1517
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

So bring on the downvotes, but can anyone tell me what the alternative plan was to bring manufacturing back to the states? And wasn’t that always going to make things more expensive?

Granted, this is being done with complete reckless regard, and the effects could’ve been spread out, but what’s the alternative?

[-] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 3 points 25 minutes ago

can anyone tell me what the alternative plan was to bring manufacturing back to the states?

what’s the alternative?

A better plan would have involved local subsidies and tax rebates for various industries that have the ability to be cheaper than existing outsourced infrastructure if they were to be developed with a large enough economy of scale, to incentivize them to engage in local production.

And for industries in which we wouldn't experience lower prices even with larger local economies of scale, such as those involved in mining mineral deposits we simply don't have enough of here in the states, we just... wouldn't do anything to tariff anybody or provide incentives if it wouldn't be something we were capable of benefiting from via local production?

And wasn’t that always going to make things more expensive?

These other methods would make things more expensive too, (albeit much less so) but they would directly incentivize local production, and crucially, only cost money when production was actually made locally. Nobody would get a tax rebate or subsidy if nobody was actually starting local production. With tariffs, however, everyone begins paying a higher cost, regardless of if local manufacturing is even happening, let alone if it's cost effective or possible in the first place.

Tariffs are just an inefficient way of incentivizing local production compared to other options, because they primarily exist to punish other countries and their economies, rather than uplift our own. They can be used to incentivize local production, but if not properly linked with subsidies, rebates, and job programs, they aren't terribly effective at doing that, and they will almost always lead to higher prices on an ongoing basis.

[-] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 1 points 33 seconds ago

You’re singing my song. Everything you’re saying is spot on.

I think the eventual solve will be small batch manufacturing capability, progressively complex according to population density. But those will need to be nationalized for planning & control, and it’s simply not possible under capitalism.

But the current power structure is built on “market solutions” by using collective punishment to force capitalists to make concessions without directly regulating them. It’s the whole reason the manipulate interest rates.

[-] LordGimp@lemm.ee 6 points 54 minutes ago

Where did you get the idea that tariffs are supposed to increase domestic production in any way?

[-] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 2 points 12 minutes ago

That’s the openly stated goal of tariffs from both parties.

[-] JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world 1 points 36 minutes ago

I can tell you! It's just not a quick, easy, single bill that we can pass. It takes a fundamental change in the way Americans think, it's gonna take at least 2 generations to make this move.

Here's the plan: we're gonna promote cooperation. We're gonna get people to notice the systematic problems in the way they are treated by their authorities. We need to aggressively be better than our enemies, both in practice and knowledge.

Here's the method: (Essay ahead).

We need to disrupt almost every single system that currently exists. They're basically all fucked. Start with the ones that get the most people motivated - their basic needs first, entertainment second, their wellbeing third. That feels wrong and it is, we need 2 generations to fix this because we've been beat down by this system so bad the priorities aren't even correct anymore. I've been using this tagline recently "People in homes, food in bellies, minds entertained and health maintained."

You as an individual can and, if you want to have an impact of saving literally the world and not just America, probably should start doing your part for this plan. Give away what you can, but never what you need. And be careful, because you might need that later. Never let that get in the way, though, of giving what you can. Bring your neighbors grocery money when you have a bit of extra cash, and offer to start a food co-op to make sure they never go hungry. It sucks, because I know damn well I wanna go spend that extra 20 bucks to treat myself and you probably do too. But if you go give it away instead, it'll come back to you. Not immediately, and not always symmetrically. But it will come back to benefit you in some way. We need to shift the focus towards the community instead of the individual. I have plans for the other steps, if you'd like I can go into them. But the food co-ops are the best first step IMO

[-] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 1 points 8 minutes ago

Why would it take generations to fix an issue that only started a few decades ago? What a load of shit.

[-] JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world 1 points 6 minutes ago* (last edited 5 minutes ago)

A few generations to fix

An issue that only started a ~~a few decades~~ 2 generations ago

Because generations are only 25 years, not the 100 that your generation will survive. These issues started, or at least became severely worse, about 3 generations ago with Reagan.

[-] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 7 hours ago

Simple answers to complex questions is fast, and helps people quickly move into the phase where they're expending energy on "solutions" rather than debating the issue.

We're lazy. People are lazy - I know I am.

Something that's sufficiently removed from our everyday experience is mysterious, and (someone we trust) tells us that it will work? No questions, here we go!

