9 ms·

This is the only explanation that has made sense to me so far. And it makes even more sense based on these exemptions. https://www.instagram.com/share/_jW_V1hw

This is the only explanation that has made sense to me so far. And it makes even more sense based on these exemptions. https://www.instagram.com/share/_jW_V1hwM https://www.instagram.com/share/_jW_V1hwM This is Senator Chris Murphy explaining it’s not economic policy, it’s an attempt to blackmail corporations into submission by making a deal with him in return for sanctions relief. Keep an eye out for what Apple and nvidia might have agreed to give.

zzzeek 2y ago
co-sign, it's the King's Tax (as Murphy had explained in a different video I watched of his). it's that simple. also it was a giant elephant to make everyone forget that they just exposed an entire military action over Signal in a completely illegal and extremely incompetent way.
- jonplackett 2y ago
  I’m British so not that knowledgeable about us politics beyond the big players. How well known is Murphy? I’d never heard of him until I saw this video but he seems very impressive and much more electable than Biden or harris.
  - zzzeek 2y ago
    he's a US Senator. Senators are very important here
    - jonplackett 2y ago
      Yeah I get that he’s a senator! I mean how much in the public eye is he. Would a random person know who he is? We have hundreds of Members of Parliament here in the UK, but probably only 10 that most people could name. I wondered how big his public profile is.
      - jraines 2y ago
        Most Senators are not well known nationally (sadly) unless they’ve either: - done a non-negligible Presidential campaign - been born from a famous family - the press either love them or love to hate them - have a leadership position and/or are conspicuously ancient Relentless self-promotors are a superset of 3, the ones who succeed Unfortunately being sensible, cooperative, or good with policy isn’t on the list It can occasionally work for state Governors
      - poink 2y ago
        I think Bernie Sanders is the only current senator I'd expect a random American to know. Murphy might make the top 5 highest profile senators but you wouldn't know him if you don't pay attention to politics at all.
  - ImJamal 2y ago
    Murphy isn't well known.
    - alabastervlog 2y ago
      He's getting more well known pretty fast, over all this. His explainer videos of what's going on and why it's so dangerous are often kinda boring and basic if you're a politics nerd–but that's great, because we don't need to be told, it's the folks who aren't politics nerds who need to be educated on this stuff.
      - ImJamal 2y ago
        This happens in politics all the time. In a couple weeks nobody remembers the politican or anything they said or did.
  - anigbrowl 2y ago
    About as well known as a politically active Lord would be in the UK. The general public probably doesn't recognize his name, anyone interested in politics does.
  - busyant 2y ago
    > How well known is Murphy? He's the senator from the state I live in, so I know him and think he's excellent. > much more electable than Biden or harris. He represents a northeast blue state. It's difficult for those types of Democrats to carry non-coastal states in a presidential election, no matter how good they may be. I suspect Bill Clinton tacked rightward to carry some southern states in 1992 and 1996, which led to his election. Christ, Al Gore (2000 election) couldn't even carry his home state of Tennessee, so you can see how difficult it is to elect a Democrat to the presidency. John Kerry (Dem from a northeast blue state) got smoked by George Bush in 2004. I'm still trying to understand how Obama won twice, but I think it boils down to the fact that he invigorated the African-American vote in some key southern states. tldr: Chris Murphy is great--unfortunately, he's the kind of Democratic presidential candidate who'd probably lose outside of the coastal states. * edit: I would have been 'happy' with either outcome in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. McCain and Romney are/were decent and serious people. In fact, Romney was roundly mocked by the Dems in 2012 for saying that Russia was the US's greatest external threat. In retrospect ...
unclebucknasty 2y ago
It's exactly what it is. And, the seemingly haphazard, unpredictable nature of it is a feature, serving as perfect cover: "Why these exemptions?" "Who knows? None of it makes sense." But, of course, it does. It's also consistent with other, publicly-wielded cudgels, like the law-firm extortions under threat of executive orders.
- sitkack 2y ago
  People should be more alarmed of these law firms, they will be used as his private army.
  - fundad 2y ago
    I’m sure the richest corporations are rushing to retain these firms in an attempt to be on the winning side.
  - rotexo 2y ago
    I think his private armies are going to be his private armies. Think Wagner group, to be deployed domestically and in central/South America.
  - freeone3000 2y ago
    As opposed to his public army, which he actually does control as President of the United States. I’m alarmed of that.
  - belter 2y ago
    People should be more alarmed, the bar does not expel the lawyers at those firms from the profession. They must be breaking every misconduct rule. "The ABA rejects efforts to undermine the courts and the legal profession" - https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/03/aba-rejects-efforts-to-undermine-courts-and-legal-profession/ https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2... Rule 8.4: Misconduct: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_8_4_misconduct/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibili...
vFunct 2y ago
