The tariffs happened!

Nice, a tarrif discussion, let me add my 2 cents.

  • Why were American manufacturing jobs lost? Because of cost. It's cheaper to build elsewhere.
  • Attempting to force those jobs to come back (they won't, but play along) just means all the products they produce are now permanently more expensive.
  • Do Americans really want to do the $2/hour jobs currently from (say) Vietnam?
  • American manufacturing jobs are gone for good. IF manufacturing comes back, it will be heavily automated/robotic with lots of AI thrown in.

  • The reasons for tarrifing Canada are completely bogus. There is < 1% of fen_t_yl crossing the border into USA, Canada captures more coming from USA then you do from Canada.
  • USA does NOT have a trade imbalance with Canada. It's not 200 billion, and the real value of < 100 billion doesn't even include services like amazon/netflix etc. In reality, Canada spends more in the US then the US spends in Canada especially if you remove oil/energy.
  • Even if there was a trade imbalance; think about it logically. Were a 10th of the size of the USA, some small trade imbalance should be expected, there are just 90% less Canadians than Americans.
  • The dairy tarrifs that Canada has only activate after a certain amount of US dairy enters our country. The first X amount are tarrif free, and you guys have never shipped any amount to trigger the tarrifs.

  • You cannot tarrif your way out of this. It sounds good on paper, but only if you focus on half the equation (American taxing incoming products) but ignore the result of them on the world stage: everybody is just going to tariff American products, you're going to lose trade alliances, and something called "soft power" or influence. You had over 60 years to build an empire with massive amounts of influence, good will, a world currency to help prop up your economy, military presence all over the globe, that is now changing daily and every day is something you won't get back. New trade alliances are already being forged (Asians are working together, Canada is leaning extremely hard into Europe and CANZUK), and once those alliances are formalized and stuff starts to flow, Americans will have lost all that for good. Once the world stops trading the US dollar, you're in for even more of a world of hurt. It will probably become the Euro or maybe two or three more regional currencies.
  • As a result of tarrifs (both American import taxes and the rest of the world export taxing), your raw materials are getting more expensive. Everything you produce is going to go up in price.
  • I love that tarrifs were placed on Antartica. A truly magnificent play there, no doubt the penguins too were taking advantage of you.

Those are just facts. It gets more interesting when you finally realize that none of this has to do with making life better for Americans. I won't go into details here other than to say, dig around, explore other theories and reasons for why trump might be taking this route. Some of them are out to lunch, others are more plausible. But I guarantee you that there is a lot of evil going on under the surface and none of this is going to benefit the average American.
 
One of my surprises this week has been hearing from economists who hate free trade. Arguing it damages American families by not making trade fair per item traded. I hadn't heard that criticism before.
 
testerdahl said:
One of my surprises this week has been hearing from economists who hate free trade. Arguing it damages American families by not making trade fair per item traded. I hadn't heard that criticism before.
Click to expand...
I’m no economist but I can see that in a limited application. A certain amount of tariffs work to keep you from being dependant on foreign sources for essential items.
Free trade allows for a higher standard of living by allowing most goods to be cheaper for the average consumer.
Just like anything else I’m sure there are economists on both sides of the fence… most seem to be pro free trade. It’s funny that economists who are pro tariff seem to think that tariffs keep some money away from the rich. Sounds complicated.
 
A quote from an American Republican president:

"Our peaceful trading partners are not our enemies, they are our allies. We should beware of the demagogues who are ready to declare a trade war against our friends, weakening our economy, our national security and the entire free world. All while cynically waving the American flag. The expansion of the International economy is not a foreign invasion, it is an American triumph. One we worked hard to achieve and something central to our vision of a peaceful and prosperous world of freedom. After the Second World War America led the way to dismantle trade barriers and create a world trading system that set the stage for decades of unparalleled economic growth. Yes, back in 1776 our founding fathers believed that free trade was worth fighting for. And we can celebrate their victory because today trade it's at the core of the alliance that secures peace and guarantees our freedom. It is the source of our prosperity and the path to an even brighter future for America."
Click to expand...

-- Ronald Reagan, 1988
 
A new trade deal with the UK has been reached today and will be announced soon.

In the article GM references moving production back to the states in multiple areas. Parts, assembly etc.

