China Raises Tariffs on US Goods To 84% as Rift Escalates (bloomberg.com) 563
China retaliated against the US after new tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump, announcing it would raise the tariff on US goods to 84%, escalating the trade conflict between the world's two largest economies. From a report: The Chinese countermeasures are effective April 10, according to a government statement Wednesday. China's move came after Trump's latest tariffs went into force at midday Wednesday in Beijing, taking the cumulative rate announced this year to 104%. A day earlier, China vowed to "fight to the end" if the US insists on new tariffs. Where US-China Decoupling Is Hardest: After decades of trade integration, Chinese companies have become increasingly essential suppliers of goods and materials that range from niche to ones many Americans can barely do without.
At $41 billion last year, smartphones -- largely consisting of Apple's iPhones -- were the single largest US import from China. More than 70% of all smartphone imports are from China, according to Bloomberg analysis of 2024 trade data from the US International Trade Commission.
Farther afield, China supplies the entirety of hair from badgers and other animals imported into the US for brush-making. It also delivers almost 90% of the gaming consoles US consumers buy from overseas.
Over 99% of the electric toasters, heated blankets, calcium, and alarm clocks the US imports are from China. Ditto for more than 90% of folding umbrellas, vacuum flasks, artificial flowers, LED lamps, and wooden coat-hangers.
At $41 billion last year, smartphones -- largely consisting of Apple's iPhones -- were the single largest US import from China. More than 70% of all smartphone imports are from China, according to Bloomberg analysis of 2024 trade data from the US International Trade Commission.
Farther afield, China supplies the entirety of hair from badgers and other animals imported into the US for brush-making. It also delivers almost 90% of the gaming consoles US consumers buy from overseas.
Over 99% of the electric toasters, heated blankets, calcium, and alarm clocks the US imports are from China. Ditto for more than 90% of folding umbrellas, vacuum flasks, artificial flowers, LED lamps, and wooden coat-hangers.
Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
just because you're a dumb orange fuck who thinks nobody appreciates your stable genius - priceless!
Re:Destroying your country (Score:5, Informative)
This will hit American consumers really hard. A lot of the cheap stuff they rely on to survive will become unaffordable, and a lot of the high end goods they want will too.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
Ramping up production in the U.S. would have baked in price rises as the U.S. does not have the low costs that other countries have. Then there the after-effects of Americans having less money to spend so U.S. producers will not be able to produce enough to cover the shortfall, and thus increasing their costs a bit more since they won't have the same lot size to ship.
Just to point out how silly the alleged Administration is, from https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Bessent "cheered that fired federal civil servants are now available to work in U.S. factories."
And one of his "points" that gave him comfort over the tariffs was that U.S. stock exchanges failed to crash their computers even though it made just about everyone's 401K's shrink.
Oh, and just what will the scientists from NiH be producing, smartphones for peanut wages? Or, will they be lured to work outside the U.S. as other countries are already making a play for U.S. scientists. And there will be more scientists on the market now that la Presidenta and Elmo are cutting research funding. Now we can look forward to the U.S. not being as competitive in the future as well as being sicker due to medical research being cut.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, and just what will the scientists from NiH be producing, smartphones for peanut wages? Or, will they be lured to work outside the U.S. as other countries are already making a play for U.S. scientists. And there will be more scientists on the market now that la Presidenta and Elmo are cutting research funding. Now we can look forward to the U.S. not being as competitive in the future as well as being sicker due to medical research being cut. If you are a rocket scientist in the USA, I can assure you that the climate in Munich is absolutely lovely. And they have real beer, real cheese and real sausages. Only the best need apply.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Insightful)
"Trump wants to make the US full of workers indentured to companies and companies indentured to him."
Trump wants to own the country like Putin owns his. He doesn't care about indentured servitude himself, but the oligarchs that funnel him money want that. The out come is the same but Trump's mind is not that complex.
"All his focus on heightening the border security with Mexico and Canada is out of fear that Americans will be trying to escape."
That's not true. Trump doesn't focus on heightening border security at all, it's performative. Trump focuses on outrage, he doesn't give a shit about security. If fact, Trump willingly destroys the security of the country. Trump doesn't care at all about the Canadian border, Canadians are not brown.
And isn't this your party?
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I believe the claim was that it was coming from China but through Canada to get to the US. If it was actually true there might be something to the US *asking* Canada to tighten boarder security up some in the interest of keeping our shared boarder fairly open as it is now. There's no data that supports significant amounts of fentanyl coming into the US from Canada though so he's full of shit.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
If it was actually true there might be something to the US *asking* Canada to tighten boarder security up some in the interest of keeping our shared boarder fairly open as it is now.
Here in Canada we have a huge problem with illegal smuggled American guns flowing into our country.
At no point do Canadian officials think it is America's job to prevent that. It is Canada's job to defend our border.
Yet bizarrely somehow Americans think Canadians should prevent things flowing into the USA?
When I drive up to the US border the first and only checkpoint I go through is an AMERICAN checkpoint. If I were to illegally cross the border the people who would interdict me would be American border enforcement.
