this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
1438 points (98.8% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

5646 readers
2943 users here now

Rules:

Also feel free to check out [email protected] (also active).

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I don't understand why this even needs to be researched. I'm no economist and I don't know much about tariffs, but: costs more to get product to me for any reason = product costs me more. When has that ever not been the case? What am I missing?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Hey, you have to factor in things like market capture! They could be operating entirely at a loss just to ensure no other competitor can operate in the same market.

(/s because duh more cost = more price)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I think what you're missing might be that you're assuming that the producers stay the same over time. I.e. if it costs more to get that product to you from China, then an US company would produce it instead in the future to circumvent the tariffs. That brings labor/jobs to the US. I think that is the idea behind the tariffs. Any questions left?

[–] JacksonLamb 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Assuming availability of goods and materials (which isn't a given but let's pretend it is) the friction there is set up costs in a fickle, unstable legislative environment in which tarrifs can be withdrawn at any time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

who says the tariffs are going to be withdrawn? lol