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

741–750 of 814 posts

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

#741

Post by matwood »

tw04 wrote: post #194
nathan_compton wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy this - Harris had a big bump in the polls as soon as she entered the race and I think she could have won if she had offered voters anything . This bullshit that American's won't vote for a woman is just an excuse not to run women and to deflect blame towards a culture war issue and away from the fact that the democrats don't actually have popular policies. I voted for Harris, I even canvased for her, but…

> I think she could have won if she had offered voters anything. But she did offer voters lots of things if you spent 30 seconds listening to her and stepped out of the faux news and Twitter echo chambers. And basically every last bit of it would’ve helped the average American. She just didn’t lie and claim she had a magic wand to fix price gouging her first week in office. https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/sep…

> She just didn’t lie and claim she had a magic wand to fix price gouging her first week in office.

This is part of Trumps genius and preys on many American's ignorance. Ask random people on the street if they understand the inflation rate for example. Most issues are complex and require nuance and complex fixes. Trump distills them down to simple problems when they are not, and lies with impunity that there are simple solutions. People believe him because it's too much work to believe anything else.

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

#742

Post by ezst »

koolba wrote: post #612
ezst wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> And Trump did what, exactly, make something already illegal even more illegal? That’s the best part! There’s no new laws necessary. We’re simply enforcing the laws on the books and means of enforcement that we as a nation have already agreed upon! > And now that you are ruled by a de facto fascist with the rule of law only applicable to his enemies, how is the payoff? On the upside, illegal immigration is no longer…

> That’s the best part! There’s no new laws necessary. We’re simply enforcing the laws on the books and means of enforcement that we as a nation have already agreed upon!

Another commenter reacted on that already, essentially immigration is used as an excuse to form a lawless militia.

> I fail to see how a democratically elected President that won both the electoral college and the popular vote is a “de facto fascist”.

Because apparently you fail to see that how he got there has no bearing on what happens next. Being voted into power doesn't grant him the right to abuse and consolidate power. Presidential powers aren't absolute, or it wouldn't be a democracy to begin with. Don't you see the paradox?

https://scribe.rip/@carmitage/i-researched-every-attempt-to-...

> And just because something may work for a small homogenous population in close proximity of each other doesn’t mean it would work or make sense for a heterogeneous population spread across thousands of miles.

Sure, you can always invoke some American exceptionalism to sidetrack any constructive effort or discussion, but as it happens, the USA is not as unique as you think it is (not the largest, not the most populous, not the largest market by any stretch). And once you pop your head out of the sand to look around, you realise that there is never a good reason to let cartels pollute air and water, or collude on healthcare or insurance costs, or weaken safety and food regulations which are already subpar for the developed world: Wealthy Americans have deaths rates on par with poor Europeans. Your misguided ideology benefits your robber barons more than you.

https://arstechnica.com/health/2025/04/wealthy-americans-hav...

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

#743

Post by thrance »

CalChris wrote: post #687
thrance wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Well, you should hold them in contempt for their awful 2024 campaign, their staunch pro-Israel position in the face of internal polls begging them to at least acknowledge what was going on in Gaza. You should hold the Democratic establishment in contempt too for their continued efforts to keep the progressives down: Sanders, AOC, now Mamdani...

Harris in particular, led a weak and energy-less campaign, disappeared for 6 month after losing, didn't do or say anything about Trump's terrible start, then reappeared for her book promotion and pinned it all on progressives.

I'm not telling you to disregard whatever good policies has come out of Biden's term, I'm telling you that's the barest of bare minimums, and winning an election against an obviously retared manchild such as Trump shouldn't be that fucking hard. Yet they lost, having down nothing to counter-message his many obvious lies. This deserves scorn, nothing else.

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

#744

Post by immibis »

LexiMax wrote: post #702
immibis wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is more tightly controlled than it lets on. User moderation tools are suspended if a user doesn't use them in accordance with a pro-corporate right-wing bias.

Do you have personal experience with this? I was under the impression that abuse of moderation tools was common due to the fact that user moderation tools and open registration do not mix well.

Yes, I asked dang by email, and he told me flags from my account have been disabled because I flagged things he agreed with. I think votes are also disabled.

The buttons are still there, but they don't do anything.