(Not that I'm gonna travel to the USA at all any more, but the point stands.)
Re: (Score:3)
And it wouldnt be at all inappropriate for Canada to merely ask the US to do more about that. That type of thing between allies is completely normal. Trump's actions towards Canada though are absolutely not normal. One does not treat friends like this and you folks are right to be angry.
Re: (Score:3)
There's no data that supports significant amounts of fentanyl coming into the US from Canada though so he's full of shit.
It is actually even less of a problem than the official US government figures suggest. These say that 43kg of fentanyl was seized at the Canadian border but about half of this was seized in Seattle and actually came from Mexico. However, since it was the northern US guards who seized it since they are a lot closer to Seattle it got counted as coming from Canada. So the actual amount is about half of what even the US government itself claims.
Sadly though facts don't seem to matter to the US government an
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Insightful)
Trump did a lot of complaining
Like they said, performative.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
How does taxing Americans when they import something improve border security? Who is being punished? What are they being punished for?
Re: (Score:3)
I don't agree with you about EVs, but I do agree with you about this... the classic despot playbook, get everyone in hock to the king, including every company, so that they have to curry favour to survive
Re: (Score:3)
Or out of hope that his political adversaries leave the country on vacation or something so he can subsequently deny them re-entry or at least obtain all the information on their phones. [slashdot.org] Due Process is no longer in place at the U.S. border, if it ever was.
I'm not sure that's what his string pullers (Score:3)
I'm sure you've seen the comments here. People who say that if nobody has a job who is going to buy their products?
Well who bought the King's products? King didn't have products he was just the king. That's what they want.
They want to use automation and AI to break the dependency on
You're a moron (Score:3)
Hint: you can't.
why there are so many parking places at a so-called automated factory.
You're a moron.
Explain how you can pay a middle class salary to someone working a sewing machine in a shirt factory and then we can talk.
Even Trump's treasury secretary (Score:5, Insightful)
So best case scenario you get a few more auto workers and the rest of your manufacturing is either devastated by the loss of access to markets and the collapsing American economy resulting in a net job loss.
This is not hypothetical. This is exactly what happened during Trump's first term when he put tariffs on aluminum and steel. We lost a ton of manufacturing jobs because of the increased cost, and we didn't get any new jobs back.
But I don't think reality is something that Trump supporters are capable of dealing with and they're going to drive us all off a cliff. And because the Republican party gets to pick their voters by stopping the Democrat party voters from casting ballots we are in for a long long ride off that cliff.
Re: (Score:3)
Wait, you want us to explain why there are huge parking lots at a facility that produces: ** cars ** ?!
Looking at satellite view, the entire parking lot complex on the West side is a dealership. Just north of that is a massive parking lot used for shipping containers. To the north of that is another lot that is 50% shipping containers and 50% finished vehicles. Several of the lots along the train tracks, are also clearly holding finished vehicles.
Now that said, yes, there are still several other lots to hol
Forget Theory, Actual Evidence (Score:3)
ROTFL. Wages will go up as demand for American labor goes up. People always seem to forget that part.
Fine, that's your theory. However, we do not have to rely on just theory because the US did this before in response to the great depression when your government last tried tariffs [wikipedia.org]. It did not work like that in the long term.
While initially there was a short term boost in US payroll and productivity (in line with your theory), the long term effects were that unemployment jumped from 8% when the act was passed to 25% three years later. US imports fell by over 60% but so too did its exports and three years
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
It will take at least a decade to ramp up manufacturing in the US, and that's if they go all-in with an Apollo Programme style effort.
To build something like a laptop there would need to be LCD factories, numerous high end silicon fabs, and a huge expansion of passive component and machining capacity. And even then the price will be 2x what it costs to make in the Far East.
It's extremely dumb and only accounts for goods, not services. It's been rumoured that China is considering banning Hollywood movies, which would take a massive chunk out of their income, for example. Microsoft and Apple could be kicked out too. Much of what he thinks is a trade deficit is only because he's not including services in it, e.g. with the EU.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Insightful)
Ha, I'm a pretty patriotic American but a nice healthcare system would be nice (I live in California) and Canada isn't a bad country at all. Twenty-five years ago I almost ended up living there due to work and I never thought that would have been too bad of a thing.
I don't think we actually want the US breaking up though, the last time that almost happened it caused an utter blood bath of a civil war. Succession is not allowed for in the constitution so we'd need a constitutional amendment which requires 2/3rds of both houses of congress as well as 2/3rds of all states to sign on to our leaving the union. As much as conservatives bitch about us Californians they'd never want to lose all our money and tech companies so that's pretty unlikely.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Informative)
The USA has a great health-care system.
The USA doesn't have a healthcare system. It has a medical services industry. An industry that delivers sub-par care in nice surroundings.
My wife and I live in the USA and, checking with doctors in the UK, it's quite clear that the healthcare in the USA is generally not particularly good. Instead, the healthcare is designed to maximize billing.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Interesting)
The rest of the first world spends about half of what we do per capita on healthcare while maintaining healthcare systems very comparable in quality to our own. I'm sure if we maintained our current spending while switching over to a more efficient socialized system we could maintain standards.
This would be assuming that our conservatives didnt massively under fund this hypothetical socialist system for us as the Tory's did for a decade in the UK of course.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Insightful)
Having for-profit insurance between you and your health care will always introduce inefficiency into the system. Profit in a health system is inefficiency of that health system.
This is one of the reasons why Medicare is one of the most efficient health systems on the planet - less than 1% of overall Medicare spend goes to administrative costs. Can any private health insurance provider say than 99% of their costs are actually payouts to health providers?
Can any private health insurance providers even say that 90% of their costs are payouts?
When there is a motivation for profit, paying out is disincentivized. What is incentivized instead is to sit in the middle collecting premiums, and then hanging on to as much of that premium as you can. And this is why our health system is FUCKED.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Insightful)
The ultimate irony in justifying everything through creative interpretation of laws while ignoring inconvenient laws and the courts that interpret them. Having one's cake and eating it too.
Re: (Score:3)
I saw a think on Linkedin, and no, I didn't check the facts or source, but it claimed an iPhone could cost between $30,000 and $100,000 if made entirely in the USA.
If true, you're going to need more tariffs. A lot more.
The guys over at framework laptops (Score:5, Interesting)
While back Apple tried to make the newest MacBooks here in the States because they didn't want the lead time from China. Motorola tried that too with high-end cell phones. The idea was that you could put out a new model much faster.
For Motorola they just gave up because the cost wasn't worth it. And it wasn't even close Trump's 104% tariff wouldn't make it worth it.
But for Apple their problem was screws. They could not get screws. The American suppliers just could not keep up with demand they weren't set up for it and they weren't going to because Apple was a single supplier and it wasn't worth the risk of building out all that infrastructure.
They could potentially get the government to do it but the right wing and the Republican party is not going to spend trillions on infrastructure. They fart Joe Biden tooth and nail on his infrastructure bill and Trump is currently trying to dismantle that.
So no new jobs, a completely destroyed economy, and even if the factories come back it'll be a complete cluster fuck and take 20 years.
You have to start asking why the hell Trump would do this and the only answer is a national sales tax. And then you have to ask why he'd want that and the only answer is because it shifts his tax burden onto you and me
Re: (Score:3)
But for Apple their problem was screws. They could not get screws.
I can believe that. A couple of years ago I did a DIY battery replacement on a 2018 Macbook Pro. The number of teeny-tiny screws to remove and replace was astounding. Plus the number of different but almost the same lengths was surprising. These two are 1.2mm long; these four are 1.1mm long. Gah. I'd rather swallow the cost of a new computer than go through that ordeal again, even if removing the old battery didn't involve bathing the chassis in acetone.
But getting back to the tariffs: they can be either ne
Re: (Score:3)
Taiwanese media is reporting that HP, Dell, Lenovo, and others are suspending shipments to the US for two weeks to see what happens.
https://www.ctee.com.tw/news/2... [ctee.com.tw]
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Insightful)
If you were CEO of a large company, would you risk spending hundreds of millions of dollars, to bring manufacturing to the USA; manufacturing that will cost more than overseas, with the possibility that Trump might just wipe out the tariffs overnight and turn your huge bed into a complete loss?
Risk that this is only temporary is something that no one is talking about. No CEO is going to take on that risk.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly, there is no reason to hold off or negotiate with the US now, because the EU needs to bring in reciprocal tariffs anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Not really. The EU can just keep its low tariffs in place and enjoy the fireworks as the US self-destructs.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Interesting)
Everyone knows this is a bad thing... except for Trump.
There are A LOT of people out there, well past working age, who watch FOX News. They're being told that this will be a character building exercise for the rest of us.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The pricing hasnt trickled down to the consumer level yet. Once that happens and people start actually feeling the financial pinch we'll see his support flake off pretty quickly. He'll still keep about a third of voters (because cult) but the Republicans will never hold onto congress.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah... it's a possibility. We'd need a 2/3rds majority in the Senate to do that though (The House only needs a majority) and only a third of our senators come up in any election so reaching 2/3rds control of the Senate probably wont happen for the Democrats. We'd need Republican votes in the Senate and the cult of Trump is awfully strong with these people. If things got bad enough it might happen though.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:4, Insightful)
And...exactly what "crimes" do you think he'll be impeached and convicted for....?
I'm seriously curious....
Just off the top of my head, decimating 'soft-power' agencies such as USAID [wired.com] which are created by Congress and can only be eliminated by Congress, and letting Elon Musk run amok which has gotta be the height of corruption to the 10th power, not to mention crippling what's left so functioning at one's job [wired.com], serving the American taxpayers onsite(!) is even more of a heroic endeavor than ever before, stealing buildings worth a half billion dollars [wired.com] while firing all the staff, and firing all those Inspectors General without cause or proper adherence to the legal process [npr.org], (which is exactly what a criminal in a hurry would do, as we've seen play out).
That's just off the top of my head, after my shift at work.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Informative)
https://democrats-appropriatio... [house.gov]
Impoundment of congressionally-appropriated funds at numerous federal agencies, in violation of federal law
Firing of dozens of experienced federal prosecutors
Firing of thousands of other federal professionals in violation of the law, and the initiation of government-wide plans for further firings
Firing of 17 Inspectors General, independent watchdogs that investigate waste, fraud, abuse, and potential criminal activity in our government
Letting Elon Musk and DOGE access the sensitive data on tens of millions of Americans
Signing of a series of illegal and unconstitutional executive orders
Removal of experienced career FBI officials and threats to fire FBI Special Agents and analysts
Removal or transfer of other experienced career officials at the Department of Justice
Initiation of plans to transfer up to 1,500 FBI headquarters professionals out of the Washington, DC area
Initiation of plans to gut the Public Integrity Section of the Justice Department, which helps investigate and prosecute corrupt public officials
Initiation of plans to gut other Justice Department units that combat money laundering, prosecute foreign corruption cases, and more
Initiation of plans to restore gun possession rights to convicted felons and persons with domestic violence convictions
Closure of the U.S. Agency for international Development, in violation of Federal law
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course it will have to punch through layers of denial.
That's a hope. Personally I know of a big Trump supporter who is angry at the tariffs because it will destroy his business. He did not like it when I asked him:
"What did you think would happen when he promised blanket tariffs, and he is enacting blanket tariffs?"
"Well, I didn't think it would affect me."
They were happy to support him if screwed over someone else. It will not be easy to admit that.
Re: (Score:3)
There are A LOT of people out there, well past working age, who watch FOX News. They're being told that this will be a character building exercise for the rest of us.
Reminds me of Josef Goebbels "Total war" speech.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Informative)
"If he had laid out his tariff plans a few years in advance, the industry could have anticipated."
Two problems with that, (1) he wouldn't have gotten elected, and (2) he had his billionaire friends wouldn't be able to exploit the volatile markets that have resulted. The mistake you make is assuming what Trump's goal is. His goal is to generate headlines and chaos, you don't plan that "years in advance".
"This is how kids act in kindergarten!"
Well yes, that's who was elected. Saying that Trump is a grade school bully is not hyperbole.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
When a political figure violates the law, all attempts at justice look political. That doesn't mean political figures should be above the law however. And of course the other side, the blatantly political decisions from the likes of judge Cannon appear to be brought up a lot less.
I quite like the South Korean model where every president ends their term with a prison sentence (ok exaggerating, but only a bit). Might have been symbolic, but it's a good thing Boris Johnson was prosecuted for absolutely flagrant violation of his own laws and while his party was still in power too. I think the American model of essentially untouchable politicians because it's "political" is a bad model. Even worse than the Hollywood immunity.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll go further: the USA created one of the world's greatest democracies, but with a terrible flaw. Will Rogers said it best:
On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter what it does.
Other countries (e.g., with parliamentary systems) have found a way to deal with that: votes of non-confidence cause the government to fall, and thus an election can be called at any time. Other things too: the head of state doesn't have nearly as much power as in the USA, and the people who perform the executive functions of the government are available for questioning in the House of Commons (analogous to Congress) not cloistered several blocks away with constitutional cloaking.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Informative)
Just in case anyone was curious, here is how it works in Canada:
We are a constitutional monarchy. That means that technically, the Crown (currently King Charles [RIP Lizzy]) is our legal head of state. This is a mostly (like 100%) symbolic position. The representative of the Crown in Canada is the Governor General, who is appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Government (or possibly the recommendation of the Prime Minister, I can't recall). The Governor General is also a symbolic position with no real authority other than to give royal assent to the various laws the government enacts. In THEORY the Governor General or the Crown could withhold royal assent... but it would probably be the last thing the Crown ever does in Canada before they are cast off as an old relic (that's just my opinion on what would happen).
Our Government is a bi-cameral (two houses) Parliamentary system. The members of the House of Commons are elected, and the members of the Senate are appointed. The role of the Senate is really just to be a "sober second thought", they aren't meant to exercise too much power, and in practice they don't. Legislation DOES have to pass through the senate, but typically they send things back to the house with comments at most, they rarely if ever block legislation outright. Anytime they DO do that we end up having a national debate about the senate and the appointed nature of senators... and I suspect none of them prefer to have people questioning their cushy jobs. In any case, the House of Commons is where the government is really located.
We don't really vote for our Prime Minister, not directly anyways. When we vote, we're only voting for our MP (Member of Parliament) who will represent us in the House of Commons. Because there are more than just two parties, it isn't always the case that one party is the Majority in the House, often (as is the case right now) the governing party (the Liberals) do not have more than 50% of the house, so they have to form an alliance with another party (currently the left party the NDP) in order to pass legislation and remain in power (this leads to compromise between the parties). Sometimes a party wins a majority government, in which case they don't really need to compromise with other parties (more like the US way). In either case, it is the governing party who selects the Prime Minister: IE it's the person who is the head of that party. When our last PM Justin Trudeau resigned, the Liberal Party held an election (only members of the liberal party vote in this [though anyone can join]) for who is going to be their leader. They picked Mark Carney, and now he is our Prime Minister (despite, interestingly enough, the fact that he does not hold an elected seat in the house, or any elected position). He has already called an election though, so if he and the liberals win, he'll have a clearer mandate.