Which didn't really work since what exactly are US tech companies giving Trump in exchange for eliminating tariffs? And are only large corporations expected to play? I import shopping bags from Chinese manufacturers from my store, like millions of other small businesses do. What exactly are we supposed to offer Trump?
- mcmcmc 2y ago
  Bribes
- blitzar 2y ago
  Buy a meal at Mar-A-Lago, $5mil a plate.
  - mindslight 2y ago
    The second worst part is the actual food on the plate is just a dumped out bag from McDonalds.
- alabastervlog 2y ago
  > And are only large corporations expected to play? I import shopping bags from Chinese manufacturers from my store, like millions of other small businesses do. What exactly are we supposed to offer Trump? You'll eventually be buying them, for more than you pay now but less than the imported price, from a large US company that bribed whoever Dear Leader is at the time, for exemptions.
- vel0city 2y ago
  Bribes. Obvious bribes. Over and over. How many millions do you spend on your Mar-a-Lago memberships? How many nights do you pay for empty rooms in Trump hotels? https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/trump-reportedly-suspends-nvidia-h20-export-ban-plan-after-usd1-million-dinner-with-jensen-huang https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...
prng2021 2y ago
I keep seeing these explanations of “4D chess”. It’s Donald Trump. He has absolutely no idea what he’s doing when it comes to economic policies. Unless you believe he can see into the future of how other world leaders would react and consistently outsmart everyone else, there’s no 4D chess being played.
- aswanson 2y ago
  Occams razor. It's Donald Trump, I've known he was a joke since the late 80s. In middle school. Baffling to see millions of people think reality TV is real and give him nuke codes.
  - lttlrck 2y ago
    I knew he was a joke in the lates eighties at middle school - in the UK. Baffling indeed. I am US citizen now - equally baffling on some days...
    - stevenwoo 2y ago
      It's infuriating to rational thought but watching videos of Trump supporters talking about why they support Trump in spite of him hurting them makes it clear where his support comes from - it's a rainbow coalition of the discontented. Obviously the editors will pick the most provocative videos/sound bites but it's a pretty consistent picture.
- rescripting 2y ago
  This isn’t advanced negotiation tactics, it’s mafia style negotiation tactics, which are 100% in character. See the law firms now providing him with 100s of millions in pro bono work to avoid punitive executive orders.
  - spwa4 2y ago
    They never mentioned if they are providing "him" - as in the US government, or "him" as in Donald Trump, 100s of millions in pro Bono work ...
gbil 2y ago
This assumes that he has more power than the tech companies on the everyday life and I wonder if that is really the case. As I'm not located in the states, I'm very much interested to hear from a US resident if that is really the case.
- JustExAWS 2y ago
  A tech company can’t shoot me with impunity under “qualified immunity”. Put me in jail, harass me because I don’t look like a belong in my own neighborhood, take my property under civil forfeiture without a trial…
  - hedora 2y ago
    They can permanently ban you from the economy though.
    - JustExAWS 2y ago
      There is no company that would ruin me if I lost an account.
  - disqard 2y ago
    You're right about these most serious adverse outcomes, but don't forget what could happen if you (say) randomly get your Big Tech account locked/suspended/banned for some reason that was ultimately erroneously flagged by an AI, and then cheerfully executed at scale. The examples you provided are more fundamental and I won't trivialize them, but making you lose your "keys to your own digital space" is a very real power they have over you.
    - JustExAWS 2y ago
      Okay? I lose my Google account and lose my Google Photos, they are also backed up to iCloud and One Drive and vice versa. All the music I bought back in the day from iTunes is DRM free and has been since 2009. I lose my Amazon account, so what?
- 2y ago
forinti 2y ago
I think the most probable outcome is that Trump causes enough trouble to incite the whole country against him. I don't see him completing his term. He's going to be impeached.
- gscott 2y ago
  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 China alone—but he is the president, not me.
  - pbhjpbhj 2y ago
    Specifically, what WTO rules are your saying China has ignored?
    - gscott 2y ago
      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-unofficial-trade-barriers-us-china-trade-war https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/chinas-use-unoff...
throw310822 2y ago
Sorry, but what would have been the consequences of the tariffs on Chinese imports? Do you imagine American citizens having to pay twice or more for an iPhone (or not getting one at all) because of Trump? Not being able to afford a new laptop, because of Trump? Not being able to buy all the cheap consumer electronics, because of Trump? The "blackmail" (except it's simply the consequences of his own actions) goes two ways here- see also the TikTok debacle: or how to explain to hundreds of millions of enraged Americans that they cannot use their favourite social network because of Trump.
boredpeter 2y ago
[dead]
proggy 2y ago
What’s interesting to me is that in this horribly corrupt state of affairs we find ourselves in, there are thousands upon thousands of smaller businesses that are not able to seek redress the way a megacorp like Apple or Nvidia can. Your run-of-the-mill office furniture importer doesn’t have the same ability to book up a dinner and pay the requisite multi-million dollar lobbying fee as a Silicon Valley magnate. In the before times, these folks would form interest groups and lobby Congress as a unified front, but at the moment it seems as though that doesn’t work anymore. It doesn’t take imagination to see a highly noncompetitive, post-capitalist future where only the goods from megacorps are exempted, and the goods from medium sized businesses are taxed to oblivion, destroying any semblance of free markets.