Reading further it looks like their actual projections are about 2 and 1/2 to 3 billion less than the initial 12 to 15 billion in profit projections. Because the numbers are arranged as a spread it could be as low as 1.2 billion so the 5 billion in the bullet point of the article is not supported below in the body.

They also talked about looking at every possible way to cut expenditures and general expense accounts.

I feel like the mantra in this country from a lot of people over the last decade has been out of control profits by large corporations and their CEOs.

With the UK signing a trade deal I think other countries will start coming to the table as conversations are ongoing. Anybody's guess as to what actual profits for these companies will look like and how much expense will actually be passed directly to the consumer.
 
I want to hear the news, both good and bad.

I'm also very curious if Ford raised the price of the Ranger the same amount as the Maverick to keep a price difference. (I didn't think to check and record prices before and after the tariffs took place.)
 
Fightnfire said:
A new trade deal with the UK has been reached today and will be announced soon.

In the article GM references moving production back to the states in multiple areas. Parts, assembly etc.

Reading further it looks like their actual projections are about 2 and 1/2 to 3 billion less than the initial 12 to 15 billion in profit projections. Because the numbers are arranged as a spread it could be as low as 1.2 billion so the 5 billion in the bullet point of the article is not supported below in the body.

They also talked about looking at every possible way to cut expenditures and general expense accounts.

I feel like the mantra in this country from a lot of people over the last decade has been out of control profits by large corporations and their CEOs.

With the UK signing a trade deal I think other countries will start coming to the table as conversations are ongoing. Anybody's guess as to what actual profits for these companies will look like and how much expense will actually be passed directly to the consumer.
Click to expand...
It seems to me the clarity on the tariffs including letting USMCA parts in, for now, is helping. That’s been my main point of contention all along - clarity. Confusion isn’t good for any business.
 
The U.K trade deal was in the works since BREXIT (2020) and is thus not a real results of the tariffs situation. Trump can claim a win, but it's still all smokes and mirrors than anything else.

The car portion of the U.K deal is also making the first 100 000 U.K cars cheaper than any NA cars made in North America even as part of the current free trade (USMCA) agreement between CAN-US-MX. The big three are not very happy about it.

He would need other nations to come to the table and work out a deal, but right now it's still mostly hurting the U.S and it's citizen. Companies will not be cutting profits long terms, as they all have indicated they will pass down the price to consumers in the end, like the steel and aluminum industry are currently doing, so it's not even bringing the desired change to the system.

China's tariffs are still the only bring point of this situation.
 
TheDo114 said:
The U.K trade deal was in the works since BREXIT (2020) and is thus not a real results of the tariffs situation. Trump can claim a win, but it's still all smokes and mirrors than anything else.

The car portion of the U.K deal is also making the first 100 000 U.K cars cheaper than any NA cars made in North America even as part of the current free trade (USMCA) agreement between CAN-US-MX. The big three are not very happy about it.

He would need other nations to come to the table and work out a deal, but right now it's still mostly hurting the U.S and it's citizen. Companies will not be cutting profits long terms, as they all have indicated they will pass down the price to consumers in the end, like the steel and aluminum industry are currently doing, so it's not even bringing the desired change to the system.

China's tariffs are still the only bring point of this situation.
Click to expand...
Yeah I saw the UK news yesterday and I was confused. I’m going to dig into it more today. Seems like much ado about nothing so far.
 
TheDo114 said:
...Companies will not be cutting profits long terms, as they all have indicated they will pass down the price to consumers in the end,
Click to expand...
"So it’s more accurate to say that costs come from prices than it is to say prices come from costs. If that’s counterintuitive, consider the example economist Richard Whately used back in the 1800s. He pointed to pearls, which at the time required collectors to free dive, sometimes as deep as 100 feet, to collect oysters in the hopes that some would have valuable pearls. Whately correctly said that the reason people were willing to dive that deep in search of pearls was because buyers valued them enough to pay high prices. Pearls did not fetch high prices because people had to dive for them."
 
TheDo114 said:
The car portion of the U.K deal is also making the first 100 000 U.K cars cheaper than any NA cars made in North America even as part of the current free trade (USMCA) agreement between CAN-US-MX. The big three are not very happy about it.
Click to expand...
Also, GM sold more than 2.7 million new vehicles in the US in 2024 alone. Ford was just under 2.1, Stellantis 1.3. That's over 6 millions new vehicles sold in the US by the big 3 in 2024. I don't think 100k CARS/SUV's, not really trucks, from the UK will have much of an impact. The big 3 all make a ton of money on their trucks.