Basically, the Prime Minister can only govern with the support of their party, they are not a monolith. When the liberal party felt that the writing was on the wall, and that Trudeau had no chance of winning, they basically pressured him into resigning to make way for someone else who could give them a better chance. Conversely, when things are going well for the PM and governing party politically, the PM doesn't ever have to worry about a strictly oppositional House, because it's by virtue of them having control of the house that they are the PM (so no deadlock between executive and Congress). Sure, I don't think we're immune to a cult of personality situation where a PM essentially whips the party into following their direction, but the party (MPs) always have the very real power to remove the Prime Minister if they want. Furthermore, in a minority government (like now) basically at any time (with some conditions) the MPs can call for a vote of no confidence and, if the governing minority party can't get the votes necessary to survive, the government collapses and we (generally) go to an election.
Hope this was useful/interesting.
Not a Technicality (Score:3)
That means that technically, the Crown is our legal head of state. This is a mostly (like 100%) symbolic position.
The monarch _is_ our head of state: it's not a technicality it's reality. New citizens swear allegiance to the crown, not the government or prime minister. It's more like a 99.9% symbolic position since the crown does retain some powers such as the ability to dissolve or prorogue parliament. While this is normally done at the request of the prime minister it's not impossible to imagine situations where the governor general might refuse such a request if the request is exceptionally damaging or potentially
Re: (Score:3)
Another important point is that if a money bill fails to pass, the government falls, they resign and the Governor General makes a choice (same with a no confidence vote) whether to have an election or invite the Opposition to try to form government. Usually depends on how long since the last election and make up of Parliament.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone knows this is a bad thing... except for Trump.
To be fair, Trump get his economic advice from Peter Navarro, who gets advice from expert "Ron Vara" who he made up -- Peter quotes Ron in his books. (Maybe that Ron guy hangs out with Trump's made-up guy "John Barron".)
Peter Navarro Invented an Expert for His Books, Based on Himself [nytimes.com]
If you're part of the 1% it's a good thing (Score:3)
The 1% don't pay much taxes as a percentage but they have so much money and income and wealth that they still pay a hell of a lot of money as a raw dollar amount.
Trump could never get a tax raise like this through Congress Republicans would freak the fuck out. But because Republicans don't understa
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Informative)
If he had laid out his tariff plans a few years in advance, the industry could have anticipated.
There's nothing to anticipate here. Anything Trump says one day is up for change the day after. Like the tariffs on Canada, that where created, then reduced, and then suddenly dropped, and now back in place again. Or the MEP (Manufacturing Extension Partnership) which he himself signed into law a month ago only to scrap the program now. - Ironically at a time when he's claiming he'll improve manufacturing in America concurrently scrapping a program that was dedicated precisely to funding that.
Any plan Trump laid out isn't worth using even as toilet paper because it's subject to change depending on his mood.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:5, Interesting)
OH MY FUCKING GOD. Trump announced a tariff pause literally hours after I made that comment. Like WTF the commander in chief basically came out to prove my point is impeccable timing.
Re: Destroying your country (Score:2)
Re: Destroying your country (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
... letting all other countries tarif our exports was a far better idea.
You guys would be a lot more convincing if you actually knew the difference between tariffs and simply not buying as much in the way of physical goods from the US as the US buys from them.
Re: (Score:3)
Can you actually survive in the world he is trying to create?
Not bad for a set of peasants (Score:4, Interesting)
Though I am slightly confused. After Vance's latest remarks, could someone tell me what the difference is between a "Chinese peasant" and an "American hillbilly"?
Re:Not bad for a set of peasants (Score:5, Funny)
The chinese peasants had their ruthless, heartless psychopathic tyrant forced on them by force and violence.
The american hillbillys freely, willingly, and knowingly chose their ruthless, heartless, psychopathic tyrant.
Re:Not bad for a set of peasants (Score:5, Informative)
The american hillbillys freely, willingly, and knowingly chose their ruthless, heartless, psychopathic tyrant.
Specifically because he promised to use force and violence against brown people... even the brown American hillbillies voted for him for that reason, they just thought it would happen to other brown people.
Re: (Score:2)
One voted him into office and the other didn't.
Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not from the US, so I keep wondering: is unemployment so bad in the US? Are American citizens truly so desperately in need of those manufacturing jobs?
Re:Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Insightful)
I do agree, to a point, that we should incentivize products manufactured in the US for domestic sales but think it's ridiculous to burn the whole world down to achieve it. Not everything can/should be made domestically but we do need to ensure we can maintain manufacturing know-how.
Re:Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, bringing back onshre manufacturing is good. However, tariffs are not the tool for that, at least, broad tariffs.
Especially since it doesn't jive with the second part of Trump's goal of "ensuring fairness for our producers". It's one thing to manufacture for domestic use, but if you're starting a trade war, selling your goods to other countries you're at war with isn't going to happen. Because the importing and exporting of goods and services is trade, and a trade war naturally hurts both directions.
