4 ms·
Doesn't every president do that, just to do different industries?
by bluedino 10mo ago
Doesn't every president do that, just to do different industries?
- theultdev 10mo agoYes they do. Not sure why you're being downvoted.
- aaomidi 10mo agoWe don’t really do tariffs like this before Trump. At least not for a long time.
- acdha 10mo agoAnd never this sweeping: like when Japanese car manufacturers were threatening Detroit, the president negotiated with Congress and the response was targeted, not a random shotgun on other countries and industries.
- irl_zebra 10mo agoTrue. I have not ordered a single product from the Heard Island and McDonald Islands since the tariffs were levied on them. I am champing at the bit for these to be reduced.
- acdha 10mo agoHaha, but every coffee, tea, snd chocolate provider I buy from has announced their prices going up and it’s not like there’s an American industry those taxes are supporting. Hawaii doesn’t have enough land to grow even a fraction of our domestic coffee consumption.
- FuriouslyAdrift 10mo agoReagon and Congress directly negotiated with the Japanese auto manufacturers. They were threatening major tarrifs. This lead to the 1981 automobile voluntary export restraint. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c8719/c8719.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c8719/c8719.pdf
- acdha 10mo agoYes: that’s kind of a textbook example of using tariffs strategically — there’s a valid argument that automobiles are a strategic industry worth protecting (just for military capacity alone) but they didn’t threaten to heavily tax coffee and chocolate from other continents at the same time or under the pretense that it would make those crops viable in the United States at scale.
- pjc50 10mo agoNo - not to anything like the same extent, and not through executive orders.
- theultdev 10mo agoFrom someone who is close to the energy sector that's simply not true. There's been so many EOs from Democrat presidents that cause hugely negative disruptions in the industry.
- CursedSilicon 10mo agoWeird that you felt the need to specify Democrats Is this something Republicans have simply never done until now?
- theultdev 10mo agoI was giving a specific example for one industry. Noting the political party was just a detail. But yeah plenty of examples of R presidents for other sectors in the past I'm sure too.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- pbhjpbhj 10mo agoCan you give a few examples, please. Also, I'm curious, what you feel you're getting out of your support of the Trump regime?
- theultdev 10mo agoThe first that comes to mind was the Keystone XL Pipeline. Biden cancelled it with EO 13990 when it was pretty much done. Would have been thousands of jobs, Canada wanted it too, it's safer than trucking/transporting by train. All just cancelled on a whim. Then there's EO 14008 that put a moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands and offshore waters. (fed land is 25% of oil production) Regardless of your position on oil (I'm sure you have one), the point is those are two examples of disruption of an industry by EO from a previous president.
- Eric_WVGG 10mo agoIt's the rate of change. Things like NAFTA took many years to implement, and were debated and developed in the open. Everyone understood what would happen to the economy and that there would be a decade of transition. Nobody announces the largest tariffs since the 1930s overnight, and selectively increases or dismantles them from week to week. Just look at this line graph: https://www.usfunds.com/resource/americas-tariff-rate-hits-the-highest-level-since-1909-and-thats-before-retaliation/ https://www.usfunds.com/resource/americas-tariff-rate-hits-t... A huge part of our power was that we were safe and predictable and that's gone forever.
- hdgvhicv 10mo agoIt could come back. Trump being removed, Vance returning to normal, then normal for the next decade and it would just be a crazy blip. But it’s not just Trump. This is what America wants.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- Eric_WVGG 10mo agoThat's what I thought after the first Trump administration. But the fact that we re-elected him proves that it wasn’t a one-off, we will always be four years away from the possibility of a wild regime change.
- hdgvhicv 10mo agoThat’s why it would jar to be Vance and this reigime, Kay without Trump. 10 more years of both red and blue and enough change to undo and prevent this in the future could get it out. Germany was reformed, Japan was reforms. These things take time But the problem is the American people want this. This isn’t some dictator in Korea or Iraq or Venezuela, this is someone with full democratic support. There are many checks and balances in the American system to avoid a single person doing this amount of damage without having widespread support.
- 10mo ago
- acdha 10mo agoNo, not even close. The basis for most of these actions requires novel legal re-interpretations to claim power from Congress for the executive, ignore time or scope limits, and remove expert judgement from what are often supposed to be consensus decisions. The courts cases over tariffs are highlighting the unprecedented claims for both the nature of the purported emergency and the scope of the response, but this shows up in many other areas such as inventing a “power emergency” to force coal plants to stay open over the wishes of the owners, communities, and state governments. We’ve never had anything like this level of direct economic interference in the modern economy - even things like WWII policies were at least targeted and based on a real threat.
- hshdhdhj4444 10mo agoNot really. Even setting aside whether the changes are good or not themselves, no President before has thrown away laws mandated by Congress the way the current President is. Further, this wasn’t even considered a possibility and is only happening now due to a confluence of events… - the Supreme Court passing rulings that essentially make the President unaccountable - the SC passing rulings preventing Congress from delegating powers which in practice means a lot of laws Congress had passed in the past have essentially disappeared (since the agencies tasked with making decisions related to them are no longer allowed to) - Congress becoming completely supine and giving away as much power as they can - a President that has accepted and is operating on what was until now a fringe legal theory of unbridled executive power ie “unitary executive” theory.
- walls 10mo ago[flagged]
- tomhow 10mo agoWTF? This is not an acceptable comment on HN, no matter who or what you're replying to. We've had to ask you before to follow the guidelines. We have to ban accounts that comment like this repeatedly. Please remind yourself of the guidelines and make an effort to observe them if you want to keep participating here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- mbgerring 10mo agoNo, every President does not declare tariffs by fiat using specious emergency powers that change day to day depending on who kissed their ass most recently.