Comment by facile3232
16 days ago
> They have both positive and negative consequences.
They have zero positive consequences for anyone but manufacturers.
16 days ago
> They have both positive and negative consequences.
They have zero positive consequences for anyone but manufacturers.
They don’t even necessarily have positive benefits for manufacturers unless they somehow have a supply chain that exists only in the US all the way down. The automakers are against tariffs, for example.
This may kill more manufacturing than it creates.
That's why you implement them reciprocally, to force anyone else implementing them to reduce theirs. Their problem is that the method they used to identify the tariff levels was, generously, crude. And also that it was implemented too sharply.
However, as a political tactic, the sharp implementation gives them breathing room to re-calibrate before the midterms. That comes at a real GDP cost, though.
Retaliatory tariffs are just dumb. They're literally a tax on your own citizens.
The only reason to implement them is to protect local manufacturing, which is usually a bad thing in the long run (they just become less competitive)
Not retaliatory, reciprocal. Retaliatory tariffs are dumb. Reciprocal tariffs are the Nash equilibrium. Whether or not these particular tariffs are in fact reciprocal is something we could debate, though. At best they are a very crude approximation of reciprocal tariffs.
3 replies →
I find it interesting that you are downvoted and yet nobody have a reason why you're wrong. Even the answer you get seems to agree with you.
I feel like that's not true (really, zero positives? never? that would mean a whole lot of people is patently stupid), but I'd like to base my opinions on facts, not feelings.
Reagan summed it up.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9C5Jig7XCw8&pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5t...