Would Donald Trump’s tariffs hurt US consumers?

[NoDisplayName]

1 hour ago, Airalee said:

that they don’t even use that was made by people making $200/month

 

Factory work in the land of China earns around 5000 RMB/month, or about $700.  Higher in tech assembly joints like FoxConn where they can earn 7000 RMB, or about $1000.

 

If we put them out of work, they go back to their villages, live in mud/thatch huts without running water or electricity, and earn around 250 RMB/month ($35) as a subsistence farmer, working 12 hour days 30 days/month.

[NoDisplayName]

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

The question is, does Donald Trump make anything in America? I doubt it. Hypocrisy of the highest order. 

 

To be fair, that's capitalism.

 

Long, long ago, I went to a government job fair.

The NSA was handing out refrigerator top secret decoder magnets......"Made in China"

[Captain Flack]

A number of posts and the replies to them, which make personal attacks and try to censor option, by claiming the views are not valid as their are not American, have been removed.

 

If you disagree with an opinion challenge it in the topic with constructive agrument.

[Airalee]

3 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Factory work in the land of China earns around 5000 RMB/month, or about $700.  Higher in tech assembly joints like FoxConn where they can earn 7000 RMB, or about $1000.

 

If we put them out of work, they go back to their villages, live in mud/thatch huts without running water or electricity, and earn around 250 RMB/month ($35) as a subsistence farmer, working 12 hour days 30 days/month.

Factories have been moving out of China for many years now to cheaper places such as Vietnam, India and Bangladesh.  Minimum wage in Bangladesh is just over $100/month. Vietnam is less than $200.

 

Keep patting yourself on the back for making their lives sooooo much better.

 

If they have to move back to the villages, that is an issue for their country to solve.

[thesetat2013]

8 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Yes. Definitely. It is actually a large tax hike. It will hurt American companies and they will pass on the additional costs to consumers. It will likely restart a horrific inflationary cycle. 

 

This plan is dumb. Very, very dumb. The concept of bringing jobs back to America is a good one, and the concept of bringing manufacturing back to America is a good one. But it has to be applied with intelligence. You cannot just wish for this to happen and make it so.

 

It has to be done progressively and it has to be done correctly. Incentives need to be offered and costs need to be reasonable. There are many reasons why those jobs and why that production shifted overseas to begin with. 

 

Just look at Trump's example, he manufactures in China every opportunity he gets because the savings are there, and he's a money grubbing sort of guy. 

IF what you say is true. Prices go up because the imports are putting the tariff cost to the customer. Who is to say that Trump can not put a price freeze on imports as well as a Tariff? If they freeze the prices would this not stop the costs reaching the consumers forcing the countries exporting things to the US to actually cover the cost? 

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, thesetat2013 said:

IF what you say is true. Prices go up because the imports are putting the tariff cost to the customer. Who is to say that Trump can not put a price freeze on imports as well as a Tariff? If they freeze the prices would this not stop the costs reaching the consumers forcing the countries exporting things to the US to actually cover the cost? 

Generally, US companies buy the products from China/overseas and pay they duties when they come in. No many companies can eat a 20% tariff and just eat it. 

 

They might get concessions from the manufacture, but 20% is a lot. 

 

 

[jvs]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Is maga not name calling? 

 

Tariffs generally increase prices, as does increasing labor costs, energy costs and taxes. 

 

To be clear, I am not a fan of tariffs, but I see them as a tool. Thailand would almost certainly not have a robust automotive industry without high tariffs.

 

 

Maga is what you call yourselves? No it is not name calling at all.

I am pretty sure tariffs are going to hurt the American tax payer but like i said before with a lot going on we just do not know what will happen.

[NoDisplayName]

6 minutes ago, Airalee said:

Factories have been moving out of China for many years now to cheaper places such as Vietnam, India and Bangladesh.  Minimum wage in Bangladesh is just over $100/month. Vietnam is less than $200.

 

Keep patting yourself on the back for making their lives sooooo much better.

 

If they have to move back to the villages, that is an issue for their country to solve.

 

Cheap plastic crap factories are moving out of China, as it's no longer economical to manufacture paying employees 7000 RMB vs 1500 RMB.  Sneakers and elephant pants and plastic doggie doo will be manufactured by slave wage employees in Vietnam and Bangladesh.  China will try to move up the value chain, manufacturing computers and routers and aircraft.

