Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States Businesses China Government

Trump Announces $60 Billion Tariff on Chinese High-Tech and Other Goods (techcrunch.com) 547

Following months of investigations by the U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, the Trump administration announced on Thursday at a White House briefing that the administration intends to place about $60 billion of tariffs on Chinese goods, with the bulk of them likely to be focused on the high-tech industry. The White House will announce a final list of goods subject to the tariffs in the next few weeks. From a report: "We've lost over a fairly short period of time, 60,000 factories in our country. Closed, shuttered, gone. Six million jobs at least, gone. And now they are starting to come back," President Trump said during the briefing. "The word that I want to use is reciprocal -- when they charge 25 percent for a car to go in, and we charge 2 percent for their car to come into the United States, that's not good. That's how China rebuilt itself."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trump Announces $60 Billion Tariff on Chinese High-Tech and Other Goods

Comments Filter:
  • Yeah (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Ryanrule ( 1657199 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @03:38PM (#56307473)
    Can’t be sad about this one.
    • Re:Yeah (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jrmymllr ( 4703481 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @03:42PM (#56307507)

      Can’t be sad about this one.

      Do tariffs ever work long term? It's basically a tax, which is funny because Republicans are supposed to be anti-tax, pro free-market. Both of which a tariff is not.

      • Re:Yeah (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sexconker ( 1179573 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @03:46PM (#56307545)

        They seem to be working for the countries that impose them on us.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by nonBORG ( 5254161 )
          Agreed! We are in a trade war, however everyone wants the US to lay down and accept their raping of us. Trump realised the Trade war has started and is not going to lose without a fight (in fact obviously the US can and will win, if we fight.)

          Obama was fighting for the other side, meaning he is a globalist and not a nationalist. Trump understands that it is no use being a globalist as you will just be abused by nationalists, until you are 3rd world country with no influence.

          People even on here seemed
          • Re:Yeah (Score:5, Insightful)

            by LostInTaiwan ( 837924 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:44PM (#56308041)

            Any idiot can start a war, but to win a war we need leaders with vision and teamwork. Do you see any of those traits in the current Trump administration?

            As much as I love to see a vibrant domestic manufacturing sector, I don't think most American cares. We decimated our own manufacturing sector with our financial sector and tax codes favoring speculative investments in real estate and the stock market. Did the recent BIG Trump tax reform changed any of that?

            I view China as an adversary to the democratic societies, and I am itching for the US to take action against the rising authoritarian capitalistic China. Yet, I am not stupid. Any war with Trump in charge will be a disaster for us. Trump's courage is defined by his Vietnam War deferments while his business acumen is defined by his four bankruptcies. Unless war is like reality television, I fear for the worst under Trump.

          • Re:Yeah (Score:4, Insightful)

            by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @05:19PM (#56308305)

            Agreed! We are in a trade war, however everyone wants the US to lay down and accept their raping of us. Trump realised the Trade war has started and is not going to lose without a fight (in fact obviously the US can and will win, if we fight.)

            Obama was fighting for the other side, meaning he is a globalist and not a nationalist. Trump understands that it is no use being a globalist as you will just be abused by nationalists, until you are 3rd world country with no influence.

            People even on here seemed to have embraced the hate Trump crap so much that they cannot see straight. Comments about Trump dying in jail or being executed with his family, and then they call Trump a fascist. There was a song by Michael Jackson "I'm starting with the man in the mirror." might be good for some of the teenagers posting this stuff to listen to and contemplate.

            You really think Trump has the expertise to win a trade war? Trade deals are decided on the fine print and you've got a guy who can't even read the all-caps. He still thinks the US has a trade deficit with Canada!

            He's just obsessed with trade deficits because it's an easy to understand number, but trade deficits aren't necessarily a bad thing, it just means you're selling them more than you're selling them. But if you can actually use the things you're buying then it's actually a good thing.

            Of course if you don't believe me try reading his idiot of an advisor without laughing [marginalrevolution.com].

          • Agreed! We are in a trade war,

            Leave it to the American to think they are always at war.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Locke2005 ( 849178 )
        All the Libertarians the joined the GOP had better be saying "Not my president!" right now!
      • by Sloppy ( 14984 )

        Republicans are supposed to be anti-tax, pro free-market.

        I think your school may need updated textbooks.

      • by cyn1c77 ( 928549 )

        Can’t be sad about this one.

        Do tariffs ever work long term? It's basically a tax, which is funny because Republicans are supposed to be anti-tax, pro free-market. Both of which a tariff is not.

        I have the same feeling. This tit-for-tat response comes across as immature, un-nuanced, and reactive. Frankly, it's also disrespectful to other countries in the way it is being presented, which essentially forces a hostile response. This is not how to do diplomacy.

        China is far more strategic with their use of subsidies AND tariffs. They will use tariffs to discourage Chinese consumers from buying foreign products when comparable domestic products are available, but they will also use subsidies to make

      • Re:Yeah (Score:5, Interesting)

        by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @07:48PM (#56309523)

        Do tariffs ever work long term?

        Depends on why they are put in place. To pop up a dying industry? Nope, they don't work. To level a playing field caused by a difference in artificial costs by your own policies (e.g. health and safety, or environmental regulations) definitely.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by gravewax ( 4772409 )
      we'll see how you are not sad when everything you buy skyrockets in price. In the end tariffs hit your wallet.
    • It's about 180 US$ out of your pocket - and your brothers, your sisters, your baby child's and your senile great-granduncle's. Or do you think this will magically not be passed on the the consumer?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by fermion ( 181285 )
      Gosh, I hope that apple and all computer companies are happy about the fondling they have given Trump over the tax cuts. I know that I want to spend my $10 back from the tax cut on the extra $50 a computer is going to cost. No sadness here. We will just pay more for crap built in the US, just like we did with the cars in the 70's.
  • Because otherwise how are we going to be able to afford all these now more expensive trinkets and toys?

    Oh. Wait. We're not supposed to. It's supposed to further expand the wealth gap and pretty much finish off the US middle class.

  • bad bad bad (Score:4, Insightful)

    by supernova87a ( 532540 ) <kepler1@@@hotmail...com> on Thursday March 22, 2018 @03:46PM (#56307539)
    This is not good for anyone, as the slew of economists and economic reporters have been putting out there for the last few weeks.

    But more than that it's every day Americans who are going to be paying for it. 20-30% more on every electronic device, gadget, previously untariffed good that was imported, all to do what? Temporarily prop up industries / companies here in the US that won't significantly change their employment levels, capital investment in manufacturing, or supply chains in time until these tariffs are lifted?
    • This is not good for anyone, as the slew of economists and economic reporters have been putting out there for the last few weeks.

      I mean you might be right, you might not... but these people are almost never worth listening to.

      Economists are only ever right in hindsight, and even then; they still take a few laps around track to get it right.

    • This is not good for anyone, as the slew of economists and economic reporters have been putting out there for the last few weeks.

      Let me guess, the same economists who preach this also preach that productivity must go up for living standards to go up. Which sounds reasonable until you realize that productivity and living standards have been decoupled since the 70s yet they continue to preach this. These are also the same economists that tell us that free trade is the best while also looking at a declining standard of living even as we've signed ever more free trade deals. The same economists that presided over the economic meltdown

      • Which sounds reasonable until you realize that productivity and living standards have been decoupled since the 70s yet they continue to preach this.

        Productivity and wages have become decoupled.

        Living standards are not entirely built on wages. If you're spending 18 hours/day farming enough food to keep yourself alive, high wages are not going to increase your standard of living. So you need a productivity boost to get that 18 hours down and have high enough wages to use your newfound free time.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          Which sounds reasonable until you realize that productivity and living standards have been decoupled since the 70s yet they continue to preach this.

          Productivity and wages have become decoupled.

          Living standards are not entirely built on wages. If you're spending 18 hours/day farming enough food to keep yourself alive, high wages are not going to increase your standard of living. So you need a productivity boost to get that 18 hours down and have high enough wages to use your newfound free time.