- dataviz1000 2y ago
  Mid-cap stocks peaked two days after the election and have been free falling every since. [0] [0]https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/IWM/ https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/IWM/
- scarface_74 2y ago
  Most of small businesses supported Trump. https://www.barrons.com/articles/small-business-owners-voted-for-trump-they-wont-get-everything-on-their-wish-list-fa623d5e https://www.barrons.com/articles/small-business-owners-voted... They are getting exactly what they voted for. I have a hard time feeling any sympathy for anyone who is being hurt by Trump who voted for him.
standardUser 2y ago
If this is an attempt at blackmail it appears to be failing. It's only been a few days and Trump has already unilaterally capitulated on several major positions. Unless he's blackmailing himself, the 'plan' is backfiring.
- belter 2y ago
  "Trump to investors: My policies will never change" - https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-investors-my-policies-will-never-change-2025-04-04/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-investors-my-policies...
- csomar 2y ago
  There could have been deals/agreements behind the scenes. This is not a republican "first". The democrats did the same to get Facebook and other social media to censor news. Trump is literally playing their book but with his style.
  - toss1 2y ago
    Anyone who can not see the obvious difference in substance, intent, scope, and scale is either willfully ignorant or seriously lacking in reading comprehension and reasoning skills. Requesting curbs on rampant disinformation is not even close to the same thing as crashing the economy to extort our closest allies and major business and industry players. Yikes
    - qmr 2y ago
      Censorship is censorship. Who are you to decide what is or isn't disinformation? Who is anyone? I prefer to do my own critical thinking. It is also well documented that Meta's rampant censorship extends far beyond "disinformation". https://web.archive.org/web/20250411170102/https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/leaked-data-israeli-censorship-meta https://web.archive.org/web/20250411170102/https://www.drops...
      - redczar 2y ago
belter 2y ago
> Keep an eye out for what Apple and nvidia might have agreed to give. Well we know Nvidia did give a million dollars already: "A $1M-per-head dinner at Mar-a-Lago is how you get AI chips to China" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43652504 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43652504
ThePowerOfFuet 2y ago
Tracking-free link: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIALTQjMKma https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIALTQjMKma
loudmax 2y ago
The term for this is extortion. The last time tariffs were this high, it led to rampant corruption as companies would pay off customs officers. This was one of the reasons for switching to an income tax. For the current administration this possibility counts as a major opportunity to generate personal wealth. But this isn't the only reason for the policy. For someone who is at heart a coward, bullying and brandishing raw power over others is its own reward. That reason enough for the policy, and damn the consequences for the nation.
- malcolmgreaves 2y ago
  You are 100% spot on in this analysis. Thank you for summarizing it so well.
- toss1 2y ago
  There is also a reason tariffs only get raised on a multi-generational time scale, e.g., 1820s, 1890s, 1930s, 2020s. The effects are so bad that nearly everyone who remembers the disaster must have died off for anyone to think it is a good idea. At this point, it is obvious that there is no geo-political or geo-strategic plan of any type. The administration is just winging it, and Sen Murphy's explanation is the only one available. It was also noted that the person occupying the president's chair said "they must be forced to negotiate". When someone is forced to negotiate, that is not a negotiation, that is extortion. Welcome to another nation run like a mob office.
- kikokikokiko 2y ago
  [flagged]
- vishnugupta 2y ago
  I guess for a change Americans will experience what Indians have been subjected to since forever. Just about anything useful and high quality has been tariffed out of existence in India. It is done in the name of protecting our industry while they catch up with rest of the world. Exactly backwards has happened. The cars we get here are so bad they are sometimes called tin cans on wheels. Without competitors from across the world Indian auto makers have absolutely no motivation to build world class cars. And it shows on the road.
emsign 2y ago
Instead of coming to Trump for pledges of political loyalty those companies should instead come to Europe to be able to make business again freely.
- tonyarkles 2y ago
  > Europe to be able to make business again freely. I mean… Europe isn’t particularly well-known for being particularly business friendly. There’s a lot of good there for sure but there’s also a lot of barriers. And I say this as a Canadian who is also disappointed by the overall business environment at home.
- tirant 2y ago
  I wouldn’t count Europe as a reference of a free market at all. Regulations and bureaucracy are rampant.
  - alextingle 2y ago
    A free market requires regulations in order to operate. Regulations require a bureaucracy in order to be effective.
    - wahern 2y ago