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

#745

Post by immibis »

CalChris wrote: post #722
immibis wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being pleasantly surprised by things that should be the bare minimum is not a sign you hold him in high regard. How do you feel about his attacks on Gaza?

Biden had a resupply pier constructed for Gaza when Israel attacked. He didn't attack Gaza at all. Troll elsewhere.

Biden sold more weapons to Israel than any president before him.

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

#746

Post by immibis »

brightball wrote: post #703
immibis wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Trade deficit" is another word for "free stuff" and also another word for "being the world's reserve currency". America receives massive quantities of free stuff from other countries and gets to control the banking system of the entire world as a side effect (this is how it manages to collect taxes from non-resident citizens and how it makes sanctions meaningful). Why doesn't America want that to continue?

Is there any reason America can’t continue that without giving every critical manufacturing industry to China?

To get free stuff you have to get free stuff. Why would you manufacture stuff, at great expense, when you're getting it for free? That makes no capitalistic sense.

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

#747

Post by matwood »

hallole wrote: post #564
mirekrusin wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moving production to US, ie. they were thinking about 2nd order implications, in other words works as expected?

Yeah essentially this. In my mental model, tariffs give an advantage to domestic suppliers / penalize foreign suppliers, and thus encourage domestic production by making it more viable. And bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. has been a pretty big GOP selling point.

> And bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. has been a pretty big GOP selling point.

Which is comical since the US is the #2 manufacturer in the world behind China. And that makes sense given the absolute size of China. The US manufacturing output continues to increase every year. What's not increasing are the manufacturing jobs because of automation.

If there are strategic industries the US wants bolster, like microchips, there are ways to handle that through long term incentives. The CHIPS act did this, but was killed by Trump because Biden put it in place.

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

#748

Post by matwood »

rich_sasha wrote: post #281
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…

It's still a bit of a mystery to me TBH. Not that Americans are paying it, but where's the cash? The headline suggests it was all passed into consumers. So why is inflation still so low? If you add 10-30% to prices (granted, of imports, not of houses, domestic food etc), you'd expect more. If companies were eating it (which apparently they aren't) then their profitability should be down. But that doesn't seem to be t…

> So why is inflation still so low?

Inflation was on a glide path to the 2% target until the tariffs. Now it's back to ~3% (most say the 2.7% was off b/c of the missing data).

The general economy is also slowing. Job growth has basically cratered, and mass layoffs are increasing. So people have cut spending.

The stock market has provided some cover because of the huge growth from the AI trade.

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

#749

Post by gravifer »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #106
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…

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…

Funny how the Chinese general public is like so too. We call it 'accelerationism'. Trump... this ghoul is some .5c booster tho

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

#750

Post by 1718627440 »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #715
1718627440 wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This really sounds like the population just isn't ripe for democracy yet. We also had that, this is a major reason why our 1848 revolution failed and why we didn't become a democracy between 1848 and 1918. So what you actually kind of miss is a nobility that has common sense and class-consciousness of the leading class.

>So what you actually kind of miss is a nobility that has common sense and class-consciousness of the leading class. I don't agree here, but I can seen in this lens if needed. But that's not what Trump voters miss. And that's the issue. What they want is a "return to good times", aka times where anyone else who wasn't a white male did in fact not have good times. But they don't care about the non-white non-males. The…

What I meant with "what you actually kind of miss" is what would be needed to have a stable state despite your population, not what the population actually desires.

This kind of resonates with the idea, that populations education and governing regime beget each other. When the people don't care about their freedom, they eventually loose it, if they do care a lot about it, they will eventually gain it.

Honestly, the current events (as in last 100years) make me think, that maybe monarchy was in fact the best option for some kind of population. I mean a good democracy is a lot better than an average monarchy, but monarchy is also better than a bad democracy that leads to authoritarianism. Even in the worst time of absolutism, the king had a budget, that nobility needed to vote on. So when the king said "I want a bigger palace" and the nobility says, my bridge is old and my workers are hungry, then that's it. Same with war. I mean when your nobility wants to play warlords, that sucks, but a elite that has their richness in real estate and agriculture has a lot to loose in a war. And what happens when your elite wants to play warlord regardless, can be seen in the USA currently.

Post reply on HN