team, neither p…

>neither party is willing to go against their president in a meaningful way.

So, what's going on is that Donny himself has all the money. Not personally, but his various election funds have more than than the rest of the Republicans combined. Obama has a similar set-up back in 2012, but not nearly as disproportionate as Donny has.

Republicans can't go against Donny without risking a primary opponent funded by Donny that will oust them.

The Democrats do not have this funding problem to the same degree.

What this means is that the Republican party is only going to go against Donny (impeachment) when they figure that the average Republican Primary voter in deeply red districts will have a 50/50 chance of voting (actual polling, not vibes) the way Donny tells them too. And that reassessment is not going to happen until at least late summer 2026.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#744

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that’s really been getting to me, is that, I’m liberal, not pro-Trump, but the MAGA American heartland story has been really getting to me. I want to see small business, manufacturing, small town American succeed. And there’s some part of me that thought maybe Trump, as much as I don’t like him, is the thing that is needed to make that happen, but man it seems like he’s really fucking over the people who su…

What a surprise. Trump fucking over people. He has a history, it's not some mysterious hero who just arrived to town. Why's anybody surprised given the things he's done in past.

Nobody in Beijing or Brussels was surprised they had plans. Observe how neither of them is kissing his ass at the moment.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely agree. It's ridiculous that low wage labor is considered a "comparative advantage". It's an advantage to capital owners perhaps, but certainly not to workers. And like you said, advantages are not static. In my opinion it's intrinsically valuable to have a diverse regional economy. Culture and economy are fundamentally inseparable, imagine a society where everyone is doing the same thing because of "compar…

This aestheticization of factory jobs is something I've noticed to be driving the New Right's worldview. It's not dissimilar to and no less dangerous than the aesthetic fixation on the agrarian economy of Mao and Pol Pot. Frankly, no, sweatshops are not important to the cultural fabric of a country. The US has problems with housing affordability, with medical costs, and with service sector costs emerging from Baumol'…

Sure, anyone not agreeing perfectly with the current system of global trade is part of the "new right"... Another way to look at it: globalisation weakens democratic control over the economy and undermines unions. Is that not a problem in your opinion?

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hang on are tarriffs not effective on date of purchase? I'm not American but it seems madness to apply them at any other time as then no one knows what will actually need paid if you've someone like Trump changing them frequently.

Applied at time of passing through customs. More typical policy would give 90 days notice so businesses could plan ahead. This policy was implemented far too fast with far too high of numbers and now it’s also changing rapidly. It doesn’t make sense. > I'm not American but it seems madness to apply them at any other time I’m American and I fully agree it’s madness. This administration clearly doesn’t understand or ev…

Trump has been spouting the same shit about trade deficits and the US getting ripped off for several decades. I think he legitimately believes high tariffs are a good idea to "fix" trade deficits.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#747
post #554
post #542

I suspect it would be a good idea if the US abolished the presidency and moved to a parliamentary system. Turns out that concentrating so much power in a single position is a bad idea.

You still often have one man with all the power in a parliamentary system. The Prime Minister. Take Canada as an example. JT had basically complete power over government. It's as rate for the prime minister party or coalition to go against him as it is for a president in the US to be impeached. I think the trick has to be to just get better people into those positions. Which means better people need to have some ince…

There really isn't need to share misinformation on HN.

The PM has slight larger responsibility the a regular MP.

I'm not a big fan of JTs policies over the years but they were done via parliamentary support.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#748
post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rich have always blamed others for the growing wealth gap. Americans often point to outside forces instead of holding the government accountable. Years of messaging have trained people to support tariffs, spending cuts, and even anti-immigrant policies—despite the need for labor. The real issue isn't spending, it's taxation. And we've let China ignore WTO rules for too long. Trump should've targeted tariffs at Ch…

Specifically, what WTO rules are your saying China has ignored?

I am just going to go with Google AI on that one

China's WTO compliance record is often criticized for several reasons, including violations of market orientation principles, state-led industrial planning, excessive subsidies, and non-transparency regarding subsidies. Furthermore, China's policies on forced technology transfers, intellectual property protection, and governmental procurement have also faced scrutiny. Here's a more detailed look at the specific WTO rules China has been criticized for ignoring:

Market Orientation and State-Led Industrial Policies: China's approach to economic development, characterized by state-led industrial planning, is seen as inconsistent with the WTO's principles of market orientation and non-discrimination.