      > Regulations require a bureaucracy in order to be effective. That's a very European point of view (though not uniquely European, it's also shared across many other cultures, e.g. in East Asia). The US has done pretty well with private rights of action. In fact, because our culture is so conservative and anti-authoritarian, centralized bureaucracies are rather quickly defanged or grossly underfunded. The most recent example is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and more quietly the FTC. Democrats would have done much better to roll back judicial expansion of the Federal Arbitration Act and devolve "regulation" back to states and private class actions, rather than to create the CFPB and elsewhere double-down on anemic, extremely inconsistent, and often highly partisan agency regulators. Where private rights of action tend to fail is when they concern inchoate or non-individualized harms, like you often see in environmental protection law. Then what you get is complete paralysis, such as with real estate development; largely because its the process, not the end-state determination of rights, that private actors weaponize. But when they're firmly anchored to property rights, personal injury or loss (including fraud), etc, they seem to do as well as centralized regulation. And in the US, they arguably do better, because of our political dynamics.
GenerocUsername 2y ago
These companies could choose to invest in the US instead and not have to worry about any of this. Tariffs are only usable as extortion if the companies have outsourced the manufacturing that gutted our middle-class. Externalizing variables comes with risk. This risk should be factored into planning in the future. Just because a politician in the 90s promised cheap labor through globalization, a president 30 years later can flip the script
- bruce511 2y ago
  I'm not downvoting you, because I think you make an argument that many would make. "Tariffs apply to imports, so produce locally instead". The argument unfortunately has 2 flaws; A) local production is expensive (which is why manufacturers fled decades ago.) If it is reintroduced here those goods remain expensive. B) most things are not made in one place. Steel comes from here, electronics from there, energy from somewhere else, and so on. Even farmers use imported fertilizer, machinery and so on. Since the Tariffs are on "everything" (not just finished goods) they drive up the cost of local manufacturing even more. A long-term strategy to increase local production makes sense. But it has to be done in a targeted way so as not to harm everything else. Typically it starts with finished goods, then slowly working down the food chain to improve the supply of parts making up those goods. Exemptions on finished goods (like electronics) kills any gain. He might have, for example, exempted electronic parts. Which would then incentivize assembly to be local. Once you have local assembly you could look at say packaging, and so on. The approach taken though doesn't lead to the outcomes being touted. Tariffs at country level are dumb. Excempting finished goods is dumb. Tariffs on things that can't be made locally (like coffee) is dumb. That's before we talk about stability and certainty. For Tariffs to work you need both, and neither are in play here.
pcthrowaway 2y ago
I think it's good to consider what the implications are if Hanlon's razor fails... but I'm not giving up hope that this is all just a result of the incompetence of Trump and his administration either.
- grues-dinner 2y ago
  Hanlon's Razor is worse than useless if the target is aware of the principle. Then they can be malicious and play it off as incompetence. Which works especially well when they are also surrounded by genuine incompetents. They can also be, and often are, malicious and incompetent. It's like saying "if it's white, fluffy and has four legs, never assume it is anything but a sheep". If the wolf knows you're applying that logic, what happens next?
  - Qwertious 2y ago
    Hanlon's razor is a great counterbalance to peoples' natural inclination of assuming people aren't dumb. The problem is when people divorce it from that context and assume it applies in general.
  - apull 2y ago
    [dead]
AnthonyMouse 2y ago
> This is Senator Chris Murphy explaining it’s not economic policy, it’s an attempt to blackmail corporations into submission by making a deal with him in return for sanctions relief. Weirdly the same explanation works if you're being less uncharitable, i.e. Apple agreed to invest $500B in the US but everybody knows new factories aren't going to be built overnight, so they get a reprieve from the tariffs for now provided they continue to go through with the investment. Which in turn makes them immune from future tariffs once they're actually making iPhones in the US, while allowing the tariffs to be reinstituted against anyone who didn't do likewise.
- bruce511 2y ago
  Apple can agree to invest 500B to build a factory, but they don't have to actually do it. Building a factory takes years, and a big chunk of that happens long before you actually start work on site. You gotta find a site, work with local govt to negotiate servicing, environmental report (there's a couple years, and potentially a couple go-arounds right there.) So there can be lots of activity, lots of progress reports, lots of optimism, for a decade or more before any real money has to be spent. Ultimately Apple et al can "agree" to anything, the president can have his "big win" and things can carry on just as before.
  - apull 2y ago
    [dead]
  - IOT_Apprentice 2y ago
    More likely they bought Trump’s crypto coin to increase Trump’s wealth.
- Braxton1980 2y ago
  Why did he implement the tariffs in the first place? The $500b was announced more than a month ago https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/02/apple-will-spend-more-than-500-billion-usd-in-the-us-over-the-next-four-years/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/02/apple-will-spend-more...