          First off most people in the 1970's weren't on farms. Second, free trade is a huge part of why although the pie has grown by leaps and bounds actual wages have not grown nearly so much and for many not at all. Want a better US? Greatly limit free trade and greatly limit immigration. We've tried the free trade route for decades and only seen living conditions deteriorate. Time for a new approach.

          • Re:bad bad bad (Score:4, Insightful)

            by jeff4747 ( 256583 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:40PM (#56308011)

            First off most people in the 1970's weren't on farms

            Do you need me to explain the concept of "an example" to you?

            Second, free trade is a huge part of why although the pie has grown by leaps and bounds actual wages have not grown nearly so much and for many not at all.

            The giant hole in this theory is that the huge increase in trade of manufactured goods occurred after wages and productivity became decoupled in the 1970s.

            The reason they got decoupled is we decimated unions and started passing a lot of labor-unfriendly laws and US manufacturers started moving out of union-friendly states and into union-unfriendly states. So workers were not able to claw back the money from productivity gains.

            Greatly limit free trade and greatly limit immigration

            Boy, that's worked great for Venezuela and Japan.

            Tip: If you don't allow imports, they won't buy your exports. Which means less jobs and lower pay.

            "Free trade" agreements have not been about trade for the last 30-or-so years. They've been about things like intellectual property rights and investments. We already had a world with low tariffs, so "free trade" agreements couldn't make trade free-er. Instead, they allowed capital to move.

            Time for a new approach.

            A new approach...by returning to 1910.

    • Re:bad bad bad (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Stan92057 ( 737634 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:31PM (#56307951)
      If its so bad bad bad they why is it working so great for China and Japan? works so great US corporation move their manufacturing to China and Japan and other communist country that don't have laws to protect workers or the environment... only winner in the US? the scum CEOs and board members and the rich.
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      But more than that it's every day Americans who are going to be paying for it. 20-30% more on every electronic device, gadget, previously untariffed good that was imported, all to do what? Temporarily prop up industries / companies here in the US that won't significantly change their employment levels, capital investment in manufacturing, or supply chains in time until these tariffs are lifted?

      Why would they? That's the whole point of protectionism - "wahhh! I can't compete with competitor! protect me uncle

  • Wonder if he even knows...
  • but every word out of his mouth is a lie, and his administration makes a point of dissing science and information.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Matt Keith ( 4571417 )
      Above all, he wants to at least appear to be successful. This is just part of the charade. I don't know if it'll end well or badly so i'm not holding an opinion on this specific issue.
  • Would it not leave everyone blind?

    If China lowered their tariffs, who of you thinks the USA would do likewise and not just keep the money as politicians love to do? I want a show of hands.

    • Would it not leave everyone blind?

      If China lowered their tariffs, who of you thinks the USA would do likewise and not just keep the money as politicians love to do? I want a show of hands.

      An eye for an eye does not leave the whole world blind.

      The people who don't poke other people's eyes out to begin with don't get their eyes poked out in reciprocation.

      If A eyepokes B, and B (or an agent acting on B's behalf, such as the state) eyepokes A, it ends.
      If A (or A's agent) then eyepokes B (or B's agent), it's a new case of eyepoking, not a reciprocal of the second.

      While assholes will get angry at reciprocal (just) eyepoking punishments and then start new instances of eyepoking, non assholes will n

  • by hackingbear ( 988354 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @03:55PM (#56307621)

    Then they will just buy $60 billion worth of airplanes from Airbus. We just pissed off Europe not long ago. And they will import chicken feet and other farm products from somewhere else.

    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      Then they will just buy $60 billion worth of airplanes from Airbus. We just pissed off Europe not long ago. And they will import chicken feet and other farm products from somewhere else.

      At the end of the day we can impose even more - they sell us more than we sell them. How about we also make them only be able to own 50% of a US company and a bunch of other restrictions that they put on us. Fair is fair after all. I'm fine with the US focusing on ourselves for a change. It's not like the world will ever thank us for helping them.

      • .... from eastern EU, with love :), thanks !


        not joking :>
      • Then they will just buy $60 billion worth of airplanes from Airbus. We just pissed off Europe not long ago. And they will import chicken feet and other farm products from somewhere else.