That's why countries make free trade agreements - I buy stuff from you, you buy stuff from me and without taxes, we buy more from each other. Yes, jobs get lost because countries start to specialize - perhaps you're better at taking wheat and turning it into flour, and I have lots of wheat. But I can also take flour and make bread better than you can, so instead of everyone having shitty bread, we can specialize and with your wonderful flour I can make great bread for both of us.
And honestly, the problem was throughout 2024 was the US economy was overheating - employment was basically full employment, and so much trading was going on that inflation was refusing to go down.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not from the US, so I keep wondering: is unemployment so bad in the US? Are American citizens truly so desperately in need of those manufacturing jobs?
Disclaimer - I'm not standing up for anyone. No, it isn't that bad.
But there is a great strategic value to having internal manufacturing capability. It's a nasty world out there. An example is WW2. The US ended up swamping the Axis powers because we could produce materiel in huge amounts, because we had the manufacturing capacity, and could even ramp it up.
Re:Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not from the US, so I keep wondering: is unemployment so bad in the US? Are American citizens truly so desperately in need of those manufacturing jobs?
Are we in need of those manufacturing jobs? Yes and no. People can be fully employed via current job offerings. However, taking some business courses one is taught that there are only 3 sources of wealth, wealth being things that result in something that can be sold, and they are agriculture, mining, and manufacturing.
The manufacturing jobs, I think because of this fact, tend to be higher paying. What we have now is people working multiple jobs, with multiple family members contributing to the household, just to be classified as "working poor." The jobs simply don't pay enough. The working poor can't fuel the consumer-driven economy, which makes the whole country share their suffering. Things could be so much better if more folks were employed in manufacturing, made more money, and spent it.
We appear to have a labor shortage because the "American dream" means achieving prosperity. You don't do that with some of the slave-wage jobs available now. You can't pay for child care, drive 20 miles to work and 20 miles back and pay for that gas (public transportation is rare in the US) plus the depreciation on the car, only to work at some slave wage job that means you starve. People can stay home, draw on the public assistance for poor people, and not quite starve so much. I think that's what they're doing, and why there appears to be a labor shortage. It's real, but could be cured with bigger wages. Manufacturing could provide those bigger wages much better than fast food retail and department store retail jobs.
Illegal immigrants, of course, due to their status, can't complain about anything without being noticed by the authorities and risk being sent back where they came from, so they don't complain, live multiple families to one house, share expenses, and work for the crap wages. They drive down the wage scale across the country. The result is fewer citizens seeking jobs that will result in their joining the "working poor."
Trump wants the factories back to break up this cycle of poverty and soft slavery. I hope it works. True prosperity has become too rare. One should not have to be a business executive or tech specialist to achieve it. The average Joe should be able to be prosperous with good manual labor type work. Work in a factory and assemble cars, you should be able to have the money to buy a boat and have a good time on the lake on weekends, and not be forced to stay home, watch the tube, and turn the heat down to near frostbite to save money on heating because you're that poor. Trump has been complaining about this for decades. I used to watch TV interviews decades ago when he was really incensed about the state of American prosperity, and now he's decided to do something about it himself. I just hope he succeeds.
Re:Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Insightful)
We in the US NEED to be able to manufacture for our own needs.
This became clear during covid, about how dependent we were on OTHER countries, to supply us with damned near everything.....and handing this type of power to an antagonistic country like China is a major national security threat.
I dunno if this is the best way to rectify this, BUT it has to be done.
We need to manufacture steel, and pharmaceuticals, and so many other things that are basic needs for the US in case of war or other world problems.
Being so dependent on other nations, especially china is dangerous for the US.
And yes, not every job I the US is computer related....we have people that are not tech savvy....but could work trades or factory jobs, just like they used to not THAT long ago and provide a living for their families.
It used to be common....it could be again if we had manufacturing in the US again, and were protected enough to have reasonable wages paid for such work.
It was only a few decades ago that the US made much of what Americans consumed....that we farmed our own land, and were largely self sufficient from the rest of the world.
We need to reclaim much of that again.....somehow.
Re: Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Informative)
How was Kamala Harris an extreme leftist?
Was she promoting communist principles or something?
Re: Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Insightful)
She was even a former prosecutor. I thought stuff like that made their peepees hard. Oh wait she was a woman and darker than a latte? Too extreme for me! I’ll take the orange guy who bankrupt casinos and sells tacky products made in China.
Re: Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Informative)
Because Fox says she is, that's where he gets his ideas.
Never mind that she's a centrist who might have been Republican a short time ago, that's she's an attorney with a prosecution background and that her opposition in California is mostly because she was not progressive enough. None of that matters, it's only the caricature that matters to MAGA, whatever they are spoon-fed by professional liars.
Re: Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have no idea what woke is and neither do you.
That said, what made Harris extreme?
