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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 931 posts

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

#901

Post by wisty »

aceazzameen wrote: post #411
wisty wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe Trump genuienly wants to disrupt neoliberalism? Now, a lot of people on the left use "neoliberalism" in the same way people on the right use "woke", or (Eu) football fans use the word "offside" i.e. it means "it's anything the other side do that I don't like". But neoliberalism actually has a definition used by more serious people - generally free trade and the reduction of government interference. Maybe Trump…

Maybe maybe maybe. These excuses are a fantasy. Have you considered maybe he really likes money and himself and anything outside of that doesn't fire any neurons?

I'm not saying Trump isn't a hypocrite, but is it slightly possible that some of what he says is actually what he intends to do, as I said in my comment.

He's dumb, sure. He's out of his depth. He's greedy. But he also has strong opinions (some of which are consistent, some ... less so) on how the US should be run. The idea that he doesn't have some political agenda when he spends hours ranting about it and seems to be implementing bits of it is just pure fantasy land.

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

#902

Post by mrguyorama »

DangitBobby wrote: post #761
otterley wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re worse than sales taxes, because the goods imported are subject to levies even if they’re unsold and eventually destroyed.

Right, but the goal is to solve a marketing issue. The Trump base is resistent to criticisms of dear leader and the mechanisms behind tariffs raising all prices can be misunderstood (and let's be honest, who really trusts economists). Call it a sales tax, they know what that is. The mechanism doesn't matter.

To "solve the marketing issue", you have to be able to market to them.

They have 100% bought into a totally controlled media ecosystem. How do you get your marketing material on Fox, or Truth Social?

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

#903

Post by actualwitch »

arandomusername wrote: post #876
actualwitch wrote: post #869

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is sorta insane to me how someone can exist in the same reality that I do, and not be aware of, like, the main part of the platform that dude is implementing right now? Perhaps that is caused by all the mentions of DOGGY/Musk getting instantly flagged off the front page, but weren't they pretty open about their plans? It's all in project 2025. It's such a large amount of open and well-documented information that c…

You said Trump dismantled social nets. Your AI slop doesn't mention any social nets that were dismantled. Please tell me, what social nets could one rely on before Trump that they cannot now? > but it doesn't include stuff like people's pension plans being dependent on economy being in "number go up" state, which is not the case now. Sounds like a ponzi scheme.

So is it that you fail to see how any of the actions mentioned in the "AI slop" can result in lack of access to safety nets by certain population groups, or do you merely assign no value to those specific nets or those specific population groups? In former case I suggest you refer to dictionary, otherwise a history book will do. Look up what happens in any of the authoritarian regimes when all the undesirables are processed, and whether people who had guns or privilege were somehow exempt from all the frog boiling machinery in the end. "First they came for the socialists..."

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

#904

Post by 3vidence »

YZF wrote: post #818
3vidence wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wasn't really going after a political angle or the elections. PMs in Canada wield a ton of power and AFAIK are rarely removed. I'm not sure what exactly you consider to be misinformation here. It's extremely rare for members of parliament to vote against their party. Another example I can think of is Israel where the prime minister yields a ton of power. I might be wrong but I think the use of the Emergencies Act w…

So you can read the emergencies act here https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2022/02/can...

It requires the house and Senate to vote amongst other requirements.

PMs are re-elected every 4 years and need to continue to win their riding just like every other MP.

The fact that MPs don't regularly vote against their party seems like pretty standard politics across the world.

The government can also call votes of no faith to remove the current PM which has indeed happened to the last 2.

I don't think you need malice to spread misinformation you just have not done sufficient research in this topic before making your comments.

Edit: I'm not familiar with the structure of Israel's government so I cant comment on how much power their PM has individually.