zzzeek 2y ago

co-sign, it's the King's Tax (as Murphy had explained in a different video I watched of his). it's that simple. also it was a giant elephant to make everyone forget that they just exposed an entire military action over Signal in a completely illegal and extremely incompetent way.

jonplackett 2y ago
I’m British so not that knowledgeable about us politics beyond the big players. How well known is Murphy? I’d never heard of him until I saw this video but he seems very impressive and much more electable than Biden or harris.
- zzzeek 2y ago
  he's a US Senator. Senators are very important here
  - jonplackett 2y ago
    Yeah I get that he’s a senator! I mean how much in the public eye is he. Would a random person know who he is? We have hundreds of Members of Parliament here in the UK, but probably only 10 that most people could name. I wondered how big his public profile is.
    - jraines 2y ago
      Most Senators are not well known nationally (sadly) unless they’ve either: - done a non-negligible Presidential campaign - been born from a famous family - the press either love them or love to hate them - have a leadership position and/or are conspicuously ancient Relentless self-promotors are a superset of 3, the ones who succeed Unfortunately being sensible, cooperative, or good with policy isn’t on the list It can occasionally work for state Governors
    - poink 2y ago
      I think Bernie Sanders is the only current senator I'd expect a random American to know. Murphy might make the top 5 highest profile senators but you wouldn't know him if you don't pay attention to politics at all.
- ImJamal 2y ago
  Murphy isn't well known.
  - alabastervlog 2y ago
    He's getting more well known pretty fast, over all this. His explainer videos of what's going on and why it's so dangerous are often kinda boring and basic if you're a politics nerd–but that's great, because we don't need to be told, it's the folks who aren't politics nerds who need to be educated on this stuff.
    - ImJamal 2y ago
      This happens in politics all the time. In a couple weeks nobody remembers the politican or anything they said or did.
- anigbrowl 2y ago
  About as well known as a politically active Lord would be in the UK. The general public probably doesn't recognize his name, anyone interested in politics does.
- busyant 2y ago
  > How well known is Murphy? He's the senator from the state I live in, so I know him and think he's excellent. > much more electable than Biden or harris. He represents a northeast blue state. It's difficult for those types of Democrats to carry non-coastal states in a presidential election, no matter how good they may be. I suspect Bill Clinton tacked rightward to carry some southern states in 1992 and 1996, which led to his election. Christ, Al Gore (2000 election) couldn't even carry his home state of Tennessee, so you can see how difficult it is to elect a Democrat to the presidency. John Kerry (Dem from a northeast blue state) got smoked by George Bush in 2004. I'm still trying to understand how Obama won twice, but I think it boils down to the fact that he invigorated the African-American vote in some key southern states. tldr: Chris Murphy is great--unfortunately, he's the kind of Democratic presidential candidate who'd probably lose outside of the coastal states. * edit: I would have been 'happy' with either outcome in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. McCain and Romney are/were decent and serious people. In fact, Romney was roundly mocked by the Dems in 2012 for saying that Russia was the US's greatest external threat. In retrospect ...

unclebucknasty 2y ago

It's exactly what it is. And, the seemingly haphazard, unpredictable nature of it is a feature, serving as perfect cover: "Why these exemptions?" "Who knows? None of it makes sense." But, of course, it does. It's also consistent with other, publicly-wielded cudgels, like the law-firm extortions under threat of executive orders.

sitkack 2y ago
People should be more alarmed of these law firms, they will be used as his private army.
- fundad 2y ago
  I’m sure the richest corporations are rushing to retain these firms in an attempt to be on the winning side.
- rotexo 2y ago
  I think his private armies are going to be his private armies. Think Wagner group, to be deployed domestically and in central/South America.
- freeone3000 2y ago
  As opposed to his public army, which he actually does control as President of the United States. I’m alarmed of that.
- belter 2y ago
  People should be more alarmed, the bar does not expel the lawyers at those firms from the profession. They must be breaking every misconduct rule. "The ABA rejects efforts to undermine the courts and the legal profession" - https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/03/aba-rejects-efforts-to-undermine-courts-and-legal-profession/ https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2... Rule 8.4: Misconduct: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_8_4_misconduct/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibili...

vFunct 2y ago

Which didn't really work since what exactly are US tech companies giving Trump in exchange for eliminating tariffs? And are only large corporations expected to play? I import shopping bags from Chinese manufacturers from my store, like millions of other small businesses do. What exactly are we supposed to offer Trump?

