> $2-4k blow over the next year as supply chains react.
It's gonna take a lot longer, and cost Americans a lot more money for "supply chains to react" and move manufacturing to the US.
It's gonna take a lot longer, and cost Americans a lot more money for "supply chains to react" and move manufacturing to the US.
Just like before the tariffs, the US is still too expensive.
On the other hand, it has killed cost-competitiveness for Chinese exports directly from China or via transshipment from Vietnam.
The tariff regime has now made Latin America (Brazil, Colombia), Turkiye, Philippines, parts of the EU (Poland, Czechia, Romania), and India cost competitive. And NAFTA/USMCA exemptions still remain and this was something Congress pushed back HARD on to ensure.
Even if it did, who cares? It wouldn't make anything less expensive or better and unemployment was already basically as close to zero as it will ever get. If wages go up that would just increase inflation more.
I can't figure out what they even imagined this was going to accomplish.
The downfall of Democracy in America and the alienation of all our allies? That is clearly their goal here...
Even if it did, is it even desirable?
Countries that actually tried to keep manufacturing beyond its usefulness typically punch beneath their weight, such as the case of Germany.
The US lost manufacturing because it was heavily automated and those jobs don't pay really well. They are great for poor countries, because working in a factory sweatshop is better than plowing fields in rural areas, but advanced economies eventually grow beyond that.
The US, being the most advanced economy in the world, transitioned a long time ago into a finance and service economy. It's kind of fascinating (viewing from the outside) that it want to revert to a more rudimentary economy, and there are people applauding that.
Can you explain to me how Germany is punching below their weight?
Like, I personally think that having manufacturing in multiple places is good for resiliency reasons at the very least.
> The US lost manufacturing because it was heavily automated and those jobs don't pay really well. They are great for poor countries, because working in a factory sweatshop is better than plowing fields in rural areas, but advanced economies eventually grow beyond that.
This is a complete myth. The US lost manufacturing because capital controls were removed, and capital went looking for new margins. Like, all of Microsoft's English customer service and technical documentation were in Ireland in the 90's. Is that because Irish people have comparative advantage in these fields? No, it's because wages were super super low compared to the US. We used to have a bunch of clothing factories too, because we were cheap.
Fundamentally, stuff actually needs to be made if you want a modern society. You can outsource that to cheaper countries/Asia for a while, but it's not gonna end well. Like, a large proportion of the population are not cut out to be tech or finance professionals, and if you outsource all the factories that they could have worked at, then they'll get really depressed and angry and vote for Brexit/Trump/Le Pen/AfD.
And given that most of the rich west are democracies, you can't just pretend these people don't exist.