        At the end of the day we can impose even more - they sell us more than we sell them.

        That just means that China will probably lose something in this. It doesn't mean that the US will win something. In fact, it'll lose even more. At the end of the day, the rest of the world is bigger than the US. If the US isolates themselves from it, it'll be their loss.

  • by foxalopex ( 522681 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @03:55PM (#56307627)

    So here's the thing, as consumers we have to ask ourselves an important question especially for the folks who can afford it. (If you're close to poverty then it's understandable that you don't have choices.) But for those of you that can afford it, would you buy a cheap gizmo or a more expensive gizmo supporting your own home country? I prefer to buy locally made stuff myself if I can find it at a "reasonable" price.

    • by jeff4747 ( 256583 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:26PM (#56307895)

      Please direct me to a 100% US-designed-and-built smartphone or tablet. Or for that matter, a 100% US-designed-and-built automobile.

      Sometimes, there is no local option.

    • by orlanz ( 882574 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:31PM (#56307943)

      I prefer to buy what works for me. That maybe "local" or a "cheap" gizmo. I prefer not to mix emotions, patriotic or otherwise, with how I spend my finances. I prefer Japanese cars, European chocolate, Brazilian nuts, Central & South American bananas, Chinese iPhones & HP laptops, Indian leather, Mexican watermelons, and Canadian maple syrup to name a few.

      On the flip side, I do focus on local when it comes to charity. Since that is an emotional expenditure.

  • Trade wars are generally not good for the economy. As happy as I would be too stick it to the Chinese companies, I fear this will do more harm than good. I think it would be better to create incentives, and hold US companies to them, to keep production in America. Igniting a trade way under the guise of national security isn't a smart move but I would expect that coming from a president who's mental agree is that of an elementary school child.
    • Dear leader told us they are good and easily won. Any other opinion must be incorrect.
    • The president want's to do something about the trade deficit and loss of jobs, and thinks that tariffs will help.

      First of all, a deficit is due to two possible things, consumer consumption and investment. If the deficits are caused by investments that is good thing because it will mean stronger future growth.

      When it comes to jobs, losses of jobs in the industry is due primarily to automation. And while tariffs will might help the profits and output of these industries to some degree, it won't bring ba
  • go pop some non-chinese popcorn, sit back and watch.

    Trade sanctions are what they are. If the imbalance of trade is that bad, maybe we could start making things in the US for a change.

    Of course there would need to be a literal shit-ton of legislation to incentivize businesses to manufacture here, not including robots.

    • Of course there would need to be a literal shit-ton of legislation to incentivize businesses to manufacture here, not including robots.

      Well, that's not going to happen. In fact, companies are already coming back to the US to build robotic factories. Low tax on raw materials coming in, low salary overhead, it's a win-win for everyone except people in the US who need jobs.

      I bet that this is going to accelerate under these tariffs. If it's too expensive to import from China, we'll just have robots build it here.

  • by Craig Cruden ( 3592465 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:04PM (#56307707)
    The economies are so interlinked that any real trade war could create unstable and unpredictable times.

    The US owes so much debt now, that if China starts dumping accumulated debt they could force a spike in interest rates that basically throw the US into a hard recession.
    It could lead to a currency war as China could hit back with devaluation equivalent to the tariffs.
    The Chinese banks are not very transparent - and if the current swoon turns into a worldwide stock market crash - could be the start of another Asian crisis (we just cannot know) if it is prolonged.
    Companies cannot just turn on a dime and change manufacturing (i.e. move it to other locations), so it could spike inflation and it could also disrupt major American companies supply.
    Or it could just be taken in stride. The problem is that the markets were already overly exuberant, and there are many bubbles that could be popped ... that anything could happen... the problem is it may not be able to be predictable.
    Anyone that claims to know what will happen ... is more than likely just pretending to know and guessing.
    • The US owes so much debt now, that if China starts dumping accumulated debt they could force a spike in interest rates that basically throw the US into a hard recession.