Subsidies and State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs): China's extensive use of subsidies for domestic industries, including SOEs, and its failure to make timely and transparent notifications of these subsidies, are major points of contention.

Forced Technology Transfers and Joint Venture Requirements: China has been criticized for requiring foreign companies to transfer technology to Chinese firms as a condition for market access, which violates WTO principles of fair trade and market competition.

Intellectual Property Protection: China's record on protecting foreign intellectual property rights, including trade secrets, has been a long-standing issue, with concerns about theft and lack of enforcement.

Discriminatory Trade Practices: China's policies on governmental procurement, discriminatory standards for technology, and restrictions on market access in services sectors have been criticized for hindering fair competition and market access for foreign companies.

Failure to Reciprocally Open Government Procurement: China has been criticized for not fully reciprocating the government procurement concessions it pledged as part of its WTO accession agreement. Retaliatory Use of Trade Remedies:

China's use of trade remedies, such as anti-dumping and safeguard measures, has sometimes been seen as retaliatory and inconsistent with WTO princip

(They were also supposed to let Visa and Mastercard in)

Also Capital Controls are a big one. You can't get your money out and I have read several times people are forced to spend more money in China to get part of their money out.

More Google AI

China maintains strict capital controls, limiting the flow of money in and out of the country. These controls affect both individuals and companies, with restrictions on repatriating profits and capital. While there are annual limits for individuals, businesses also face specific procedures and conditions before they can repatriate profits, according to INS Global Consulting. Elaboration: For Individuals:

    Annual Limits:
    Chinese residents have an annual limit of $50,000 USD equivalent for transferring money out of the country, says Wise. 
Currency Exchange: RMB cannot be transferred directly; it must be converted to foreign currency, notes INS Global Consulting. Work Permit: Individuals must have a work permit and be employed in China to be eligible for repatriation, according to INS Global Consulting. Required Documents: Applications for repatriation require documents like passports, employment contracts, and tax bills, says INS Global Consulting. Exchanges and Fees: Individuals can use banks or exchange agencies (like Western Union and MoneyGram), but fees will vary, says INS Global Consulting.

For Companies (FIEs - Foreign Invested Enterprises):

    Capital Account Regulations:
    China's "closed" capital account means companies must comply with strict rules when moving money in or out, according to CNN. 
Profits Repatriation: Companies can only repatriate profits after specific conditions are met, including tax compliance and a company's annual audit. Surplus Reserve Fund: Companies must allocate a portion of their after-tax profits to a mandatory surplus reserve fund, which can impact the amount available for repatriation, notes China Briefing. Withholding Tax: Dividends repatriated to foreign investors are subject to a 10% withholding tax, says China Briefing. State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE): The SAFE regulates capital account transactions and requires foreign investors to open separate accounts for current and capital accounts, notes China Briefing. New Controls: Increased government oversight and security measures have been introduced to scrutinize outbound investments, according to China Briefing.

In Summary: China's capital controls are a complex system that limits both individual and corporate capital movements. While there are some recent efforts to relax controls, they remain a significant factor for businesses and individuals operating in China, requiring careful planning and compliance with regulations before any money can be moved out of the country.

https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/chinas-use-unoff...

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#749
post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still often have one man with all the power in a parliamentary system. The Prime Minister. Take Canada as an example. JT had basically complete power over government. It's as rate for the prime minister party or coalition to go against him as it is for a president in the US to be impeached. I think the trick has to be to just get better people into those positions. Which means better people need to have some ince…

The prime minister in the UK is regularly kicked out by their party, and it's the same in most parliamentary systems. Liz Truss introduced ridiculous ideological economic policies that caused a bond market revolt. Her party kicked her out within the lifetime of a lettuce. This is only possible in a parliamentary system. Most of her recent predecessors were similarly if less rapidly removed. In the past 40 years, only…

The UK is not Canada though. You have the House of Lords, we have a Senate. We are a (con)federation, and that adds a whole new political overlay that the UK doesn’t have.

The executive power of our PM relative to the body politik is much higher. We don’t have a tradition of backbench rebellion, and the PMO often wields more power than the cabinet.

Re: Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

#750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small business is viable. There are hundreds of thousands of small businesses successfully running throughout the country. Maybe I'm missing your point but this seems like a dumb thing to say.

Sorry, it would have been more correct to say that while smol businesses are viable, Republicans and other corrupt politicians siding with big business is just them siding with the winning side.

Ok I agree with this but I would add that they are only winning because Republicans side with them.
Post reply on HN