Re: Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Informative)
Kamal Harris was picked as VP BECAUSE she had a vagina and black skin
Harris was WAY more qualified to be president in 2024 than Trump was in 2016. She had a public leadership role in the country's largest state and had served in the Senate. Trump was a TV celebrity with a history of bankruptcies, not paying taxes, and not paying contractors, but, hey, he had a catchphrase! But please, go on about how her gender and race disqualifies her from service.
Re: Do US reaaaaaaally need those jobs? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Harris was WAY more qualified to be president in 2024 than Trump was in 2016."
Irrelevant.
If qualifications are irrelevant to you, then shut the fuck up about qualifications.
Re: (Score:3)
So now the public schools have rights the parents don't have and can chemically alter their children without input. By force of law.
Aaaannd, you lost me. What law is in place that allows that? I'll wait. I have a relative with a gay grandson in high school and she keeps talking about how he's gay because the school "encourages" it. She has also said the school is going to let him have a sex change because the law says so. She can't list the law either.
Since you listed the Daily Wire link (a notoriousl
Re: (Score:3)
Right we need manufacturing jobs that pay enough to buy a house and feed a family.
How is that going to happen? This isn't the 70's any more. Large manufacturers are not going to pay a machine operator to pull parts out of a bin, slot them into a jig, then pull a handle to have a machine punch a hole or bend the part, etc. There are machines that do that part of the job too now. You only need so many inspectors and people to fix the machines where there's a problem, and even those jobs are being replaced by more advanced automated systems. Any new factories built are going to take as much
Dedollarisation (Score:2)
You're gonna start hearing a lot about this and soon.
Re:Dedollarisation (Score:4, Insightful)
That's what Russia and China want, so Trump views it as a positive. He can use that collapse to justify his slush fund for the "crypto reserve" aka his historically enormous pump and dump scheme.
It doesn't matter how much Trump destroys, it only matters how much he ends up owning. This is a totally expected outcome that have been saying all along. We're acting like it's news now?
Okay, buying my MacBook Pro before prices change (Score:2)
What a f*ing disaster. Of course so many bigger disasters going on in the U.S. compared to little ol me's purchasing needs. But am overseas, meaning might even get another tariff to ship it here if they are assembling it in Cupertino. Need to replace my vintage MBP and wanted a near top of the line MBP. Now considering whether to go for a much cheaper model, but if there is no end in sight I might need this to last a while.. That and maybe I'll need to locally source a windows or linux machine that already
Effective (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:3)
Losing fight for us (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a losing fight for us. China only has to deal with the tariffs that we put on them and that they put on us. Meanwhile all of our imports will be effected and many of our exports will be effected when the rest of the world finishes retaliating. China knows this which is why they arent backing down. They know these tariffs will wreck the US economy which will cause the Republicans to lose control of the House and the Senate in two years which will bring some sanity back to our governance and someone reasonable to deal with.
Declaring a trade war on the entire world is the most dumb-shit thing Trump has ever done. We have no leverage because every country knows they're taking less hurt over all from us than we are from the rest of the world.
Re:Losing fight for us (Score:5, Interesting)
We only make up 15% of their exports. That's hefty but not a crippling amount.
We have a much stronger hand here.
I have no idea how you're arriving to that conclusion. As I said, we're fighting the entire world, China only has to fight us. Almost all of our exports and imports will be effected by this trade war where as China only needs to worry about the share of their economy that touches on us. We're in an absolutely awful position right now.
Re: (Score:3)
Long term, this is great for Europe! (Score:5, Interesting)
Suddenly, this is all changing very quickly. When the USA is no longer a stable, friendly and reliable partner but rather an incomprehensible psychotic maniac fighting everyone and everything windmill style, the EU realized that it has no choice but to become that stable and reliable adult on short notice. It's like when a parent kicks a lazy and naive rebel teenager out and he suddenly has to pay for his own food and rent.
Soon (as in a decade or two from now), Europe is going to be fully self-sufficient superpower and no longer reliant on the US. Looking back, this spring will be seen as the turning point that made the EU strong.
This plus the bond market is pretty catastrophic (Score:5, Insightful)
It really looks like the bond market is turning, which is no great surprise, because the wrecking ball that Trump has taken to the US economy's credibility is considerably larger than the one that Truss took to the UK's, and the bond market reaction to her was a pretty substantial GFY.
Just to lay it out for those unclear about what comes next for US residents:
- The demand for house purchases falls off a cliff because first time buyers disappear as mortgage rates go through the roof
- Loans of all sorts become dramatically more expensive
- Loan defaults, foreclosures, etc rise
- Property values fall
- Unemployment rises as companies lay off workers to manage costs and because they can't afford to invest
- Prices rise dramatically, wages don't
What a shit show
Re:This plus the bond market is pretty catastrophi (Score:4, Insightful)
I think some of the billionaires appear to have forgotten the first rule of dealing with Trump: you're going to get shat on. Seeing Musk, Koch, Ackman et al be shocked by this is one of the few strands of silver in the storm cloud's lining.