I'm still waiting to see all of the details and nobody should really care where or when this deal was in the works. I understand there's a portion of the population that doesn't want to give any sort of credit to Trump for anything. But the deal is done now, not in 2020, and just the beginning. Huge wins for Boeing, which is worth significantly more than the big 3 combined.
 
Fightnfire said:
Also, GM sold more than 2.7 million new vehicles in the US in 2024 alone. Ford was just under 2.1, Stellantis 1.3. That's over 6 millions new vehicles sold in the US by the big 3 in 2024. I don't think 100k CARS/SUV's, not really trucks, from the UK will have much of an impact. The big 3 all make a ton of money on their trucks.

I'm still waiting to see all of the details and nobody should really care where or when this deal was in the works. I understand there's a portion of the population that doesn't want to give any sort of credit to Trump for anything. But the deal is done now, not in 2020, and just the beginning. Huge wins for Boeing, which is worth significantly more than the big 3 combined.
Click to expand...
I know that 100k is a drop in the bucket, but it's to represent the absurdity of the tariff situation.

I understand the cost analogy that you made, but to the end consumer it does not matter whether the price is artificially inflated or that it's based in reality, it's still what they have to pay for it at the end of the day. Bulk aluminum and steel buyers are now paying 25% more for their products and charging that price back to their consumers. Other companies have indicated they will do the same. We can wait and see, same thing as for the few manufacturers that have indicated they will move production in the US in X amount of years.

You should care that the deal was already under way as it's extremely important to the context of the tariffs situation. The administration started the tariffs to try to bring people to the table, but the U.K were already at the table negotiating, this does not accomplish the main goal, it's just optics, or like I mentioned above, smoke and mirrors.

It's not about discrediting the wins of the administration, but being realistic about it. China is a win, making other countries up their defense budget is a win, wanting to bolster key industries like mining, chip making, resource exploitation is a win, but not much else.
 
TheDo114 said:
I know that 100k is a drop in the bucket, but it's to represent the absurdity of the tariff situation.

I understand the cost analogy that you made, but to the end consumer it does not matter whether the price is artificially inflated or that it's based in reality, it's still what they have to pay for it at the end of the day. Bulk aluminum and steel buyers are now paying 25% more for their products and charging that price back to their consumers. Other companies have indicated they will do the same. We can wait and see, same thing as for the few manufacturers that have indicated they will move production in the US in X amount of years.

You should care that the deal was already under way as it's extremely important to the context of the tariffs situation. The administration started the tariffs to try to bring people to the table, but the U.K were already at the table negotiating, this does not accomplish the main goal, it's just optics, or like I mentioned above, smoke and mirrors.

It's not about discrediting the wins of the administration, but being realistic about it. China is a win, making other countries up their defense budget is a win, wanting to bolster key industries like mining, chip making, resource exploitation is a win, but not much else.
Click to expand...
I hear you and I think we agree on most points other than the tariffs. From day one I've said, somewhere on this forum, that I saw this as purely a negotiating tactic, and from my perspective a needed one. I've also thought there were going to be some short term reprocussions. From the vehicle maufacturer perspective several have already said they are moving production in some way back to the US. As well as foreign investments being made into various industries which is also good. I think this is a long term win, or more, a return to what should have been all along speaking specifically to the items you mentioned.

The cost analogy wasn't as much about price and how it got there it's that price will be determined by the consumer, not the seller. They can choose to pass the tariff on but my gut tells me they've already paid millions to market researchers that have told them they are already at, or over, the price threshold for a new pickup in this country.

The manufacturers trends tend to come in waves. An off-road version of a truck sells well, think 2020 & FX-4, Trail Boss, PRO-4X and then every manufacturer jumps on that wagon. Tremor, AT4X, Trail Hunter, Rebel etc. etc. etc. The prices surge because of demand and the profits soar. Now, it seems like the focus is shifting back towards value and mid-range. The consumer sets the price, it's the manufacturers job to align themselves with it. Just like the pearl diver.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top