mcmcmc 2y ago
Bribes
blitzar 2y ago
Buy a meal at Mar-A-Lago, $5mil a plate.
- mindslight 2y ago
  The second worst part is the actual food on the plate is just a dumped out bag from McDonalds.
alabastervlog 2y ago
> And are only large corporations expected to play? I import shopping bags from Chinese manufacturers from my store, like millions of other small businesses do. What exactly are we supposed to offer Trump? You'll eventually be buying them, for more than you pay now but less than the imported price, from a large US company that bribed whoever Dear Leader is at the time, for exemptions.
vel0city 2y ago
Bribes. Obvious bribes. Over and over. How many millions do you spend on your Mar-a-Lago memberships? How many nights do you pay for empty rooms in Trump hotels? https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/trump-reportedly-suspends-nvidia-h20-export-ban-plan-after-usd1-million-dinner-with-jensen-huang https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...

prng2021 2y ago

I keep seeing these explanations of “4D chess”. It’s Donald Trump. He has absolutely no idea what he’s doing when it comes to economic policies. Unless you believe he can see into the future of how other world leaders would react and consistently outsmart everyone else, there’s no 4D chess being played.

aswanson 2y ago
Occams razor. It's Donald Trump, I've known he was a joke since the late 80s. In middle school. Baffling to see millions of people think reality TV is real and give him nuke codes.
- lttlrck 2y ago
  I knew he was a joke in the lates eighties at middle school - in the UK. Baffling indeed. I am US citizen now - equally baffling on some days...
  - stevenwoo 2y ago
    It's infuriating to rational thought but watching videos of Trump supporters talking about why they support Trump in spite of him hurting them makes it clear where his support comes from - it's a rainbow coalition of the discontented. Obviously the editors will pick the most provocative videos/sound bites but it's a pretty consistent picture.
rescripting 2y ago
This isn’t advanced negotiation tactics, it’s mafia style negotiation tactics, which are 100% in character. See the law firms now providing him with 100s of millions in pro bono work to avoid punitive executive orders.
- spwa4 2y ago
  They never mentioned if they are providing "him" - as in the US government, or "him" as in Donald Trump, 100s of millions in pro Bono work ...

gbil 2y ago

This assumes that he has more power than the tech companies on the everyday life and I wonder if that is really the case. As I'm not located in the states, I'm very much interested to hear from a US resident if that is really the case.

JustExAWS 2y ago
A tech company can’t shoot me with impunity under “qualified immunity”. Put me in jail, harass me because I don’t look like a belong in my own neighborhood, take my property under civil forfeiture without a trial…
- hedora 2y ago
  They can permanently ban you from the economy though.
  - JustExAWS 2y ago
    There is no company that would ruin me if I lost an account.
- disqard 2y ago
  You're right about these most serious adverse outcomes, but don't forget what could happen if you (say) randomly get your Big Tech account locked/suspended/banned for some reason that was ultimately erroneously flagged by an AI, and then cheerfully executed at scale. The examples you provided are more fundamental and I won't trivialize them, but making you lose your "keys to your own digital space" is a very real power they have over you.
  - JustExAWS 2y ago
    Okay? I lose my Google account and lose my Google Photos, they are also backed up to iCloud and One Drive and vice versa. All the music I bought back in the day from iTunes is DRM free and has been since 2009. I lose my Amazon account, so what?
2y ago

forinti 2y ago

I think the most probable outcome is that Trump causes enough trouble to incite the whole country against him. I don't see him completing his term. He's going to be impeached.

gscott 2y ago
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 China alone—but he is the president, not me.
- pbhjpbhj 2y ago
  Specifically, what WTO rules are your saying China has ignored?
  - gscott 2y ago
    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-unofficial-trade-barriers-us-china-trade-war https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/chinas-use-unoff...

throw310822 2y ago

Sorry, but what would have been the consequences of the tariffs on Chinese imports? Do you imagine American citizens having to pay twice or more for an iPhone (or not getting one at all) because of Trump? Not being able to afford a new laptop, because of Trump? Not being able to buy all the cheap consumer electronics, because of Trump? The "blackmail" (except it's simply the consequences of his own actions) goes two ways here- see also the TikTok debacle: or how to explain to hundreds of millions of enraged Americans that they cannot use their favourite social network because of Trump.