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

#905

Post by c_o_n_v_e_x »

goosedragons wrote: post #773
erkt wrote: post #766

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not about trade deficits-it’s about becoming an independent manufacturer again. Whether or not anyone international buys what we make is secondary. Wealth is disproportionately allocated to those that benefit from globalization but the vast majority of Americans are hurting from it, even if a OLED TV costs nickels.

How do these tariffs help the vast majority of Americans? Maybe in a half a decade-decade time they can get a job in some factory as a tech??? Except there's so much uncertainty and so much tariffs even on raw material that it doesn't even make sense from that perspective. Raising prices on everything is not going to help the majority of Americans. Taxing the rich might have but half the rationale for these tariffs i…

There's a lot more to manufacturing than "just" being a line assembly worker.

The factories have to be designed and built. This includes all of the manufacturing processes, equipment, tooling, automation, etc. All of which are done by reasonably paid, middle class engineers and trades.

Then you have all the 2nd order businesses that get stimulated. Energy must be provided. Mines, mills, refineries, etc. to make the raw materials. The packaging for the end products. Logistics for supplies and end products.

All of the value above used to be in the US but has been captured overseas for decades now.

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

#906

Post by tangjurine »

energy123 wrote: post #609
owenversteeg wrote: post #247

I’m not seeing anyone discuss this here, so I figured I’d raise an important point: this style of tariffs is crushing for US manufacturing. While a universal tariff with no exceptions incentivizes domestic manufacturing, a selective tariff with specific industry exceptions is absolute poison. You might think, as the authors of this exemption did, “well then we will exempt computer parts.” Then people will simply impo…

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.

They can be competitive in the U.S.

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

#907

Post by ashoeafoot »

Animats wrote: post #893
Supermancho wrote: post #805

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Domestic production is "desired" but this is not how to rebuild domestic production capability No need to be handwavy. It can be part of a strategy. A painful and ultimately less effective way than another, sure. There will be a lot of factors at play beyond these controls. This administration lacks the ability to focus for very long in any competent sense. I'm not sure there is a strategy that will work, at this t…

I'd really like to see a coherent strategy from somebody on rebuilding American manufacturing. Bad ideas: * Tax cuts for the rich will make it happen.[1] * More tax cuts.[2] * High tariffs with no plan.[3] Semi-reasonable ideas: * Clairmont study.[4] * McKinsey study (2017).[5] Hasn't held up well. Manufacturing is low-margin and requires stable markets. How to promote that? There are a lot of dull and boring busines…

Per product class protectionism installed for new products, then work up the supply chains. Protect electronics, cause electronics go into all thingd, thenprotect homegrown machine suppliers. aka copy chinese growth strategies

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

#908

Post by YZF »

3vidence wrote: post #904
YZF wrote: post #818

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't really going after a political angle or the elections. PMs in Canada wield a ton of power and AFAIK are rarely removed. I'm not sure what exactly you consider to be misinformation here. It's extremely rare for members of parliament to vote against their party. Another example I can think of is Israel where the prime minister yields a ton of power. I might be wrong but I think the use of the Emergencies Act w…

So you can read the emergencies act here https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2022/02/can... It requires the house and Senate to vote amongst other requirements. PMs are re-elected every 4 years and need to continue to win their riding just like every other MP. The fact that MPs don't regularly vote against their party seems like pretty standard politics across the world. The government can also call vote…

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-premiers-cabinet-1....

"Once cabinet declares an emergency, it takes effect right away — but the government still needs to go to Parliament within seven days to get approval. If either the Commons or the Senate votes against the motion, the emergency declaration is revoked."

Seems like this was later approved by parliament... Do you have a link showing it was approved by senate?

Right now we have an unelected PM. Not sure how the re-election after 4 years is relevant. A US president also has to be re-elected.

I said I might be wrong on the emergency act. and indeed I was wrong (-ish). But you're correct that I need to do better research. I was going from memory and indeed the initial application was before the approval but you are still technically correct.

Were the reciprocal tariffs on the US also approved by parliament?

I think you mean no confidence? Yes. This is generally something that happens in a minority government.