      That's not how government bonds work. Plus China drastically cut back on buying US debt about 10 years ago (there's only so long that effort could prop up their currency). The bonds have a maturity of 20 years, so a whole lot of China's debt purchased in the 2000s is being paid off.

      • China still holds over 1 trillion in debt. If China decides to reduce its stake - that means more debt on the market, while the US is adding another trillion debt in the last few months. So supply goes up, demand goes down - and interest rates have to go up to make the new debt more attractive than the other supply of debt that China throws into the market.
        • So supply goes up, demand goes down - and interest rates have to go up to make the new debt

          Interest rates on US debt are not really driven by the free market. They're mostly set politically.

          Theoretically, the Fed should not have raised interest rates recently - that should have happened only when they were in danger of overshooting their inflation target. But the reserve board members spend most of their time talking with bankers who make more money when interest rates go up. They've been demanding a rate increase since about 2010, and finally got a couple.

          Which means from a supply-and-demand

      • Oh, and that does not include the debt they have to roll over on maturity... (more supply).
  • by Dutchmaan ( 442553 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:10PM (#56307747) Homepage
    Remember that tax cut you guys gave the wealthy, with those temporary peanuts for you... well those peanuts are being snatched back by the administration! SO WEIRD! Could never have seen it coming! Enjoy that extra few bucks a week!
  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:11PM (#56307755)
    the jobs aren't coming back. Not very many anyway. Any factories built here will be run by robots. On the other hand we might end up bringing back the pollution.

    The trouble with tariffs is they don't work as half measures. If you want to do isolationism like Brazil does that's fine. But get ready for $1500 Playstations and $3000 video cards. That's why you can still buy a Sega Megadrive in Brazil without irony.

    Oh, one more thing. Any chance these tariffs will be passed on to me in the form of services like roads, schools or healthcare? Given the $1.5 trillion dollar tax cut we just did (83% of which went to the 1%) I'm guessing no. It's just like the lottery. They claim the money will go to services but then they shuffle it around and turn it into tax cuts for the rich.
    • by orlanz ( 882574 )

      It makes no sense. We lost jobs and shutdown factories over the decades but our overall manufacturing is still way up year over year. Why should we pay more to make the same stuff? You raise prices, demand goes down... which means you need less production capacity. Which results in less jobs and factories AND decline in manufacturing.

  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @04:21PM (#56307851)

    We've lost over a fairly short period of time, 60,000 factories in our country. Closed, shuttered, gone. Six million jobs at least, gone. And now they are starting to come back," President Trump said during the briefing.

    Factories gone for things that can be made much less expensively over seas, gone from a now more services-oriented US economy. Many, perhaps most, of those jobs won't be coming back and, if they do, US consumers will pay a steep price. Trump is longing for a World that was, but has now moved on.

  • by outlander ( 140799 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @07:02PM (#56309179)

    ....and the market dropped 700 points. If Trump's headed for another bankruptcy, he wants to take us all with him.

  • by dk20 ( 914954 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @07:45PM (#56309505)

    Doesnt trump and his several members of his family sell various "made in china" goods (trump shirts, etc).

    If "Made in the USA" is so important, why isnt his own stuff made there? Do as i say and not as i do?

  • by manu0601 ( 2221348 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @09:26PM (#56310037)
    Since both USA and China are WTO members, I wonder how Trump administration thinks they can avoid retaliation through WTO arbitration.
  • by nehumanuscrede ( 624750 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @10:06PM (#56310201)

    China can even the playing field by dropping their own tariffs. If not, well. . . too fucking bad. They have the means to fix this, they just elect not to.

    Seriously, why the hell would any country tolerate doing business with China when their polices are blatantly designed to promote Chinese Companies over foreign ones ? As long as China continues this behavior, I have zero issues with cutting them off from the markets they are so obviously screwing over.

    Once sales of their top money makers cease, it won't take long for them to realize how dependent their economy is on getting the rest of the world to buy their crap. No sales = no money = economy going to hell in a hurry.

    So, to any country ( not just China ) that plays these games, I say bring it on.

    You want to be treated fairly ? We only expect the same in return.

    Which, really isn't that much to ask.

Overload -- core meltdown sequence initiated.

Working...