this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
1569 points (98.8% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

5695 readers
525 users here now

Rules:

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

Icon credit C. BrΓΌck on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 5) 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

God damn! This is so simple a third grade student can understand it. The US government has no authority to tax foreign governments, citizens or businesses. They can only tax American citizens and businesses. So Trump puts a 50% tariff (Import Tax) on tea from England. The tea costs $5.00. The person or corporation who imports it, pays the $5.00 cost plus the $2.50 tariff. The US government gets the $2.50. In this case, Trump and Musk are probably just stealing it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (8 children)

Of course the employee is wrong, but the OOP isn't tackling the argument in a really productive way. There's an opportunity to meet the employee where they are.

People caught in the right wing noise machine always seem to understand that businesses pass on business taxes to the consumer. So, if other countries were paying the tariffs, why wouldn't they pass those costs on?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

Those cost more, and with the tariffs I doubt he can afford it

[–] [email protected] 47 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Man, this isn't even "doing your research" it's just knowing what very basic words mean.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago

It's anti-intellectualism.

You don't need to understand any of it, you can just ask people who spend their lives researching this stuff.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 3 days ago (4 children)

I bet a coworker $20 that "tariff" and "tax" were synonyms. Motherfucker refused to pay up, calling merriam-webster.com, thesauraus.com, wikipedia etc. "fake news".

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 days ago

Isn't this the same debate as to how one country can (or cannot) force another country to pay for a random construction project that isn't in anyones interest (that wall)?

It's not like the concept is beyond (basically, 99.9+%) anyones cognitive abilities. It's just how ads (the science behind it is plentiful, it's a giant business sector) work on human brains.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Some people are just dumb. It doesn't help that our education system is designed to produce worker bees and not educated citizens.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Worker bees don't even get to have sex with the queen-president!! :'''(

Are the male bee drones the cabinet circle?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't understand how they think this works

[–] [email protected] 36 points 3 days ago (2 children)

A lot of them think that the country with the tarrifs levied against them needs to pay the country they are exporting to to sell the goods there like a "If you want to do business here" tax on the country exporting.

But in all honesty even if it did work that way, the exporting country would just jack the prices up to cover it. The end result for US citizens would be the same.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think it actually can't work that way at all if he does that. Theoretically, it'll work upto 100% tarrifs but it's way worse.

Imagine mr T says 100% tarrifs on product X, that costs $20.

If consumers pay it then it just costs $40 and it's over. If the original country pays it then they have to pay $20 to sell $20 product, which is not profitable at all. But if they jack the price to $40, then they have to pay $40, again not profitable. So this system only works for smaller % tarrifs so that they can raise the price to cover that.

Suppose you have $2 profit (10%) on $20 item, and 20% ($4) tariffs. You can't pay more than your profit, so you increase the price from 20 to 26, now you have 30% ($8) profit, you pay 20% ($5) tarrifs and get total 10% profit. So you see with 20% tariff you get 30% increase in cost. So this would work worse than consumers directly paying 20% tariffs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

But in all honesty even if it did work that way, the exporting country would just jack the prices up to cover it. The end result for US citizens would be the same.

This. It doesn't matter whether the exporter or importer is payign the tariff, the result is the same - it increases the cost of goods, and that cost is going to get passed down the line, plus margin.

[–] [email protected] 129 points 3 days ago (3 children)

The OP is battling against what Faux Newz, Dipshit Donnie, and other right-wing propagandist shitrags are telling his employee, all which the employee takes as indesputable truth. If he can override that much brainwashing he can convince anyone of anything.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But the guys in OP, they don't turn on daddy Trump. It can't be that they were lied to, then they'd have to do something alien to them like introspection. No, it must be...an honest mistake? Honestly have no idea how they'd justify it internally.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 56 points 3 days ago (1 children)

"The Big Lie" is what Sanders is calling it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

How does the saying about selling a lie go?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Three liars makes a tiger

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well, a lie can be half around the world before the truth even has its boots on.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

That's because the lie's boots have already been licked clean.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 3 days ago (4 children)

To be fair, economics is not intuitive. Half of it is built out of unicorn dust and human imagination. How else would bitcoin even exist? For those of you who are economists and love the money side, vs the behavioral side, that’s great, we need people like you to explain it to the rest of us.

I work with a real system that will still exist no matter what happens with politics or money, so it takes work, for me. That said, tariffs and inflation are not difficult concepts provided you simply take the time to learn.

I know someone who lost their job in December due to tariffs anticipation, and they were not alone in that group of layoffs. The effects are there even if you fail to learn the reasons.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago

Half of it is built out of unicorn dust and human imagination.

Economics is applied psychology at scale hiding behind the idea of math and using "businesses" and "markets" to depersonalize their findings and play pretend at describing natural laws. All it's really describing is the behavior of people, and a wildly nonrepresentative subset of people at that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

For extra sad - what is economical is more intuitive bcs it's not just a human skill, it's a skill nature forces all species into in one way or the other.
'Economics' (the human science) however adds so many extra steps, scales, and logistics that is def not immediately intuitive (even in the simple cases when it is).

In both cases there is a certain element of future uncertainty so risk management is essential.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago

It's not that complicated that when a company with thin margins has to pay a tax, they have to pay it on to consumers.

Your finance department doesn't care about the difference between a more expensive part due to scarcity vs a more expensive part due to a tax.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I'm of average intelligence so if I can understand it, so can they.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 208 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Or, we can hold the fucking media accountable for telling blatant lies about the impacts of tariffs.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Fox News got around that by claiming they're entertainment, not news.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 66 points 3 days ago

Ignorance is not an excuse. Fire all MAGAs for taxifs.

[–] [email protected] 81 points 3 days ago (2 children)

and every one of the millions who ~~were~~are just as dumb, will forget the lessons learned well before the next election and vote for it all over again.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 days ago

nice of you to assume there's gonna be a NEXT election.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 days ago

You know, the one Trump wins with 106% of the totaled votes.

load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί