3 ms·

Apparently up to about 40% support them, depending on the poll. [1] That 40% seems absolutely unshakeable in their support. No matter what happens, that group

Apparently up to about 40% support them, depending on the poll. [1] That 40% seems absolutely unshakeable in their support. No matter what happens, that group will support it. And 40% is pretty close to half. [1] https://www.progressivepolicy.org/polling-u-s-public-is-against-trump-tariffs-by-about-60-36/ https://www.progressivepolicy.org/polling-u-s-public-is-agai...

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
somenameforme 1y ago
It's not like people are just closing their eyes and trusting in leader. I'm part of that 40% (and probably substantially more given contemporary pollsters difficulty in reaching people like me [1]), and I think my rationale is quite sound. The fundamental reason is that we are creating an unsustainable system. When Germany chose to limit imports of Russian gas, they wrecked their economy. Many people, blinded by hindsight, wondered why they would have created such a dependency to begin with. But that completely ignores the fact that literally every other nation, including the US most obviously, has excesses of dependencies on other countries, many of which we aren't friendly with today, and even more that we won't be friendly with tomorrow. Times change. An 'advanced economy' is a misnomer, if not an outright facade. Supplanting agriculture, real manufacturing, and other core aspects of your economy with e.g. advertising driven high tech discretionary industries creates an inverted dependency. People don't need iPhones or Google. They do need food, the zillion things in your home labeled 'made in China', and gas. If those 'lesser economies' chose to stop selling to the US, they'd destroy the country. Offshoring all of these jobs also distorts the economy driving excesses of wealth inequality. Many of the jobs that used to lay between flipping burgers and writing code are the exact ones that have been hollowed out by offshoring. The fundamental problem we've created is that it's cheaper than make a widget half way around the world and ship it here than it is than it is to make it here. So how do we fix this? Tariffs are a blunt way to change this, but change it they do. The most probable outcome is that these providers will simply increase their prices which will, in turn, enable and motivate domestic competition and/or incentivize these companies to create onshore operations. [1] - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/05/polling-2024-trump-bias/682834/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/05/polling-20...
- forgotoldacc 1y ago
  > But that completely ignores the fact that literally every other nation, including the US most obviously, has excesses of dependencies on other countries, many of which we aren't friendly with today, and even more that we won't be friendly with tomorrow That's called trade. There's a recorded history of it going back about 5000 years (it goes back farther when you look at artifacts spread around the world before written history existed) and every great civilization partook in it and it's the reason they became known as great empires. Societies that went nowhere and quickly collapsed, notably, did not partake in this system.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - somenameforme 1y ago
    When you make comments like this, it makes it sound like you think Germany tying their entire country's economy to Russian gas was a reasonable thing to do, because it's just trade after all. I'm trying to avoid straw manning you because I am certain you don't believe this, but your argument would suggest you do. There is self beneficial trade, and there is trade which risks imperiling your own national stability if and when relations sour. People claim this is obvious in hindsight - and even criticize governments for not acting earlier, yet make arguments akin to yours (which frame it is a practical impossibility) when speaking of acting preemptively to resolve such issues. And if there has been any trend of the 21st century it's to emphasize that the status quo on just about anything won't persist. So one needs to do like we always should in practically any endeavor - hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
    - forgotoldacc 1y ago
      America isn't tied to any single country. Adding tariffs to discourage trade with every country on earth (except Russia, which was exempt from tariffs, while other sanctioned countries like Venezuela were not) isn't anywhere near equivalent to making one's entire energy sources dependent on another country. You're likely arguing against someone else you've built up in your mind and definitely about another topic. It has no relevance and the trap you're trying to set isn't effective here. But to take the irrelevant point you're bringing up, Germany switched a substantial amount of its energy sources thanks to having an extensive trade network built up. They would've been screwed if they were dumb enough to tariff all their allies and isolate themselves. Strong trade relations make a country durable during times of conflict. North Korea is the ideal country in the sense that it's not dependent on outside resources (and blocks most of them) and makes everything at home. They don't have to worry about the risks of trade potentially collapsing. They're free to tariff all their allies. They'll be OK if another country cuts off their gas. And the lesson we can learn from North Korea is to always do the opposite of North Korea, because the country is an absolute failure due to these policies. While its southern neighbor goes all in on trade and specializes in its own unique goods that it exports in exchange for other specialized goods from other countries.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