[-] Noizth 13 points 9 hours ago

This was explained to people all over the internet. I remember people posting the dailyshow shirt guy interview where they explain to him how tariffs will impact his business. Some people didn't care as long as it also hurt everybody they don't like.

So ask yourself we someone who voted for Trump whines about tariffs. Is this person just dumb or a total piece of shit?.

[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

So ask yourself we someone who voted for Trump whines about tariffs. Is this person just dumb or a total piece of shit?.

I say both. They are stupid racist homophobic assholes and deserve any pain they get for their choices. And though we should do everything we can to help those who will be hurt by Trump's policies, I sincerely hope that every single person who voted for that POS experiences an absolute fuck ton of pain and suffering in the coming months and years.

[-] nickiwest@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

The most unfortunate thing is that the pain and suffering will not only be limited to the people who supported Trump and his policies. Everyone is going to pay for their poor choices.

[-] melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

yeah, the point of being nice is to create a better world with better people who will be more capable of being nice.

and because it feels good.

but being nice to nazis doesn't feel nice, and it makes the world a more dangerous place, where being nice is harder and riskier and less pleasant.

laughing at their suffering is pretty great though. pointing and laughing at their suffering maybe makes the world a slightly better place, long term.

[-] pachrist@lemmy.world 18 points 11 hours ago

I might be wrong here, but tariffs can be very effective tools, but as a slow burn. The way they're being wielded here is asinine.

If you want to affect behavior, tariffs are a long game. They're passed by Congress so they aren't tied to the whims of one man. If you don't want US chicken or EU trucks, make a law and let decades of implementation change behavior.

If you just want them to hurt, you do them the way we are now. The unpredictability hurts businesses and individuals, inside and outside the US. It makes prices and markets volatile and sows distrust. It hurts the vast majority of people, but benefits people who have the stability and assets to buy low and sell high. Each tariff implementation and retraction is just a mini market manipulation giving people with advance knowledge of what is affected to profit.

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 hours ago

They're a tool for correcting price alterations on the seller side. If China is subsidizing the manufacturing of Fidgets, a matching tarrif on the import of Fidgets protects domestic manufacturing from artificially cheap competition by preventing consumers from seeing those low prices.

The subsidies don't even need to be hostile. The US subsidizes food to lower domestic costs, ensure a stockpile, and keep farmers happy. The side effect of driving down world grain prices is incidental.

[-] papertowels@mander.xyz 4 points 9 hours ago

Additionally, they strike me as the stick that pairs best with a carrot to spur domestic production of whatever you've put tarrifs on, along the lines of the CHIPS act.

[-] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago

This administration doesn't believe in carrots, only sticks.

[-] IMALlama@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

The sticks loose a lot of their scaryness when they're not consistently wielded. See the on again off again tarrifs on Canada/Mexico and their constantly changing scope. The lack of consistency and predictability makes it very hard for businesses to make decisions.

[-] raynethackery@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago

I distinctly remember learning about tariffs in Social Studies. That was back in elementary / middle school. I understood it then and so did my classmates.

[-] Sceptique@leminal.space 5 points 13 hours ago

By the way, if tariffs are directly sent back to the customer through tax reduction on the tariffed category of products, wouldn't it be painless for the company/customers (if you forget the retaliation tariffs) while increasing you local insensitive to production? (all things equal if you imagine companies reduce the cost of the products properly etc which is not realistic)

[-] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 5 points 9 hours ago

I don't see how that would help. In the ideal case of a finished product, tariffs artificially raise the effective price for the buyer; they don't change the math on the cost of production. Usually, they hurt the producing/exporting firm by forcing it to increase the asking price, which reduces sales. It reduces sales because the buying/importing firm has to pay higher prices. If the buying/importing firm gets tax reductions that are directly tied to the tariff, then its out-of-pocket expense hasn't changed, and it can just keep buying the imported product with no effect on its profits. That means that the producing/exporting firm can still sell exactly the same volume of product at the higher price, covering the tariff cost, with no effect on its profits. Nothing much has changed, except a bunch of extra paperwork and transactions.

There's only incentive to move production locally if the buying/importing firm can switch to a cheaper, local product, but retain the tax benefits, allowing it to keep more money. But that means the tariff money is no longer being collected, so somebody else is paying the taxes while not getting the benefits. In short, tariffs can only work by causing pain to somebody locally.

[-] vinniep@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago

That's 2 if's. Sure, IF both of those things were true, maybe it would net out, but still be a paperwork and cashflow delay for the company (pay the duty today, get the money back at some point in the future) which sucks liquidity out of the market and generally holds back growth and investment.