boredpeter 2y ago

[dead]

proggy 2y ago

What’s interesting to me is that in this horribly corrupt state of affairs we find ourselves in, there are thousands upon thousands of smaller businesses that are not able to seek redress the way a megacorp like Apple or Nvidia can. Your run-of-the-mill office furniture importer doesn’t have the same ability to book up a dinner and pay the requisite multi-million dollar lobbying fee as a Silicon Valley magnate. In the before times, these folks would form interest groups and lobby Congress as a unified front, but at the moment it seems as though that doesn’t work anymore. It doesn’t take imagination to see a highly noncompetitive, post-capitalist future where only the goods from megacorps are exempted, and the goods from medium sized businesses are taxed to oblivion, destroying any semblance of free markets.

dataviz1000 2y ago
Mid-cap stocks peaked two days after the election and have been free falling every since. [0] [0]https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/IWM/ https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/IWM/
scarface_74 2y ago
Most of small businesses supported Trump. https://www.barrons.com/articles/small-business-owners-voted-for-trump-they-wont-get-everything-on-their-wish-list-fa623d5e https://www.barrons.com/articles/small-business-owners-voted... They are getting exactly what they voted for. I have a hard time feeling any sympathy for anyone who is being hurt by Trump who voted for him.

standardUser 2y ago

If this is an attempt at blackmail it appears to be failing. It's only been a few days and Trump has already unilaterally capitulated on several major positions. Unless he's blackmailing himself, the 'plan' is backfiring.

belter 2y ago
"Trump to investors: My policies will never change" - https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-investors-my-policies-will-never-change-2025-04-04/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-investors-my-policies...
csomar 2y ago
There could have been deals/agreements behind the scenes. This is not a republican "first". The democrats did the same to get Facebook and other social media to censor news. Trump is literally playing their book but with his style.
- toss1 2y ago
  Anyone who can not see the obvious difference in substance, intent, scope, and scale is either willfully ignorant or seriously lacking in reading comprehension and reasoning skills. Requesting curbs on rampant disinformation is not even close to the same thing as crashing the economy to extort our closest allies and major business and industry players. Yikes
  - qmr 2y ago
    Censorship is censorship. Who are you to decide what is or isn't disinformation? Who is anyone? I prefer to do my own critical thinking. It is also well documented that Meta's rampant censorship extends far beyond "disinformation". https://web.archive.org/web/20250411170102/https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/leaked-data-israeli-censorship-meta https://web.archive.org/web/20250411170102/https://www.drops...
    - redczar 2y ago

belter 2y ago

> Keep an eye out for what Apple and nvidia might have agreed to give. Well we know Nvidia did give a million dollars already: "A $1M-per-head dinner at Mar-a-Lago is how you get AI chips to China" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43652504 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43652504

ThePowerOfFuet 2y ago

Tracking-free link: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIALTQjMKma https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIALTQjMKma

loudmax 2y ago

The term for this is extortion. The last time tariffs were this high, it led to rampant corruption as companies would pay off customs officers. This was one of the reasons for switching to an income tax. For the current administration this possibility counts as a major opportunity to generate personal wealth. But this isn't the only reason for the policy. For someone who is at heart a coward, bullying and brandishing raw power over others is its own reward. That reason enough for the policy, and damn the consequences for the nation.

malcolmgreaves 2y ago
You are 100% spot on in this analysis. Thank you for summarizing it so well.
toss1 2y ago
There is also a reason tariffs only get raised on a multi-generational time scale, e.g., 1820s, 1890s, 1930s, 2020s. The effects are so bad that nearly everyone who remembers the disaster must have died off for anyone to think it is a good idea. At this point, it is obvious that there is no geo-political or geo-strategic plan of any type. The administration is just winging it, and Sen Murphy's explanation is the only one available. It was also noted that the person occupying the president's chair said "they must be forced to negotiate". When someone is forced to negotiate, that is not a negotiation, that is extortion. Welcome to another nation run like a mob office.
kikokikokiko 2y ago
[flagged]
vishnugupta 2y ago
I guess for a change Americans will experience what Indians have been subjected to since forever. Just about anything useful and high quality has been tariffed out of existence in India. It is done in the name of protecting our industry while they catch up with rest of the world. Exactly backwards has happened. The cars we get here are so bad they are sometimes called tin cans on wheels. Without competitors from across the world Indian auto makers have absolutely no motivation to build world class cars. And it shows on the road.

emsign 2y ago

Instead of coming to Trump for pledges of political loyalty those companies should instead come to Europe to be able to make business again freely.