somenameforme 1y ago

It's not like people are just closing their eyes and trusting in leader. I'm part of that 40% (and probably substantially more given contemporary pollsters difficulty in reaching people like me [1]), and I think my rationale is quite sound. The fundamental reason is that we are creating an unsustainable system. When Germany chose to limit imports of Russian gas, they wrecked their economy. Many people, blinded by hindsight, wondered why they would have created such a dependency to begin with. But that completely ignores the fact that literally every other nation, including the US most obviously, has excesses of dependencies on other countries, many of which we aren't friendly with today, and even more that we won't be friendly with tomorrow. Times change. An 'advanced economy' is a misnomer, if not an outright facade. Supplanting agriculture, real manufacturing, and other core aspects of your economy with e.g. advertising driven high tech discretionary industries creates an inverted dependency. People don't need iPhones or Google. They do need food, the zillion things in your home labeled 'made in China', and gas. If those 'lesser economies' chose to stop selling to the US, they'd destroy the country. Offshoring all of these jobs also distorts the economy driving excesses of wealth inequality. Many of the jobs that used to lay between flipping burgers and writing code are the exact ones that have been hollowed out by offshoring. The fundamental problem we've created is that it's cheaper than make a widget half way around the world and ship it here than it is than it is to make it here. So how do we fix this? Tariffs are a blunt way to change this, but change it they do. The most probable outcome is that these providers will simply increase their prices which will, in turn, enable and motivate domestic competition and/or incentivize these companies to create onshore operations. [1] - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/05/polling-2024-trump-bias/682834/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/05/polling-20...

forgotoldacc 1y ago
> But that completely ignores the fact that literally every other nation, including the US most obviously, has excesses of dependencies on other countries, many of which we aren't friendly with today, and even more that we won't be friendly with tomorrow That's called trade. There's a recorded history of it going back about 5000 years (it goes back farther when you look at artifacts spread around the world before written history existed) and every great civilization partook in it and it's the reason they became known as great empires. Societies that went nowhere and quickly collapsed, notably, did not partake in this system.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- somenameforme 1y ago
  When you make comments like this, it makes it sound like you think Germany tying their entire country's economy to Russian gas was a reasonable thing to do, because it's just trade after all. I'm trying to avoid straw manning you because I am certain you don't believe this, but your argument would suggest you do. There is self beneficial trade, and there is trade which risks imperiling your own national stability if and when relations sour. People claim this is obvious in hindsight - and even criticize governments for not acting earlier, yet make arguments akin to yours (which frame it is a practical impossibility) when speaking of acting preemptively to resolve such issues. And if there has been any trend of the 21st century it's to emphasize that the status quo on just about anything won't persist. So one needs to do like we always should in practically any endeavor - hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
  - forgotoldacc 1y ago
    America isn't tied to any single country. Adding tariffs to discourage trade with every country on earth (except Russia, which was exempt from tariffs, while other sanctioned countries like Venezuela were not) isn't anywhere near equivalent to making one's entire energy sources dependent on another country. You're likely arguing against someone else you've built up in your mind and definitely about another topic. It has no relevance and the trap you're trying to set isn't effective here. But to take the irrelevant point you're bringing up, Germany switched a substantial amount of its energy sources thanks to having an extensive trade network built up. They would've been screwed if they were dumb enough to tariff all their allies and isolate themselves. Strong trade relations make a country durable during times of conflict. North Korea is the ideal country in the sense that it's not dependent on outside resources (and blocks most of them) and makes everything at home. They don't have to worry about the risks of trade potentially collapsing. They're free to tariff all their allies. They'll be OK if another country cuts off their gas. And the lesson we can learn from North Korea is to always do the opposite of North Korea, because the country is an absolute failure due to these policies. While its southern neighbor goes all in on trade and specializes in its own unique goods that it exports in exchange for other specialized goods from other countries.