3 ms·

> The intent is to make that stuff more expensive so we can compete. This would seem to be an admission that the domestic product is inferior, otherwise why w

> The intent is to make that stuff more expensive so we can compete. This would seem to be an admission that the domestic product is inferior, otherwise why would it be necessary to burden the import with tariffs? In any case, if that's the intent, it's not working out for fairly predictable reasons. Lots of imported goods have no domestic equivalent. The factories required to make them require years of investment, which is not forthcoming, because the longevity of these tariffs is highly dubious and the government is doing nothing to encourage business development. And even if there were new factories, they would have to import machines and raw materials, which are of course tariffed, driving up the cost of domestic goods, and defeating the alleged purpose of the tariffs. There's no just explanation that can make the tariffs look useful to anyone. Like everything from this administration, it's about the appearance of action.

newfriend 8mo ago
If one country has labor protection and pollution regulations, and another country has near-slave labor and dumps chemicals into rivers, would you consider the former inferior? Unable to compete?
- hackyhacky 8mo ago
  Most consumers don't care about the conditions under which a product is made. Whining about labor practices is just an excuse for making an inferior product.
- hananova 8mo ago
  It’s fairly funny to a european that it isn’t immediately clear which half of the comparison is intended to apply to the US, and which half is supposed to apply to China.
  - nickff 8mo ago
    If you think that labor in the USA and China are treated similarly, you really need to pull your head out of the sand.
  - irishcoffee 8mo ago
    It's funny as an American that Europeans are either this ignorant or think this kind of comment is clever.
- ndsipa_pomu 8mo ago
  Pollution regulations?
FpUser 8mo ago
>"Like everything from this administration, it's about the appearance of action." Actually people are being murdered for real, lots of other real stuff as well
- hackyhacky 8mo ago
  > Actually people are being murdered for real, lots of other real stuff as well They are. My point is not that the administration isn't having a real impact, but rather that they the administration doesn't care about the real impact, positive or negative. They care only that they get the headline.
wrs 8mo ago
There’s plenty of action. Actions have amply demonstrated that the purpose of the tariffs is to extort other concessions from countries, or simply to punish them for perceived insults against our leader. This is pretty obvious based on how they are set at arbitrary levels, deadlines are set and deferred, amounts are set and changed unrelated to any economic explanation (“I didn’t like the way she talked to us”), etc. They’re just an easy cudgel to use against an entire country at whim, at least until the rest of the government delegitimizes the “emergency” excuse being used to impose them. Essentially the President regards everything as either a zero-sum no-holds-barred negotiation with him as the primary beneficiary, or as some kind of real-estate deal (see his Davos speech about how we’re “leasing” Greenland). Tariffs are just a great general-purpose stick he found a way to wield.
throw0101a 8mo ago
> This would seem to be an admission that the domestic product is inferior, otherwise why would it be necessary to burden the import with tariffs? There are valid reason and particular instances for when tariffs are good/useful: * https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/when-are-tariffs-good https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/when-are-tariffs-good It's just that the those instances are not applicable for what Trump is currently doing.
josefritzishere 8mo ago
Their argument is so fundamentlaly false though. If the idea is to make American businesses more competitive, why tariff raw materials? That raises the cost of American goods. It makes us less competitive. They are either very bad at this, or the purpose of the tax is different than advertised.

newfriend 8mo ago

If one country has labor protection and pollution regulations, and another country has near-slave labor and dumps chemicals into rivers, would you consider the former inferior? Unable to compete?

hackyhacky 8mo ago
Most consumers don't care about the conditions under which a product is made. Whining about labor practices is just an excuse for making an inferior product.
hananova 8mo ago
It’s fairly funny to a european that it isn’t immediately clear which half of the comparison is intended to apply to the US, and which half is supposed to apply to China.
- nickff 8mo ago
  If you think that labor in the USA and China are treated similarly, you really need to pull your head out of the sand.
- irishcoffee 8mo ago
  It's funny as an American that Europeans are either this ignorant or think this kind of comment is clever.
ndsipa_pomu 8mo ago
Pollution regulations?

FpUser 8mo ago

>"Like everything from this administration, it's about the appearance of action." Actually people are being murdered for real, lots of other real stuff as well

hackyhacky 8mo ago
> Actually people are being murdered for real, lots of other real stuff as well They are. My point is not that the administration isn't having a real impact, but rather that they the administration doesn't care about the real impact, positive or negative. They care only that they get the headline.

wrs 8mo ago

There’s plenty of action. Actions have amply demonstrated that the purpose of the tariffs is to extort other concessions from countries, or simply to punish them for perceived insults against our leader. This is pretty obvious based on how they are set at arbitrary levels, deadlines are set and deferred, amounts are set and changed unrelated to any economic explanation (“I didn’t like the way she talked to us”), etc. They’re just an easy cudgel to use against an entire country at whim, at least until the rest of the government delegitimizes the “emergency” excuse being used to impose them. Essentially the President regards everything as either a zero-sum no-holds-barred negotiation with him as the primary beneficiary, or as some kind of real-estate deal (see his Davos speech about how we’re “leasing” Greenland). Tariffs are just a great general-purpose stick he found a way to wield.

throw0101a 8mo ago

> This would seem to be an admission that the domestic product is inferior, otherwise why would it be necessary to burden the import with tariffs? There are valid reason and particular instances for when tariffs are good/useful: * https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/when-are-tariffs-good https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/when-are-tariffs-good It's just that the those instances are not applicable for what Trump is currently doing.

josefritzishere 8mo ago

Their argument is so fundamentlaly false though. If the idea is to make American businesses more competitive, why tariff raw materials? That raises the cost of American goods. It makes us less competitive. They are either very bad at this, or the purpose of the tax is different than advertised.