Re:This plus the bond market is pretty catastrophi (Score:4, Interesting)
Percentages. You and I lose 75% of our wealth, and we're looking for a dry cardboard box to sleep in on the nearest street corner when we're not begging for food. A billionaire loses 75% of their wealth and it doesn't affect them at all. With the remaining 25%, they buy up all the stuff you're selling off at rock bottom prices. Their standard of living doesn't even hiccup.
It's a profit opportunity for them. They don't even think about the suffering it's causing, because anyone without a billion dollars is just too damn poor to register as human to them.
It's not peril-free though, the process can be chaotic enough that a few of the big players will end up with nothing, so you will find a few of them screaming.
Remember the last time the US had a Tarriff war? (Score:5, Informative)
It made the great depression longer and worse.
Cause of Great depression:
The Great Depression (1929â"late 1930s) was caused by a combination of factors:
1. Stock market crash of 1929 â" massive loss of wealth and confidence.
2. Bank failures â" people lost savings, credit dried up.
3.Overproduction + underconsumption â" too much supply, not enough demand.
4. Debt from WWI and uneven wealth distribution.
Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930
Raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods.
Meant to protect American industries and jobs⦠but backfired.
Why it made things worse:
Other countries retaliated with tariffs on U.S. goods.
Global trade slowed dramatically.
Export industries suffered, especially farmers.
Made the worldwide depression deeper and longer.
So to recap causes of the great depressions.
1 and 4 are a check or majorly in process.
3 is coming fast
2 will follow.
Add the tariffs and we can have the Biggest Best ever great depression!
Big business vs small business (Score:3)
Wouldn't this affect big business more than small business?
The average small business in america isn't having things built in China. It's the walmarts, apples, etc. Wouldn't that make it easier for small business to compete?
So much for knock off flow hives... (Score:3)
Overnight these went from $200 to $700... the flow hive is an aussie company but they have a US wing, the flow hive classic they are knocking off is $649 in the US.
Just bought an original instead of the knock off so I guess the tariffs are working.
How long? (Score:3)
How long until a critical mass of spineless GOP quislings in Congress make the calculation that their careers will be damaged more by supporting Trump than by opposing him and taking back control of tariff regulations?
This will be the measure of how badly democracy has been eroded in the USA.
Re: (Score:3)
Tragedy, Farce, and a Toddler With a Flamethrower (Score:3)
Tariffs raise prices. They distort markets. They don't shrink deficits. They don't rebuild the middle class without help. They hurt consumers first and workers second. But they look strong. They feel decisive. They give a villain to blame. China. Mexico. Brussels. Elites. They signal power, not policy. That’s why Trump uses them. Not to fix the economy. To control the story.
Remember the last time Trump was in office? Remember those tariffs? They raised prices on washing machines, cars, electronics. Farmers suffered from retaliatory tariffs on soybeans and pork. The trade deficit widened. Manufacturing jobs stagnated. Companies moved operations to Vietnam and India. Trump's first term tariffs [nber.org] cost U.S. consumers and firms $3 billion monthly. Trump's base doesn't do macroeconomics. They are hermetically sealed in epistemic cocoons. What they do is identity. They want a fighter. Trump gives them the illusion of one. When tariffs bite, Trump blames foreigners. When prices rise, Trump blames Democrats. When jobs don’t come back, Trump blames globalists. It doesn’t have to be true. It merely has to feel true to Trump's base. That’s how the narrative holds. Until it doesn’t.
For those of us that grok macroeconomics, we’ve seen this before. Smoot-Hawley raised tariffs in 1930. The world hit back. Trade collapsed. The Depression deepened. It took a planetary-scale armed conflict to restart the US economy. Trump’s tariffs are just going to trigger the same pattern. Think about it. What are we seeing? China retaliated. Supply chains fractured. Prices rose. Now China’s escalating again, and the pain will land hardest in the same towns that hung their hopes on MAGA. When the math stops working, Trump won’t pivot—he’ll lash out. Fire his advisors. Blame the next scapegoat. I’m wondering what all the neocons and neoliberals and Christo-fascists out there are thinking. Is Trump still just a useful idiot advancing your agenda? Or are you realizing you handed a toddler a flamethrower? Go ahead—deny it. Pretend this time is different. Pretend Trump’s tariffs are surgical, strategic, modern. Marx said history repeats itself twice: first as tragedy, then as farce. Guess where we are in the cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
(with Father Jack Hackett's voice) More tariffs!
Re:"countermeasures" (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, why do the right-minded get so confused when they receive a perfectly logical consequence to their actions? I cannot count the number of times I have seen a right-wing type person express total bewilderment when a person responds exactly as one would expect after receiving hostile behavior from them.
Re:"countermeasures" (Score:5, Insightful)
why do the right-minded get so confused when they receive a perfectly logical consequence to their actions?
There is nothing which does not confuse them, they are being consistent.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
China's economy will collapse?
China's economy, of which ~1.5% is attributable to the US, is going to collapse because of these tariffs?
China's economy, which is growing by ~5% per year, is going to collapse because one country has decided to tax imports from there?
China, which already restricts global exports of numerous 'critical' minerals, but could at any time relax these rules to any country or countries it chooses to, is going to experience economic collapse because one man is confused about how supply