BigHornRam
Well-known member
I was thinking the cruise ship would not be able to buy fuel due to rationing, and would spend the last 3 years anchored off some 3rd world hell hole.
Your imagination is even more morbid!
Tariffs and Potential Inflation
- Thread starter SilentBirdHunter
- Start date
Your imagination is even more morbid!
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Trump and Putin probably have shares of stock in this cruise line.Anti trumpers going down because of russia
I also hear Mica and Joe are being offered employment as celebrity hosts for the cruise.
Last edited:
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 421
I agree with your thought that Biden's tariffs were more targeted--some in fact (semiconductor and solar panels for example) were clearly designed to boost domestic production and not be so reliant on country's we can't count on.
I for one never implied all of Bidens tariffs were OK--but that the scale and number Trump has been talking about are a real concern--they dwarf what Biden did. Its diving into territory where I think you need specific examples to dissect--we had one earlier in the thread I think. Tariffs designed to boost domestic sources without assistance or the potential for those domestic sources to get up and rolling aren't going to help do anything but drive our prices up in the short term. In the long term I wonder what manufacturers think about the stability of incoming domestic and foreign policy--I could see some who want to initiate or expand say it's too uncertain and volatile a time to risk.
Markets--and most long term capital investors--prefer stability or the assumption of it.
Good read:
It's an economic war. With that, U.S. will feel it. Though Trump's tariffs, atop Biden's, atop Trump's original, it beats the hell out of lives lost for both countries.
It's an economic war. With that, U.S. will feel it. Though Trump's tariffs, atop Biden's, atop Trump's original, it beats the hell out of lives lost for both countries.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
So, if the 50s/60s/70s/80s were known as the “Cold War”, do the 2020s/2030s become known as the “cheap Walmart crap & flat screen tv war”?
Handlebar
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2014
- Messages
- 303
This all seems to be predicated on whether there will be tariffs or not, but the threat of a tariff may be only a negotiation tactic.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Perhaps we should move on from what has been...seems I heard that somewhere.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
My 2 cents - to virtue signal about on-shoring manufacturing jobs (that will only happen in tiny pockets) and to take small steps to re-engage defense-critical supply chains (but likely too little too late).
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Exactly, we naturally align according to our preferred signal with conjecture and aspersion for the 'other' team.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
We know that China's economy is not doing great. But on the positive side, they are exporting lower inflation/deflation to the US for those goods. That is a factor that can't be ignored.
I hate the default that any view is driven by "team". Let's pretend there is a US company that produces Widgets that competes with a China Widget maker. Under a 25% tariff, regardless of who put it on, looks like this.
US Widget $10
China Widget $8
Tariff (25%) $2
Total $10
Market share is split 50/50.
US widget makers says it is still unfair that the Chinese widgets are the same price and encourages increasing the tariff to 50%. New Price...
China Widget $8
Tariff (50%) $4
Total $12
What do you think the US manufacturer will do?
a) invest and expand production to account for the assumed increase in market share capture?
b) increase the price to $12
There is a lot that goes into this, like production capacity, supplier capacity, cost of borrowing, cost of labor, etc. I can say with 100% certainty that the price will get jacked up to $12 in the short term, because none of those things happen as fast as implementing the tariff. If widgets is a t-shirt, every consumer is going to be mad. If a widget is a high-end hunting pack, only HT'ers will be mad.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
I've absolutely no doubt you can sell from both sides of the same desk...
"The optimism that accompanied China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) twenty years ago has vanished as Beijing continues to embrace state-led development, pouring subsidies into targeted industries to the detriment of U.S. and foreign companies. Though U.S. consumers have benefited from the flood of cheaper goods from China, millions of Americans have lost their jobs due to import competition. Meanwhile, investment by Chinese companies is raising national security concerns. The United States has long accused China of pressuring American companies to hand over their technology, or of pilfering it outright. How to respond to China now sits at the center of the U.S. political debate, with President Joe Biden following his predecessor, Donald Trump, in adopting an aggressive economic approach."
The Contentious U.S.-China Trade Relationship
Trade between the world’s two biggest economies has ballooned in recent decades, bringing significant benefits but also perils that have led to calls to rethink the relationship.
www.cfr.org
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 421
Fair question
Lot more complex than stated by some here.
I think this piece covers some of the incoming admin's intent and the likely result from an economists and fiscal policy position well.
How Will Trump’s Universal and China Tariffs Impact the Economy?
President-elect Trump may want to impose tariffs to encourage investment and work, but his strategy will backfire. Tariffs will certainly create benefits for protected industries, but those benefits come at the expense of consumers and other industries throughout the economy.
taxfoundation.org
Keep in mind what they are talking about
- 60%tariffs on chinese goods
- tariffs of up to 100 percent on mexican goods
- 10-20% tariffs on EVERYTHING else imported into this country.
I think there are solid reasons to treat China as dangerous and a hostile partner for trade we do have with them though. We need strong actions to discourage them but also measured ones--Not the Bull in a China shop run over them actions the incoming admin is claiming.
Just a few things off the top of my head
1) They are trying to take over Hong Kong, a major and important US trade partner--in Putin like fashion, increasingly bold
2) They openly steal patents trade secrets and other things against standards and laws and this hurts both US producers and consumers
3) They intentionally prop up chinese manufactures to drive prices down and drive US producers out of business
noharleyyet
Well-known member
...imagine having to purchase two more cruises for Vance's terms.I was thinking the cruise ship would not be able to buy fuel due to rationing, and would spend the last 3 years anchored off some 3rd world hell hole.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
8 more years on the ship with only Liz Cheney and Rosie O'Donnell for company. You got to really want it!
No way that never trumper, err trump butt licker, err puppet will ever win.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
More like:
China widget $8 with capacity, local supply chain and labor to make 10 million
Local Govt subsidies as these jobs are essential to political stability -25%
US tariff (25%)
Final cost $8. (8-2+2)
US widget $12 with capacity, local supply chain and labor to make 1 million widgets
China market share 90%
So, US raises tariff to 100%
Final china cost $12 (8-2+6)
China final market share 80%
US raises tariffs to 200%, china bumps subsidies to 50%
Final china cost $12 (8-4+8)
etc
etc
etc
And even if you outright block the product, then price just jumps to $20 but 80% of US demand not filled at all due to inability to supply.
We are way past tariffs to price in govt support or environmental reg costs. The complex supply chains don't exist in the US and can't just pop up in a year or even 4 years.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
40 years ago about about 34% of American workers where in manufacturing jobs. Now about 20% are. What that means is china screwed 14% of workers, but in turn low cost goods and low inflation overall benefited the other 86%. That is the problem with macro economics and politics - they don't necessarily track the same definition of "good". There is no doubt china has been net gain for a clear majority of American household bank accounts, but having 14% of high quality jobs displaced takes a huge social toll that comes through in populist politics.". . . Though U.S. consumers have benefited from the flood of cheaper goods from China, millions of Americans have lost their jobs due to import competition. . . ."
The Contentious U.S.-China Trade Relationship
Trade between the world’s two biggest economies has ballooned in recent decades, bringing significant benefits but also perils that have led to calls to rethink the relationship.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Just to be clear - Hong Kong is theirs legally. We may not like what they are doing with it, but they are not unlawfully invading a neighbor.
Similar threads
