Hacker News Reader

Comment by Shiggy_ | Hacker News Reader

That is not what the user above you said.

They're explicitly pointing out that the US (and most of the western world) has abandoned the manufacturing sector of their economy, outsourcing work that used to employ millions of people to the developing world.

This is a trade-off that can benefit both countries, but, it is wise to consider both WHO benefits from this, and what the LONG-TERM implications of this entails. It's great for an investor class in America that has the capital to create factories in China, and it's great for China to take USD and start to employ their workforce. But, the question is whether or not this is actually a good thing for the American worker.

The rust-belt would certainly have an opinion on this. My father was a factory worker that was able to support a family on a single income, and when that manufacturing plant closed, it absolutely destroyed the finances of my family.

View on HN

You're conflating the goal with the approach. If the goal is to bring back or grow US manufacturing, the question is whether the current tariffs are an effective way to accomplish that relative to their trade offs. From the evidence so far, the historical research, and most economic analysis, the case doesn't look particularly strong. We haven't seen a meaningful revival in manufacturing employment, and even analyses that project some growth in manufacturing find that it comes with substantial costs elsewhere in the economy, including higher input and consumer prices, weaker growth in other sectors, and lower overall GDP.

This is a false dichotomy.

I personally believe that strategic tariffs should be used to protect our national interests, including providing meaningful employment.

This administration has no interest in strategic tariffs. Instead, they are made overbroad (50% on everything from Canada vs, say, cheap imported steel) and they are made and removed capriciously (tariffs on English whisky dropped after King Charles' visit to the White House).

If Trump really wanted to bring your dad's factory job back, he'd specifically target whatever industry he was working in AND ideally spend the tariff money boosting that industry. This is precisely the strategy countries like Japan used to reach first world status.

Instead Trump uses tariffs like a cudgel -- much closer to what the XKCD comic depicts. There is no chance his tariffs will lead to your father's factory ever being reopened, as that would require, at the bare minimum, a tariff that investors know will stay in place for years, as opposed to one that could be lifted with the visit of a charismatic member of nobility.

[...wanted to bring your dad's factory job back, he'd specifically target whatever industry he was working in AND ideally spend the tariff money boosting that industry.]

Which was more or less the intent of the CHIPS and Science Act for the semiconductors industry.

The chips act used tax dollars and subsidies to incentivize companies to build here. This and tariffs on semis are not much different the only difference is with a tariff you only pay the tax when you buy imported goods

Tariffs are much more regressive than our normal tax policy. Which is probably the reason this administration prefers them.

Subsidies ensure a certain sector has money. CHIPS pays for semiconductor fabs no matter what. Tariffing foreign semiconductors doesn't ensure there will be money for semiconductor fabs here - there could just be no semiconductors at all.

There will not be zero semiconductors. Tariffs incentivize domestic production by raising imported prices allowing our industries to be competitive. There is no world where the military and industry just don’t have processors anymore they will be forced to invest locally that’s THE point of tariffs traditionally (see: the us after its founding)

And the chips act was subsidies

Oh, I agree that the way that the tariffs are currently being levied is embarrassing on a national scale. Also on the fact that meaningful economic change won't happen when these tariffs will disappear/re-appear at the drop of a hat.

It's also worth pointing out that while, yes, there is 50% tariff on Canadian goods, this only effects ~5% of imported goods, meaning 95% of the Canadian imports are unaffected by this nonsense.

It's also worth pointing out that some of these tariffs actually are being used to help build out US industry, like the CHIPS act.

I don't think that we disagree on anything here, haha

Reply on news.ycombinator.com