3 ms·

> Not taxes, tariffs - which is of course a tax - which the general public did not, by all available evidence, understand was a tax. Experts were pretty clear

> Not taxes, tariffs - which is of course a tax - which the general public did not, by all available evidence, understand was a tax. Experts were pretty clear in telling the public that it was a tax. The only people who can say they didn't understand that would have to be people who not only didn't know what tariffs were in the first place, but who also didn't bother to listen to the many many people trying their best to explain it to them. I'm 100% convinced that trump doesn't understand them and refused to listen to the many many people who have tried to explain it to him, which is why he had to suddenly start walking them back. Only his ego is getting in the way now.

no_wizard 1y ago
>The only people who can say they didn't understand that would have to be people who not only didn't know what tariffs were in the first place, but who also didn't bother to listen to the many many people trying their best to explain it to them anti intellectual sentiment runs deep in many parts of US society. Having experts out explaining things - particularly via news media outlets - has unfortunately become an ineffective tactic as a result. There are many people, across different areas of US society, that reject any expert explanations in favor of their own beliefs, or things they read that re-enforce their beliefs. We live in an age where 'vibes' and anecdotal experiences override facts based on well gathered evidence and history. I believe quite strongly the average Republican voter is heavily weighted toward dismissing public experts out of hand. All this is to say, I'm surprised that didn't have much impact. It should have completely destroyed his campaign to be honest, as many of his actions should have, but this was an indisputably bad idea from any reasonable economic standpoint. >Only his ego is getting in the way now I largely agree with this. I will only add that I can't tell where Trump ends and his donor class setting the agenda begins.
vel0city 1y ago
"Who pays the tariffs" can potentially be a complicated question. There is a certain amount of elasticity of demand, the breadth of choice of supply, and more that can influence if a supplier chooses to eat the cost or if the price goes up. It's totally possible to draw up a scenario where it's the exporter that does bear the majority or all the cost of a tariff. Highly unlikely in the real world, but technically possible. But in the end blind American exceptionalisim and surrounding himself with yes men seems to have made him at least publicly proclaim the exporters would bear the cost. Or Trump is just a liar. Occam's Razor suggests an answer. Chances are this is just another instance of Trump lying and people eating it up.
- no_wizard 1y ago
  In what scenario does the other country - the one being tariffed, to be absolutely clear - does that country pay the tariff? That was the exact scenario he iterated over and over on the campaign trail. What technically possible scenario exists for this to happen?
  - vel0city 1y ago
    When there's practically no other country willing to import it and there are costs to migrate to another kind of production and few alternate buyers would be an example.

no_wizard 1y ago

>The only people who can say they didn't understand that would have to be people who not only didn't know what tariffs were in the first place, but who also didn't bother to listen to the many many people trying their best to explain it to them anti intellectual sentiment runs deep in many parts of US society. Having experts out explaining things - particularly via news media outlets - has unfortunately become an ineffective tactic as a result. There are many people, across different areas of US society, that reject any expert explanations in favor of their own beliefs, or things they read that re-enforce their beliefs. We live in an age where 'vibes' and anecdotal experiences override facts based on well gathered evidence and history. I believe quite strongly the average Republican voter is heavily weighted toward dismissing public experts out of hand. All this is to say, I'm surprised that didn't have much impact. It should have completely destroyed his campaign to be honest, as many of his actions should have, but this was an indisputably bad idea from any reasonable economic standpoint. >Only his ego is getting in the way now I largely agree with this. I will only add that I can't tell where Trump ends and his donor class setting the agenda begins.

vel0city 1y ago

"Who pays the tariffs" can potentially be a complicated question. There is a certain amount of elasticity of demand, the breadth of choice of supply, and more that can influence if a supplier chooses to eat the cost or if the price goes up. It's totally possible to draw up a scenario where it's the exporter that does bear the majority or all the cost of a tariff. Highly unlikely in the real world, but technically possible. But in the end blind American exceptionalisim and surrounding himself with yes men seems to have made him at least publicly proclaim the exporters would bear the cost. Or Trump is just a liar. Occam's Razor suggests an answer. Chances are this is just another instance of Trump lying and people eating it up.

no_wizard 1y ago
In what scenario does the other country - the one being tariffed, to be absolutely clear - does that country pay the tariff? That was the exact scenario he iterated over and over on the campaign trail. What technically possible scenario exists for this to happen?
- vel0city 1y ago
  When there's practically no other country willing to import it and there are costs to migrate to another kind of production and few alternate buyers would be an example.