 

Tariffs add another layer of complexity, such that it might become economical to assemble I-phones in India, instead of China, from the same components sourced from South Korea and Taiwan Province.

[NoDisplayName]

12 minutes ago, thesetat2013 said:

IF what you say is true. Prices go up because the imports are putting the tariff cost to the customer. Who is to say that Trump can not put a price freeze on imports as well as a Tariff? If they freeze the prices would this not stop the costs reaching the consumers forcing the countries exporting things to the US to actually cover the cost? 

 

No, they'll simply stop exporting to the US.

[kingstonkid]

9 hours ago, EveryG said:

There are millions of non-leftists who think Trump is a joke. I'm very sure you are not able to actually engage in a discussion of tariffs because you are too busy putting people in simple categories to make a complicated world simpler for your 7 year old mind. 

 

Tarrifs are not only to hurt the other country but they are also to protect the industries in the country.  The challenge that the U.S. has is because industries and buyers look outside the country for cheap knock offs that they make into a top product.  

 

Car imports, phones I phones in particular  Consider that when covid hit the U.S. did not have enough thermometers because China could not produce them fast enough.  TRUMP has the plan to bring back the industries and make things at home.

[bubblegum]

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

So do you agree that increasing corporate income taxes increase prices or not? 

Trying again to go off topic. Please try and concentrate.

[bubblegum]

54 minutes ago, thesetat2013 said:

IF what you say is true. Prices go up because the imports are putting the tariff cost to the customer. Who is to say that Trump can not put a price freeze on imports as well as a Tariff? If they freeze the prices would this not stop the costs reaching the consumers forcing the countries exporting things to the US to actually cover the cost? 

Yes it would but now you are talking socialism. What happened to free trade?

[EveryG]

2 hours ago, bubblegum said:

 

This is a brilliant explanation. There's nothing more socialist than tariffs.  

 

 

[Purdey]

Wages are lower in China. How will America compete? Raising the prices by using tariffs is a non competitive approach. It just means fewer cheap goods in the shops.

The capitalist method would be to use cheap labor. Like immigrants. 🤔

Edited 3 hours ago by Purdey

[kingstonkid]

9 hours ago, EveryG said:

There are millions of non-leftists who think Trump is a joke. I'm very sure you are not able to actually engage in a discussion of tariffs because you are too busy putting people in simple categories to make a complicated world simpler for your 7 year old mind. 

 

Tarrifs are not only to hurt the other country but they are also to protect the industries in the country.  The challenge that the U.S. has is because industries and buyers look outside the country for cheap knock offs that they make into a top product.  

 

Car imports, phones I phones in particular  Consider that when covid hit the U.S. did not have enough thermometers because China could not produce them fast enough.  TRUMP has the plan to bring back the industries and make things at home.

[Yellowtail]

21 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Wages are lower in China. How will America compete? Raising the prices by using tariffs is a non competitive approach. It just means fewer cheap goods in the shops.

The capitalist method would be to use cheap labor. Like immigrants. 🤔

The company I worked for, has manufacturing facilities all over the world. The Thailand plant used three time the direct labor hours as the California plant building the same products. 

 

 

[EveryG]

7 minutes ago, kingstonkid said:

 

Tarrifs are not only to hurt the other country but they are also to protect the industries in the country.  The challenge that the U.S. has is because industries and buyers look outside the country for cheap knock offs that they make into a top product.  

 

Car imports, phones I phones in particular  Consider that when covid hit the U.S. did not have enough thermometers because China could not produce them fast enough.  TRUMP has the plan to bring back the industries and make things at home.

This is simply nonsense. Try watching that 8 minute video from the WSJ...hardly a "leftist" newspaper. Try again when you have an elementary grasp of how tariffs actually work, you silly socialist. 

[thesetat2013]

32 minutes ago, bubblegum said:

Yes it would but now you are talking socialism. What happened to free trade?

Was it ever Free trade? When the cost is increased for products being sent to another country but that country expects america to not charge more? Where is the equality? Where is the free trade on both sides of the fence? 

[still kicking]

10 hours ago, Yagoda said:

The Huffington post is not a respected news outlet. 

But Fox news is?

