And what will you get by making a crappy product artificially competitive? Its the same inferior product still, except you artificially forced the better stuff to be more expensive. Its absolutely hilarious seeing USA adopt policies of communist countries of the Latin America.

Wrong, as I said just ask countries like Brazil what happens when you tariff everything to shit and beyond. Brazil doesn't have chip fabs still and still has to pay a huge amount for phones and computers.

The answer to local industry being shit isn't to coddle it further, it is to scare the living shit out of them. Clearly in-country competition isn't enough, otherwise it'd already have been better than foreign goods. That's how capitalism succeeds, coddling them will only lead to overall crappy product and crappy life everywhere. I find it quite amusing this anti China rhetoric suddenly jumped up after in some areas Chinese getting superior to Americans. Hilarious really how much of a sore loser America is.

Enjoy and suffer shit goods at shittier prices. The tradeoff is you get fucked in both, in any countries that do tariffs. If one of the goals was to make life better for the lower classes, what will happen is that it won't, they'd be fucked even more being forced to pay more for the same stuff.

▲

ericmay 21 hours ago | parent [-]

> And what will you get by making a crappy product artificially competitive?

I disagree with this characterization on at least two points:

The first is that you're assuming the product is crappy. Maybe it's actually quite good but just slightly more expensive for whatever reason, maybe that's unionization or something. Many people may opt to pay $6 less for a cheaper "thing" because they're not thinking about quality or wages or other factors. I know plenty of people who opt for buy-and-replace strategies because of "cheaper" products.

Second you're assuming that the cheap product isn't also artificially competitive. Other countries subsidize manufacturing or have lower wages or have other factors that lead to the product being cheaper than it should be.

> Its absolutely hilarious seeing USA adopt policies of communist countries of the Latin America.

I'm not sure protectionist policies are inherently communist, but to the extent they are I expect leftists to cheer these policies on.

> Enjoy and suffer shit goods at shittier prices.

Sounds good - stop bothering us about our crappy decisions then?

▲

donkeybeer 21 hours ago | parent [-]

>Other countries subsidize manufacturing or have lower wages or have other factors that lead to the product being cheaper than it should be.

Then do the same for Americans. Make better product, don't force people to buy crappier.

Its not just about the buyer choosing a quality-price tradeoff. Let us be honest, the USA (or any other country) isn't the best in every sector. Artificial tariffs just mean your people will have to buy worse product. Again, its a slide to Latam style communism, absolutely hilarious.

I will even agree that a careful and targeted application of tariffs can help grow certain industries and can be a beneficial thing, but again careful and targeted is key, its a teat that they should be removed from in time. But what Trump is doing isn't remotely targeted or thought out.

The fact that you somehow are pegging me as a leftist and reacting emotionally to simple statements of fact show how incredibly stupid people who love tariffs are. Absolute comedy.

Tariffs are essentially a signal you are a loser, you can't do better so you force barriers on others. And I will maintain this for all countries that do it, whether its USA, Brazil or China. You are not showing strength by tariffs you are showing how weak you are. If I were thinking of investing in a weakening country, I might think otherwise now.

▲

trimethylpurine 19 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>You are not showing strength by tariffs you are showing how weak you are.

Why does that matter?

	▲	donkeybeer 18 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Signals are important to pay attention to. Its not a nice thing to be weak as a country. It's alright if you think you need this or that tariff right now to prop up this or that key industry, but what happens over time if you continuously slide ever weaker. Its just a warning sign that must be paid heed to. A strong sector shouldn't need a tariff to survive. For better or worse your IT/tech sector is one of the good examples of a strong sector, to extent that other countries are trying to shield themselves from it's success. That should be the aspiration for the industry, not living under tariffs forever.

▲

ericmay 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> The fact that you somehow are pegging me as a leftist

I didn't mean to do that, and I apologize for that. I just meant that to the extent that you are associating tariffs with communism that those on the left will applaud Trump's tariffs and trade policies as they align with that ideology.

Though as an aside, you mention that we're sliding toward LATAM style communism (again I think it's mercantilism and not communism but whatever) but it seems to me that it's more so happening in the political sphere via Trump and his cronyism, not so much because of trade barriers.

> Then do the same for Americans. Make better product, don't force people to buy crappier.

A t-shirt is a t-shirt. At some point we're not really talking about making a better product, but we're instead talking about the costs associated with making that product. Instead of phrasing this as "buy the cheaper product" or "buy the better product" it should instead be looked at as "buy the product that is more environmentally friendly (shipping, environmental standards, etc.)" or "buy the product that supports higher American wages and 40 hour work weeks".

These are all just trade-offs and policy decisions. If you gave me the choice between buy American made t-shirt for $20 [1] or buy the made in (insert country) shirt for $5 - I would buy the American one every time because the price isn't the only factor.

For a long time we've focused on price only, but the prices on the shelves are not necessarily the only consideration, they're just the easiest one for people to make and we don't have other clear and obvious incentives right at the point of sale to help someone make a decision - was the (insert country here) product made by a despotic regime hellbent on assaulting your way of life - is that on the sticker? Or is it some harmless text hidden away that says "Made in Country X".

Efficient markets are great, but they're not the point of society, just another thing we decide how much or how little we want of.

[1] https://www.allamericanclothing.com/collections/shirts/produ...

▲

donkeybeer 18 hours ago | parent [-]

Quality is to an extent a personal function, each person may have a different idea of what factors to consider in quality. But the word here is personal, I find it highly unpleasant when a state uses its might so transparently to force these choices.

You should also not discount price. You can afford to, I can afford to buy something more expensive because we consider some other aspects of the item more important. Again, if you had said this in terms of simply propping up a local even if less efficient industry alive, it makes sense, redundancy is a concept I can understand of course, I could have accepted it even if I don't agree fully. But I feel if it is presented as making the life of lower and middle classes easier, it is a total lie since they will be impacted most by these price increases. Some T-shirt firm in America will start earning more, but then where do the people of that firm spend it on? The other firms are also now higher priced if we fully commit to such extreme and wide ranging tariff programs. I am sorry if I come across as a bit vigorous in this, but I have seen how it is in high tariff countries so I have a strong feeling on this matter.

	▲	ericmay 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]