tonyarkles 2y ago
> Europe to be able to make business again freely. I mean… Europe isn’t particularly well-known for being particularly business friendly. There’s a lot of good there for sure but there’s also a lot of barriers. And I say this as a Canadian who is also disappointed by the overall business environment at home.
tirant 2y ago
I wouldn’t count Europe as a reference of a free market at all. Regulations and bureaucracy are rampant.
- alextingle 2y ago
  A free market requires regulations in order to operate. Regulations require a bureaucracy in order to be effective.
  - wahern 2y ago
    > Regulations require a bureaucracy in order to be effective. That's a very European point of view (though not uniquely European, it's also shared across many other cultures, e.g. in East Asia). The US has done pretty well with private rights of action. In fact, because our culture is so conservative and anti-authoritarian, centralized bureaucracies are rather quickly defanged or grossly underfunded. The most recent example is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and more quietly the FTC. Democrats would have done much better to roll back judicial expansion of the Federal Arbitration Act and devolve "regulation" back to states and private class actions, rather than to create the CFPB and elsewhere double-down on anemic, extremely inconsistent, and often highly partisan agency regulators. Where private rights of action tend to fail is when they concern inchoate or non-individualized harms, like you often see in environmental protection law. Then what you get is complete paralysis, such as with real estate development; largely because its the process, not the end-state determination of rights, that private actors weaponize. But when they're firmly anchored to property rights, personal injury or loss (including fraud), etc, they seem to do as well as centralized regulation. And in the US, they arguably do better, because of our political dynamics.

GenerocUsername 2y ago

These companies could choose to invest in the US instead and not have to worry about any of this. Tariffs are only usable as extortion if the companies have outsourced the manufacturing that gutted our middle-class. Externalizing variables comes with risk. This risk should be factored into planning in the future. Just because a politician in the 90s promised cheap labor through globalization, a president 30 years later can flip the script

bruce511 2y ago
I'm not downvoting you, because I think you make an argument that many would make. "Tariffs apply to imports, so produce locally instead". The argument unfortunately has 2 flaws; A) local production is expensive (which is why manufacturers fled decades ago.) If it is reintroduced here those goods remain expensive. B) most things are not made in one place. Steel comes from here, electronics from there, energy from somewhere else, and so on. Even farmers use imported fertilizer, machinery and so on. Since the Tariffs are on "everything" (not just finished goods) they drive up the cost of local manufacturing even more. A long-term strategy to increase local production makes sense. But it has to be done in a targeted way so as not to harm everything else. Typically it starts with finished goods, then slowly working down the food chain to improve the supply of parts making up those goods. Exemptions on finished goods (like electronics) kills any gain. He might have, for example, exempted electronic parts. Which would then incentivize assembly to be local. Once you have local assembly you could look at say packaging, and so on. The approach taken though doesn't lead to the outcomes being touted. Tariffs at country level are dumb. Excempting finished goods is dumb. Tariffs on things that can't be made locally (like coffee) is dumb. That's before we talk about stability and certainty. For Tariffs to work you need both, and neither are in play here.

pcthrowaway 2y ago

I think it's good to consider what the implications are if Hanlon's razor fails... but I'm not giving up hope that this is all just a result of the incompetence of Trump and his administration either.

grues-dinner 2y ago
Hanlon's Razor is worse than useless if the target is aware of the principle. Then they can be malicious and play it off as incompetence. Which works especially well when they are also surrounded by genuine incompetents. They can also be, and often are, malicious and incompetent. It's like saying "if it's white, fluffy and has four legs, never assume it is anything but a sheep". If the wolf knows you're applying that logic, what happens next?
- Qwertious 2y ago
  Hanlon's razor is a great counterbalance to peoples' natural inclination of assuming people aren't dumb. The problem is when people divorce it from that context and assume it applies in general.
- apull 2y ago
  [dead]

AnthonyMouse 2y ago

> This is Senator Chris Murphy explaining it’s not economic policy, it’s an attempt to blackmail corporations into submission by making a deal with him in return for sanctions relief. Weirdly the same explanation works if you're being less uncharitable, i.e. Apple agreed to invest $500B in the US but everybody knows new factories aren't going to be built overnight, so they get a reprieve from the tariffs for now provided they continue to go through with the investment. Which in turn makes them immune from future tariffs once they're actually making iPhones in the US, while allowing the tariffs to be reinstituted against anyone who didn't do likewise.

bruce511 2y ago
Apple can agree to invest 500B to build a factory, but they don't have to actually do it. Building a factory takes years, and a big chunk of that happens long before you actually start work on site. You gotta find a site, work with local govt to negotiate servicing, environmental report (there's a couple years, and potentially a couple go-arounds right there.) So there can be lots of activity, lots of progress reports, lots of optimism, for a decade or more before any real money has to be spent. Ultimately Apple et al can "agree" to anything, the president can have his "big win" and things can carry on just as before.
- apull 2y ago
  [dead]
- IOT_Apprentice 2y ago
  More likely they bought Trump’s crypto coin to increase Trump’s wealth.
Braxton1980 2y ago
Why did he implement the tariffs in the first place? The $500b was announced more than a month ago https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/02/apple-will-spend-more-than-500-billion-usd-in-the-us-over-the-next-four-years/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/02/apple-will-spend-more...