[Yellowtail]

tGiven the election results, clearly more people trust Fox than the Huff Post

[scottiejohn]

41 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

The company I worked for, has manufacturing facilities all over the world. The Thailand plant used three time the direct labor hours as the California plant building the same products. 

 

 

But what was the pay per hour rate Thai v USA?

[frank83628]

4 hours ago, MicroB said:

 

Not always. What happens to average Thai wages if Thailand decided to start handing out work permits/visas for Farang?

 

In reality, Thai managers won't be able to see massive pay rises because Cleetus from Mobile, Dirk from Groningen or Paul from Newcastle gets their £100k PA job transferred to the Bangkok office.

 

Mass immigration might be one of the drivers for wage inequality, but is not the only one, and might not even anywhere near the most important. Sandeep arrives from India in the bright lights of London, and he gets a job emptying the bins for an office cleaning company which wins a competitive bid from a PLC in the City because they are paying mostly immigrant employees a wage much closer to the minimum wage than their competitors. There is a saving to the PLC which helps them reduce costs, contributing to the bottom line, and nudging everyone over the line for those bonuses. PLC employee wages go up because of Sandeep. Of course Wayne the bloke who got thrown out of school at 14 for sniffing glue, still can't anything better than cleaning skips for cash in hand.

 

Rohit is an engineer with some experience. In India, his wage is £6000 a year, which is pretty decent there, but he thinks the UK offers more opportunities. His boss in India keeps telling him the grass isn't always greener, but Rohit is young, got a new wife and baby, and he spends a lot of time on Tiktok, looking at amazing snow and cars. He get a visa sponsor. He attends interview for a graduate engineer, advertised as starting at £45,000 depending on experience, which seems like a King's Ransom to him. He doesn't have quite as much experience as the other candidates. He comes out with out during the interview, he'll take the job for £10,000 a year. Does he get the job, driving down wages? No. What is happening is the UK company sets up an office in Bangalore, and employs all the CAD engineers they need there. Now the savings aren't really 1/10th of the wage cost, because they seem to need to employ twice as many people  there, on shifts, because of the time difference. They design clever stuff that is manufactured in the UK by an additive process that is pretty automated. Normally those engineers would be a £60 PH overhead in the UK, now that's reduced to £20PA, taking account of the rented office in India, and that they need to have a travel budget so that some of the managers can swan out there every now and then.

 

Wage growth is complex. There was this idea at one time of "trickle down" economics; Elon Musk now being a trillionaire (or close to it) makes you richer. It doesn't; its a garbage idea that the Oligarchs in Russia made the lives of ordinary Russians better because they became richer and brought more Bentleys. I think the opposite is also equally untrue; capillary economics, the idea that poor immigrants make other people poorer. No, what happens is you have a lot more people less well off than you.

 

Where mass immigration can cause stress is on public services, and that is down to the humanity of the society. there is increased demand on education, healthcare. A society can be inhumane and stop migrants sending their kids to school, or, in the case of a publicly funded healthcare system, let them die in the streets, Or in the case of Farang managers in Thailand, make them send their Farang kids to an expensive international school, and take out private healthcare insurance.

 

When Sandeep the cleaner is stopped from coming to the UK, the cleaning company doesn't turn to the semi-literate Wayne to start cleaning the Boardrooms. They invest in a few of those cleaning robots, made in China, designed by engineers in Bangalore, working for a Newcastle based start up selling whizzy AI enabled cleaning robots. Which had received a generous innovation grant from the government as an example of 21st Century Britain, taking on the world, after they won the contracts to sell robot cleaners to Bangalore airport, a stunning "export" win, given the airport had seen massive increases in passenger traffic.

 

The Industrial Revolution had casualties. It lead to high level industrial espionage and mass infringement of patents to enable a cotton industry to be established in the nascent United States with its Revolutionary Government, who had recently inspired very bloody regicide in France. The Americans, as they called themselves, needed stolen technologies (Samuel "Slater the Traitor" Slater  who stole the secrets to Richard Arkwright’s transformational “water frame” technology of cotton spinning) to make the mass slave trade much more profitable (picking cotton). It was ok, because 2 generations later, it fueled a rise in American innovation, beating that of Europe. Britain was cotton king (and sugar king) was no longer so, but that was ok, because they had made a ton of cash, and 200 years later became a service based economy, hardly affected by threats of tariffs. Not much of a navy, but then, the tea clippers,  anti-slavery patrols, were just a distant memory.