But that isn't particularly relevant since neither of those two things will ever happen. The tax cuts will go to the top earners, and retaliatory tariffs are very much a thing and cannot be ignored.

[-] Sceptique@leminal.space 3 points 12 hours ago

Ah yeah I see I forgot this part, more bureaucracy and delay might hurt cash flow. Thanks that's a good thinking.

It's just a though experiment, in real life it's not a nice math problem to solve like you said.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 35 points 20 hours ago

Personally if I had to cut someone's hours, all else being equal, the one who took 50 attempts to figure out tariffs would go before the one who took 2.

[-] fritobugger2017@lemmy.world 32 points 22 hours ago

Trump & Co do love the uneducated.

[-] Retropunk64@lemm.ee 57 points 1 day ago

Dumbasses go from not believing everything a politician tells them to believing everything a politician tells them because he's dRaInInG the SwAmP. Zero sympathy for anyone still buying their lies.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago

It's not an issue of believing/not-believing politicians nearly so much as it is a media environment that's fully saturated with right-wing propaganda.

What do you tell a person who has been listening to AM Radio for 30 years? What do you tell a person that was taught Ayn-Rand-o-nomics in High School while the teacher clutched a copy of Atlas Shrugged alongside her Bible? What do you tell a person who has never actually been involved in the higher levels of business management, because our economic model is so subdivided and the commodities so fetishized?

You can't get mad at the loyal acolyte of a cargo cult for praying to the cargo gods if that's all they've ever known. Neither can you simply ignore the Cult Leader, who has been blaring the message from a megaphone into everyone's ears, for their entire adult lives.

I have immense sympathy for people who are pre-programmed to get hoodwinked by this shit and I count my lucky stars every day that I only get hoodwinked some of the time and mostly on things that don't obliterate my quality of life when they come due.

But more than them, I feel awful for the people who come after us, because we at least got to enjoy that World's Greatest Middle Class Life while it was on offer. The next generation is going to be fed all the same propaganda, but they're going to be doing it from in the pod while eating the bugs.

[-] Retropunk64@lemm.ee 1 points 6 hours ago

I think comparing this to a cargo cult is a bit misguided. These people live in a world with unlimited information right at their fingertips. I get finding factual information is incredibly difficult these days, but that's just all the more reason to not blindly accept the bias of one source. The propoganda machines are to blame for a lot of our problems, but that doesn't let the assholes gobbling it up off the accountability hook.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

These people live in a world with unlimited information right at their fingertips.

Unlimited inputs, certainly. But the signal-to-noise ratio is absolutely fucked. It is easy enough to be fully insulated from useful information, and easier still to be insulated from actionable information. That's before you get into how all the old-guard liberal(ish) news sources - your 60 Minutes and NPR and local papers of record - have been gobbled up by right-wing advertisers or shut down by corporate cartels.

The propoganda machines are to blame for a lot of our problems, but that doesn’t let the assholes gobbling it up off the accountability hook.

Sure. At some point, you're the guy in the DHS detention camp sodomizing an eight year old with a night stick because your ex-IDF police trainer told you it builds character. Or you're a billionaire in your ivory tower, shoving ketamin up your nose and screaming "The Wokes want to destroy me!" at your third wife. You've given up even the pretext of your own humanity and we should treat you like the monster you've become.

But for the millions of middle Americans in states with failing infrastructure and polluted air and water and far-right mass media blaring into every eye and earhole, the demand that they line up to vote for Charlie Crist over Ron DeSantis or Jim Justice over Bill Cole or Eric Adams over New York Republican Placeholder Candidate becomes a fucking farce. The dogged insistence among Chuck Schumer liberals that we need more Liz Cheneys and Michael Bloombergs in the Democratic Party to save us from the Ken Paxtons and Pam Bondis of the Republican Party is fucking mental. And if people don't go along with it, I can hardly blame them.

[-] varyingExpertise@feddit.org 14 points 1 day ago

You can't get mad at the loyal acolyte of a cargo cult

Yeah, I can. It's probably not productive or helpful or change inducing, but boy, can I. And some days I don't have energy to waste on regulating my feelings towards intentful idiots and then I do get mad. It doesn't change shit but at least I don't have to bottle all that up.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago

It’s probably not productive or helpful or change inducing, but boy, can I.

Alright, fair enough. But you cannot see the symptoms of the problem as the root of it.