Anyways, I still think PMs in Canada effectively have a lot of power. But I stand corrected on the extent of their power. It is pretty rare they are removed by their party/coalition but the government has occasionally fallen due to votes of no confidence - yes. There is a complete list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_defeat...

EDIT: Also I think you're being a little bit extreme in your "spreading misinformation" comment.

> The PM has slight larger responsibility the a regular MP.

Is clearly not accurate either.

> 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.

It's true that the mechanism of power in Canada and Israel (the two parliamentary systems I'm familiar with) are different but the PMs do have a lot of power. Canada being a federation maybe a bit less (but the US is also a federation).

The PMs party rarely goes against him (and maybe the vote above is an example for that). But yes, as I said above no confidence votes do (rarely) happen in Canada. The US president's powers are also limited, they rarely seem to get anything real done. I don't know of an objective measure there to compare the "power" of a PM vs. a President. PMs can be removed by parliament (or rather the government forced to go to elections). US presidents can also be removed (in theory).

This was more of my opinion/countering the idea that parliamentary systems just magically fix everything. I don't think they do. But I'll try and improve my accuracy when making random comments.

EDIT2: https://sencanada.ca/en/content/sen/chamber/441/debates/020d...

https://sencanada.ca/en/content/sen/chamber/441/debates/020d...

"Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Therefore, honourable senators, I ask for leave of the Senate to end the debate on the motion to confirm the public order emergency proclaimed on February 14, 2022, and revoked earlier today, and to withdraw the order for the consideration of the motion, with the Senate resuming sittings following the rules, orders and practices that would otherwise be in effect."

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

#909

Post by shaky-carrousel »

erkt wrote: post #766
thfuran wrote: post #746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It’s not about trade deficits-it’s about becoming an independent manufacturer again. Whether or not anyone international buys what we make is secondary. Wealth is disproportionately allocated to those that benefit from globalization but the vast majority of Americans are hurting from it, even if a OLED TV costs nickels.

The vast majority of Americans will be hurt even more when product prices double just to subsidize a handful of jobs. If there's such strong interest in ensuring some people have a salary—regardless of the cost to everyone else—we might as well drop the pretense and just pay them directly.

Except, of course, if we did that, the government wouldn't be able to hand those factories over to their friends or political allies. That's the real feature of these "industrial policy" moves, not a bug.

Argentina has been running a nearly identical playbook for decades: impose high tariffs and taxes on imports, hand out subsidies to politically connected local manufacturers, and claim it's all in the name of "national production" and "job creation." The result? Inefficient, uncompetitive factories that only survive because they're protected from global markets. Consumers get stuck paying absurd prices for low-quality goods, innovation dies, and the overall economy stagnates. The only real winners are the cronies who cash in on state favors.

If the U.S. goes down that same path, just like Argentina, it's not going to end in a manufacturing renaissance. It's going to end in inflation, stagnation, and a bunch of overpriced junk no one wants to buy.

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

#910

Post by goosedragons »

c_o_n_v_e_x wrote: post #905
goosedragons wrote: post #773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do these tariffs help the vast majority of Americans? Maybe in a half a decade-decade time they can get a job in some factory as a tech??? Except there's so much uncertainty and so much tariffs even on raw material that it doesn't even make sense from that perspective. Raising prices on everything is not going to help the majority of Americans. Taxing the rich might have but half the rationale for these tariffs i…

There's a lot more to manufacturing than "just" being a line assembly worker. The factories have to be designed and built. This includes all of the manufacturing processes, equipment, tooling, automation, etc. All of which are done by reasonably paid, middle class engineers and trades. Then you have all the 2nd order businesses that get stimulated. Energy must be provided. Mines, mills, refineries, etc. to make the r…

Who is going to build a factory when there's a fifty percent chance the tariff plan changes the next day? Or a refinery? Or a mill? Or a mine?
Post reply on HN