 

There is a Digital Revolution, and there will be casualties. And beneficiaries. There is an alternative, called Ludditism.

 

A restriction on immigrants won't in itself cause an increase in employment rates. Jobs will still move overseas. There is not an easy solution, but people will offer easy sounding solutions. They always will because they need your vote, but not always have your interests at heart.

Did you actually type all that or was it a copy n paste? 

[Yellowtail]

10 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

But what was the pay per hour rate Thai v USA?

Exactly, even using three times the labor, it was cheaper to build it here. 

[kingstonkid]

1 hour ago, EveryG said:

This is simply nonsense. Try watching that 8 minute video from the WSJ...hardly a "leftist" newspaper. Try again when you have an elementary grasp of how tariffs actually work, you silly socialist. 

 

You have to love those who are new to posting.

 

I think you need to check things before you try to label people, Mr. Lefty.

 

The last thing you would find backing TRUMP is a socialist those were the ones backing Kamala

 

BTW for future reference if you are gong to refer to a news paper or organization plesae provide the link 

 

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by kingstonkid

[gamb00ler]

10 hours ago, Yagoda said:

To understand that import taxes benefit the consumer when imposed as part of a comprehensive business plan shows real education instead of Leftist soundbites.

Trump does have a comprehensive plan.... but only to grab as much power as possible and hold on to it as long as possible.... oh yeah.... and to use it to stay out of jail.  His business plan is to fleece his flock with shlock.

[EveryG]

11 minutes ago, kingstonkid said:

 

You have to love those who are new to posting.

 

I think you need to check things before you try to label people, Mr. Lefty.

 

The last thing you would find backing TRUMP is a socialist those were the ones backing Kamala

 

BTW for future reference if you are gong to refer to a news paper or organization plesae provide the link 

 

 

 

For someone with so many posts, you seem a bit slow to follow....so I'll go slow for you. 

 

Tariffs are anti-capitalist, anti-free market, and the most socialist approach possible to the markets (according to the way magas use the term). Therefore, if you support tariffs, you are more of a socialist than a free market capitalist, which the magas claim to be but are obviously not. I do not support anything that hinders free trade and free markets. Period. 

 

So, because you don't actually understand what tariffs are at their core (government control instead of free market), you don't understand that you are indeed supporting socialist ideas, of which Trump has MANY.  

 

For your future reference, that WSJ video link was posted above several times. Scroll up and take 8 minutes to educate yourself. 

[Jingthing]

17 minutes ago, EveryG said:

For someone with so many posts, you seem a bit slow to follow....so I'll go slow for you. 

 

Tariffs are anti-capitalist, anti-free market, and the most socialist approach possible to the markets (according to the way magas use the term). Therefore, if you support tariffs, you are more of a socialist than a free market capitalist, which the magas claim to be but are obviously not. I do not support anything that hinders free trade and free markets. Period. 

 

So, because you don't actually understand what tariffs are at their core (government control instead of free market), you don't understand that you are indeed supporting socialist ideas, of which Trump has MANY.  

 

For your future reference, that WSJ video link was posted above several times. Scroll up and take 8 minutes to educate yourself. 

Maga is not about ideology.

Maga is about blindly following whatever Trump says this minute until he changes his mind the next minute and then following that too.

Voters failed to learn from history.

Now the world is stuck with this horror.

[frank83628]

6 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Trump's suggested tariffs would hurt not only US consumers but also citizens in the country where the tariffs were imposed. 

Yeah, So better to  just scrap it totally and go back to the Democrat wat of doing things. Much easier. 

[gamb00ler]

46 minutes ago, EveryG said:

Tariffs are anti-capitalist, anti-free market, and the most socialist approach possible to the markets

I dislike tariffs as much as you, but I don't think you can label them as a socialist policy.  It's more like a consumption tax without any protection from it for those who can least afford to pay it.

 

Tariffs have a lot in common with mafia tactics, like extortion or a 'protection' racket.

Edited 49 minutes ago by gamb00ler

[pattayasan]

Trump has boasted that under his presidency, people will be able to get 2 percent APR on a mortgage — but right now it's trending the wrong way, back up to 7 percent, driven in part by bond markets fearful Trump's tariffs will drive up the price of construction materials.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-housing/