It doesn’t change shit but at least I don’t have to bottle all that up.

No, no. Sorry. I definitely get that. But at some point you need to look past the guy in clown makeup dancing around your neighborhood to the clown college that's churning these people out.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] General_Effort@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago

This may be "unpopular opinion" stuff, but I frequently see highly upvoted populist pitches on Lemmy that are just the same; a supposed way of sticking it to the man that will quite obviously be borne by the little guy.

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 77 points 1 day ago

Delete Elon and Trump from existence and nothing will get better.

Why?

Because Americans are dumb as fuck and they'll still be dumb as fuck when and if those two are gone.

I'm old enough to have seen the same pattern multiple times. Republican leadership fails spectacularly, even pissing off many conservatives in the process. But as soon as the next cycle begins, those conservatives are back onboard voting for the absolute shittiest candidates.

Because to them an actual, literal dictator is better than a Democrat as president.

Our society is circling the toilet and it almost certainly won't get better within our lifetimes. Prepare yourselves for that.

[-] phx@lemmy.ca 31 points 1 day ago

I actually don't consider this an issue of being dumb. It IS an issue with being under-educated (often deliberately in R states) and fed a ton of propaganda

[-] ploot 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There's ignorance and there's stupidity. Stupidity will stubbornly resist any attempt to correct its ignorance.

Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease.

Against stupidity we are defenseless.

Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed — in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical — and when facts are irrefutable, they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.

For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.

...

If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] aceshigh@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It took Rome 1000 years to collapse. I expect instability in the us for the rest of my lifetime. I’m struggling to balance that reality and also living my life.

Also- I think COVID is to blame too. More people started living from the survival mindset and actually getting sick impacted their brain. Dictatorships help people feel safe.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rekabis@programming.dev 23 points 1 day ago

Why else do Republicans love to defund education? Conservatism requires people to be ignorant about reality in order to have any chance at succeeding.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 89 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

didn't understand why he was told the other countries pay the tariffs

that's easy: you were willing to vote for a guy who lied over 30 thousand times in his first term so he realized you're a fucking idiot and he could say anything without you thinking even half a second about it.

WHAT'S THE POINT OF EXPORTING SHIT YOU IDIOT WHY WOULD A COUNTRY DO IT IF THEY HAD TO PAY FOR IT

load more comments (4 replies)

Even if it were a tax paid by foreign companies, what difference does it make? They would just increase the prices the goods are sold at.

So, lets say, a smartphone that is priced at $1000:

With the 20% tariff in place:

If the Chinese conpanies pay the $200 per device, they just sell each phone at $1200 to the US importer.

If the US importers pay the $200 per device, similarily, they would tack on the $200 (on top of the usual markups), making it $1200 per phone.

There is zero difference, the end consumer always foots the bill.

This is so simple to understand, how are people this stupid

[-] Sceptique@leminal.space 1 points 13 hours ago

Wouldn't refunding the amount of the tariff to the customer fix this? Ignoring the very important diplomatic and retaliation tariffs which makes the whole post unusable for real life

  • Canada sells a product A $100.
  • Tariffs makes it $120 when you buy it
  • so Canada gets $100, USA gets $20, USA customer pays $120.
  • USA has now $20, they can directly refund the customer for $20 via a policy to reduce the price of the category of A.
  • So customer gets $20 reduction of the product A via tax something, so USA now has $0 and USA customer actually paid only $100.
  • Except now if USA company make the product A they can sell it for like $100 and customer pays $80.
  • There is a slight increase of imported goods price here because tariffs cannot actually refund $20, it will be a % of the local vs imported production.
  • Over time you can expect to get a local advantage because of this price inequality, so local companies will be subsidized by imports until imports are no longer significant.

Where am I wrong here ?

[-] Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 12 hours ago

In your scenario how is the local made $100 item bought at $80? Where is a $20 refund paid from? You are double spending it on both imported and local goods

[-] Sceptique@leminal.space 1 points 8 hours ago

In the scenario local good is still worth $100 but given that you refund all good by the amount added by the tariff later, you have $20 refunded (not really $20 as i tried to show previously, but $20 x total_tariff / total_amount_of_good_bought_locally_and_imported, so somewhere between $80 and $100 net for local production and between $100 and $120 for imported good, depending on the ratio import/import+localprod

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
1517 points (100.0% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

5665 readers
1713 users here now

Rules:

Also feel free to check out !leopardsatemyface@lemm.ee (also active).

Icon credit C. BrĂĽck on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS