back to article Now Trump's import tariffs could raise the cost of a laptop for Americans by 68%

The Consumer Technology Association has issued some fresh predictions for how much more Americans may have to pay for their hardware if Donald Trump's hard-line import tariffs are imposed. The US-based association's latest study looks at two scenarios that have been floated by the incoming president: If Trump announces a …

  1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    I take it this will make the mid-term elections ---- interesting.

    1. drankinatty

      And this Cheeto colored bloke is really dense enough to just try the tariffs out, just because. Just like he thinks Greenland is "massive" compared to the US by the way it looks on a map... What could possibly go wrong?

      1. UnknownUnknown

        Green - Sudaten - land.

    2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Mid-term Elections?

      IMHO, Cheeto will do everything he can to make all elections a think of the past when he becomes POTUS for life in couple of weeks.

      He wants to cut spending. Then not having an election every two years will save a few billion. Cut social security and most seniors won't have the money to buy food let alone a laptop.

      They asked for this didn't they?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Mid-term Elections?

        How would he realistically do that?

        1. Justthefacts Silver badge

          Re: Mid-term Elections?

          Appoint yes-men to the positions responsible for oversight and organisation of the elections…..and then, just fail to do so.

      2. Stevie

        Re:They asked for this didn't they?

        No, only about just over half the voter turnout wanted that.

        The rest of us are being dragged down by the vortex of suckage.

        1. Yankee Doodle Doofus Bronze badge

          Re: Re:They asked for this didn't they?

          Just UNDER half the turnout wanted that (there were more than 2 choices on most states' ballots).

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Thank God

      I live 20 minutes from Canada.

      1. Ms123

        Re: Thank God

        How far are you from Mexico ? Mexico is a safer place. He announced he wants Canada to be part of the U.S. together with Greenland

      2. Version 1.0 Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: Thank God

        If you are only 20 minutes from Canada then you will be able to take a bus into Canada, buy a laptop at the standard lower price from China and then bus home to sell it - so make some money or just get your friends happy.

        It's nice traveling into Canada (icon) and then coming home in the USA

    4. Roland6 Silver badge

      That’s if he ever gets to the mid-term elections…

      1. goodjudge

        "That’s if he ever gets to the mid-term elections…"

        That's if there are any mid-term elections...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I think the narrative that there won't be midterms or they will be "rigged" is in its self bad and will lower Dem turnout.

    5. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      You'll see that as the newly minted representatives get busy with their re-election campaigns and fundraising, starting yesterday at the latest.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The US imports over 330 billion dollars worth of stuff a month, peaking at 352 billion last September before dropping off slightly. Good luck replacing all that, especially things like seasonal food, food currently affected by drought in the US & electronics as the supply chain doesn't exist. Add in the currently low unemployment rate in the US and who will produce all this local supply?

    China centralises its factories in hubs like Shenzhen. These hubs have the infrastructure, ports, supply chains & pool of trained workers that would cost the US trillions to replicate. Who is going to invest in that? Even assuming somebody did, US workers would need to be willing to work for Chinese pay & conditions to try compete on price.

    One example. Purism make the only smartphone currently produced in the US, the Librem 5. They started US production during COVID as they struggled getting supplies of the overseas built version. The US built version costs $1999 and still includes some Chinese & Indian parts. The overseas built version cost $1299. Are US consumers willing to pay the $700 premium for US made?

    1. Gene Cash Silver badge

      > Are US consumers willing to pay the $700 premium for US made?

      I don't see why that's a thing. I bought a Moto G over a Google Pixel back when they were made in Ft. Worth, Texas. It wasn't that expensive. "Cheap and cheerful" was what El Reg said.

      Unfortunately, it had only a partially working touchscreen, and even more unfortunately they completely botched the return process, sending me an urgent airmail envelope that I wasn't allowed to use with their return service and noting the wrong model of phone.

      Soon after that, Motorola closed the Texas plant.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        So Motorola closed the Texas plant since it was not economically viable to compete with overseas production. That makes the point really.

        Now nobody makes any smartphone in the US except Purism. This is their blog post explaining why they chose to do so, despite the increased cost.

        The Benefits of Manufacturing Domestically

        Purism began manufacturing their Librem smartphone in the US at the height of the pandemic, when COVID-related delays and a global chip shortage were wreaking havoc to the electronics industry. By sourcing the majority of the phone’s parts domestically (with the exception of the chassis, which is made in China, and the WiFi card, which is made in India), Purism was able to avoid the shipping and labor disruptions that its competitors grappled with.

        For instance, Apple has struggled with pandemic-fueled supply issues as recently as November 2022, when a COVID surge impaired iPhone production at a facility in China. Meanwhile, in the early weeks of the pandemic, Samsung had to delay the launch of a new Galaxy Note due to travel restrictions preventing entry from the company’s headquarters in South Korea to production facilities in Vietnam. In addition to COVID, geopolitical conflicts have complicated traditional globalized supply chains—ongoing tensions between the US and China have introduced new obstacles to resilient supply chains in the electronics sector.

        By manufacturing and assembling the Librem 5 in the US, Purism seeks to avoid getting entangled in complex international dynamics, while also saving on shipping and transportation costs.

        Downsides: Increased Cost

        However, these advantages also come with downsides. While the original, foreign-made Librem 5 retails at $1299, its US-made counterpart is significantly more expensive, priced at $1999. This increased price tag reflects the economic barriers to manufacturing domestically.

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          Be interesting to see a breakdown on that price premium; would not be surprised if labour costs are only a very small part…

        2. david1024

          economy of scale

          The delta will be much less than $700 if they can scale up due to volume... but that needs volume sales. This is a chicken and egg problem and I think they want to bump the issue with tariffs and see what happens. It is a lot like a flu vaccine--may be significantly effective, may not--but does change the 'r' value.

        3. UnknownUnknown

          Motorola Phones joined IBM ThinkPad/Desktops & ThinkSystem Servers @ Lenovo. Nuff said.

      2. DS999 Silver badge

        Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

        Because most of the parts will have come from overseas, and have tariffs associated with them. You're going to be paying a hefty tariff markup since the most expensive parts like the display and the SoC are imported (as well as cheaper parts like the battery)

        I expect Trump will be forced to carve out so many exceptions to his tariffs that they might as well not exist, but he can't not do them after loudly promising 1000x over that he was going to do exactly that. So he'll do just a little bit so he can claim "promise kept" like he claimed he "built the wall" when he built like 20 miles worth out of a 2000 mile border.

        1. HereIAmJH Silver badge

          Re: Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

          So he'll do just a little bit so he can claim "promise kept" like he claimed he "built the wall" when he built like 20 miles worth out of a 2000 mile border.

          And Mexico paid for it? He won't even go that far, he'll just say the 'deep state' kept him from doing anything. Most of the things he ran on this time, he was going to fix last time. Drain the Swamp, build The Wall, solve illegal immigration. He achieved none of them, but it was always someone else's fault.

          What he will do is carve out exceptions for industries that 'contribute' to him. Then complain about 'Deep State' or Libs blocking his plans. Or throw out another conspiracy squirrel to distract the weak minded so they forget about tariff promises.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

            COVFEFE!

            1. renniks

              Re: Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

              COVFEFE to wash down the hamberders!!

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: He achieved none of them, but it was always someone else's fault.

            To play devil's advocate... This seems to be SOP for any politician. Trump's promises have "just" been bigger and wilder than most.

        2. David Hicklin Silver badge

          Re: Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

          > Because most of the parts will have come from overseas, and have tariffs associated with them

          And it will take years for a local supply chain to be created (which I think is the deluded hope here) and by then he will be out of office either by being voted out or old age taking him out horizontally - then everything will be reversed as usual in politics

        3. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

          Re: Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

          As far as I know, he is not proposing increased tariffs on Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan where most of these components come from.

          The article is typical left wing scare mongering!

          The standard of living in these countries is on par with the US, so moving some manufacturing to the US will not impact the bottom line as much as people think. We've seen this in the auto industry and are now seeing it with TSMC opening foundries in the US. (Although, the Biden CHIPS act killed a new foundry in Arizona because all the DEI requirements meant they would have to hire "unqualified" DEI candidates! So they decided the build it in Japan!)

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

          2. Yankee Doodle Doofus Bronze badge

            Re: Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

            < "As far as I know, he is not proposing..."

            As far as you know, 2 + 2 = 17

          3. DS999 Silver badge

            Re: Even assembly in the US doesn't mean no tariff

            Trump has on multiple occasions claimed he would impose WORLDWIDE tariffs. And when he puts tariffs on China I wouldn't be surprised if he kowtowed to China's claims of ownership over Taiwan by including it in the tariffs.

            He's also talking about 25% tariffs for Mexico and Canada, if he's doing that why do you think anywhere in the world is safe? It doesn't make a lot of sense to tariff Canada but leave Japan or South Korea tariff free.

            Plus saying "as far as you know" where Trump is concerned is pretty much par for the course. The guy says about 20 batshit things every day, and 19 of them contradict or alter his previous statements. He's mentally unstable and doesn't himself know what he's planning to do. I'm sure as someone who voter for and/or supports him like I assume you do, you have some beliefs about things he'll do. i.e. the things you want him to do. So when he talks about those it triggers the reward center of your brain, telling you you were smart to vote for him because you're going to get what you wanted. When he talks about things you wouldn't want him to do, or talks about doing the things you want him to do differently or not at all, you ignore those and will tell yourself "he's distracting the libs" or "he's just saying that to strengthen his negotiating position" or whatever because you don't want to believe those.

            You are going to be disappointed in a lot of the things he does, I promise you. You won't be disappointed as often as me, but in the end we'll both get so many things we don't want out of him that there won't be much difference between us. Except you'll have been one of the fools who fell for his con job and put him into office.

    2. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge
      WTF?

      Buried lede

      Why TF does even the foreign-built phone cost $1299? The specs on the phone are also woeful, with only 3 GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage on the base unit. It appears that the real cost of the phone is the operating system, PureOS, which seems to be a "hardened" AOSP version. They're also offering a phone plan for $99/mo. Is that because the cellular signals are manufactured in the US as well instead of using dirty foreign radio waves?

      Not saying that Purism isn't trying to do something good with a privacy-focused phone, but that's a hard sell to the average consumer.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Buried lede

        Because they were only going to make and sell a handful. So the salaries of the engineers and the costs of making prototypes were only spread over a few units rather than millions.

      2. Irongut Silver badge

        Re: Buried lede

        Sounds suspiciously like one of those secure phones for criminals scams the FBI like to run.

        Over inflated cost - check

        Crap specs - check

        "Hardened" Android - check

        Monthly subscription - check

        All that's missing is the end to end encryption and a secret app & PIN to access it.

        1. doublelayer Silver badge

          Re: Buried lede

          It sounds like that because the initial poster got it wrong. It's not a hardened Android or AOSP build. It is an open Linux one. The reason it's so expensive is that they're trying to write their own, fully open source mobile operating system, and they probably sold like fifty of them. Okay, fifty is an underestimate, but the actual numbers are not high. They've also been selling the same model for seven years, took two years to ship flawed initial versions, and the version they have now isn't exactly a smooth user experience, so they're still not selling very many. Trying to write a Linux-based, open source operating system is not simple if everything was done right, and many mistakes happened during this process.

    3. HereIAmJH Silver badge

      Replacing Imports

      The US imports over 330 billion dollars worth of stuff a month, peaking at 352 billion last September before dropping off slightly. Good luck replacing all that

      There won't be any replacements. For the most part they won't be necessary, due to lack of demand. First we'll see hyper-inflation on anything with any imported content. You'll get some additional me-too inflation as big businesses never miss an opportunity to increase revenue. (IE domestic competitors will raise prices too, because they can) The economy will slow and jobs will decrease, increasing the pressure on household budgets. The only bright star for families will be prices for domestically produced food will drop, because farmers can't export due to retaliatory tariffs. That will be temporary though, because farming has tight margins and many farmers will go bankrupt, lowering supply in future years causing food prices to rebound.

      But, even if we could gear up quickly to manufacture all the stuff we import, NOBODY wants to work a minimum wage manufacturing job. That is the only way you get close to price parity. Even then, it will require a lot of automation and robotics in the plants and huge $$ investments for all the shiny new equipment. In walks Dubai and Saudi Arabia and all our new domestic manufacturing will be owned by foreign investors.

      Wrap it in the flag and put a 'Made in USA' sticker on it, that will solve everything.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Replacing Imports

        Finding people to work cheap will be less of a problem after arresting tens of thousands of illegal/unwanted immigrants - prisoners are a legal source of slave labor.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Replacing Imports

          Trouble is that slave labor is uneconomic. In a field you are going to need a guard per 'worker' and the amount of produce being 'accidentally damaged' is going to be 100%

          Unless you can go completely Godwin and execute any Zwangsarbeiter who doesn't make quota at the end of the shift - you are going to be paying 100s of guards $$$ to watch a handful of prison labor squash tomatoes

          1. FILE_ID.DIZ
            Boffin

            Re: Replacing Imports

            UNICOR is the trade name for Federal Prison Industries.

            You can see all that Federal prisoners make here: https://www.unicor.gov/

            The prices seem reasonably cheap on many items.

            1. HereIAmJH Silver badge

              Re: Replacing Imports

              FILE_ID.DIZ

              First the OS/2 story, now this. The Reg is making me feel really old this week.

        2. HereIAmJH Silver badge

          Re: Replacing Imports

          I'd question the legality of using prisoners extensively for labor. But that isn't the reason chain gangs went away. They compete with private businesses and that is where the money is.

          The majority of the undocumented won't be available to work. Some won't be capable, most will be expelled as quickly as possible due to the cost of housing and feeding them. It would cost more to arrest them and use them for labor than it would to just leave them alone and let the employers exploit them.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Replacing Imports

            >I'd question the legality of using prisoners extensively for labor

            Well the nice thing about people questioning the legitimacy of the prison regime is that it just increases the supply of prisoners

      2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Replacing Imports

        >domestically produced food will drop, because farmers can't export due to retaliatory tariffs

        Which is great if you want to eat soybeans and corn syrup.

        American domestic agriculture is fantastically productive but not necessarily a broad healthy diet.

        1. Uncle Slacky Silver badge

          Re: Replacing Imports

          Luckily corn syrup already comprises about 90% of the American diet...

          1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

            Re: Replacing Imports

            Can you fatten Americans on soybeans ?

            Asking for a Moloch friend

      3. Brian 3

        Re: Replacing Imports

        Farming won't decrease after the farmers go bust, because the Chinese will buy the farmland like they have been doing.

        1. HereIAmJH Silver badge

          Re: Replacing Imports

          States are starting to block Chinese purchases of farm land. But that won't stop other countries from buying it. More likely corporations will buy up all the small farms as they fail, as they have been doing for decades, giving them more pricing power. The large corporations will get subsidized by the Federal Gov't as 'too big to fail'.

    4. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

      > who will produce all this local supply?

      USA has the highest imprisonment rate among developed countries, with a very good lead. Place 5 among all countries. Even though China has over 4.5 as many people USA is still NUMBER ONE with 1.8 million prisoners in total numbers, whereas China has only 1.7. So there is your cheap labour. Change a few laws to get more in prison, and then produce cheap!

  3. Gene Cash Silver badge

    Good!!

    I hope this increases the pushback on Microsoft's Windows 11 compatibility bullshit.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Good!!

      >I hope this increases the pushback on Microsoft's Windows 11 compatibility bullshit

      Too old and lack the energy, but if I were 20 years younger I'd be building Patriot Linux or somesuch (I'm not American) and focusing on older laptop compatibility (and installers/troubleshooters for idiots).

      Just a bit of 'Don't Tread On Me', red, white and blue UI and the odd 'military grade' whatever thrown in - perfect timing.

  4. Just A Quick Comment

    Is this madness unbounded...?

    ...or have I missed some fundamental point?

    1. doublelayer Silver badge

      Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

      I think the only fundamental point is that Trump really likes broad, general, and high tariffs, always has, and has convinced enough people that they will solve their problems. They are now going to find out whether they actually do. Of course, there may be obstacles to imposing all the tariffs he talks about having because he does like to make promises he can't keep, but tariffs are more in his power than most other things he's promised. For example, he has no chance of implementing an income tax offset from the tariff; he can't do it unilaterally and politicians are not going to help him, but he can impose most of the tariffs without external approval.

      1. Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch Silver badge

        Bueller...? Bueller...?

        In 1930, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, in an effort to alleviate the effects of the... Anyone? Anyone?... the Great Depression, passed the... Anyone? Anyone? The tariff bill? The Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act? Which, anyone? Raised or lowered?... raised tariffs, in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government. Did it work? Anyone? Anyone know the effects? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Bueller...? Bueller...?

          Indeed, you can't tax your way to growth.

    2. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

      This is the Mafia boss' opening gambit. Now all US PC brands have to go and kiss the ring, pay for Mafia insurance, and he'll look after them and remove the tariffs.

    3. Headley_Grange Silver badge

      Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

      I assume he needs the tariff money to buy Greenland.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

        It may be more expensive than he thinks...

        1. Anonymous Custard Silver badge
          Trollface

          Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

          And not quite as green either...

        2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

          Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

          He doesn't, it's just another impossible promise to distract from the real stuff that he'll either decree or legislate: tax cuts for the rich and rolling back protection pretty much everywhere. I wonder why we don't hear much about Big Pharma at the moment…

      2. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

        Buy?

        If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?

        From his rhetoric, over Greenland, Panama, Canada etc.,I get the same vibe as Putin who regards the former USSR as Russian and the Chinese who think the south China seas (including Japan, Taiwan et al) are part of China…

        1. Jedit Silver badge
          Black Helicopters

          "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

          Well, Greenland is a Danish territory. If Trump goes in to take it over, it would be a declaration of war on a NATO member and the rest of the organisation would be obliged by the terms of the treaty to act in their defence.

          The most likely practical result would be full economic sanctions from the EU, with Russia and China gleefully following suit.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

            Or a breakdown of NATO, allowing Russia to (attempt) to invade Baltics/Poland and force Europe to seek a strategic alliance with China

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

              If NATO is dissolved the clamour for an EU army, which necessitates a common foreign policy, will be unstoppable. So he'll create another (nuclear) military and economic superpower potential rival to the US, something they have been trying to stop for decades. They would have to be proper idiots to do this, if their stated aim is the continuation of US global dominance...

              1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

                Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

                But only France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Italy, Sweden and Finland have the domestic reactors and engineering capability to build nuclear weapons.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

                  I'm not sure if anyone on that list other than France has the reprocessing facilities to make bomb grade material.

                  1. Roland6 Silver badge

                    Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

                    France is probably your best bet for having connections to the right people in Iran… :)

                  2. gnasher729 Silver badge

                    Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

                    There’s a list of countries with nuclear weapons and a list of countries who could build nuclear weapons anytime they wanted. Germany is on the second list.

                    1. Grunchy Silver badge

                      Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

                      The American government has three co-equal branches, that’s the President, the Congress, and the Senate.

                      Trump helped them win the election but that’s all done now. I’m pretty sure if things get real nuts the plan is to impeach the moron and promote President Vance, who can be more easily controlled.

                      Nobody would blame them, either.

                2. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

                  Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

                  Germany: Which reactor? Those off or those already demolished?

                  France: Yep!

                  Rest of Europe: Naaaa. Not impossible, but naaaaaaaaaaaa....

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

            Or a strike on Washington from the French nuclear subs based out of St Pierre and Miquelon.

          3. Justthefacts Silver badge

            Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

            You first……

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "If Trump decides to walk into Greenland, who is going to stop him?"

              Polar bears with Laser Beams

        2. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

          Who will stop him? NATO.

    4. James Anderson Silver badge

      Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

      It’s a case of government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.

      Cutting taxes for the rich, increased profits from their investments and exceptions for any measures that will affect them.

      Your average billionaire is not going to be bothered about the price of a laptop when they are paying thousands less tax.

      I can’t help thinking the average American deserves this for being so completely gullible.

      1. Version 1.0 Silver badge

        Re: Is this madness unbounded...?

        The Republican reaction to China does not sound as bad or as expensive as our BREXIT reaction. All these political repeats are a result of an environment mentioned years ago for example: It will be years—not in my time—before a woman will become Prime Minister. -- Margaret Thatcher, 1974.

        The original politics world was only government people trying to make everyone happy, not just their friends rich ... described well: "The most important things to do in the world are to get something to eat, something to drink and somebody to love you." - Brendan Behan

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

  5. Bebu sa Ware
    Facepalm

    Back to the future

    Tariffs on imports were the rule pretty much globally until near the end of the 20th century when "free trade" and globalisation were spruiked notably by the US which lead to the US signing a number of free trade agreements with the world from which I doubt any party other than the US actually substantially benefited. You don't hear so much about GATT nowadays.

    If the legislature permits Trump and fellow travellers to go down this path the serious economic consequences are going to be felt by all Americans.

    Unconstrained protectionism is as bad if not worse than laissez faire free trade.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Back to the future

      As the 1930s showed and before that the 1860s. America needs capital inflows to maintain its standard of living, if these do not correspond with a trade deficit then the system is unsustainable: the risks to the capital markets of unbounded protectionism are more likely to be felt by the cabal than any inflation.

    2. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

      Re: Back to the future

      Those agreement did not benefit the US people, mostly they benefited political donors! Many countries, like Mexico (NAFTA), greatly benefited from these agreements, while the US lost million of jobs!

      We've heard this false argument time and again! It's a fallacy that the Hawley–Smoot Tariff's were the primary cause of the Great Depression. There were a myriad of circumstances that created that situation.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Back to the future

        NAFTA was awful! Move production to Mexico with very low wages, poor unions, poor workers rights and protections and keep the sale price in the US the same.

      2. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: Back to the future

        >” Those agreement did not benefit the US people, mostly they benefited political donors!”

        But haven’t you worked it out yet, those are the only US people who matter, everyone else is a work shy layabout….

      3. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Back to the future

        >Those agreement did not benefit the US people, mostly they benefited political donors

        So what makes you think they are about to abandon them?

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Make America Expensive

    Again.

  7. Dinanziame Silver badge
    Trollface

    Offsetting tariffs with lower taxes

    Clever — everybody pays more for everything, cost of living increases, but people who pay a lot of taxes actually pay less money overall. I wonder if there is anybody getting shafted here, hmmm...

  8. Nifty

    "Trump's tariffs could result in the loss of 400,000 US jobs"

    What was the population of the US again?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "Trump's tariffs could result in the loss of 400,000 US jobs"

      The sort of tariffs that Cheeto-man has talked about will kill far more than a net 400k US jobs. It isn't feasible to dramatically increase the cost of imports for a globally connected economy without massive harm to the domestic economy. Moreover, even if it works to make domestic production relatively attractive, how long will it take to reverse 30+ years of offshoring? With US power generation being sucked dry by the nonsense of AI, where's the power for manufacturing going to come from?

      Worth thinking that US bankruptcies are already on the rise, hitting a 14 year high.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "US bankruptcies

        will give the oligarchs a great opportunity to expand their empires on the cheap, then asset strip leaving a shell loaded down with debt. The american way!

        The losers will be the workers.

        It appears that Harley Davidson is pretty close to going under.

        1. Dinanziame Silver badge
          Angel

          Re: "US bankruptcies

          It appears that Harley Davidson is pretty close to going under.

          To be fair, that is probably due to the fact that the average age of their customers goes up by ten years every ten years.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "US bankruptcies

            I wanted a Harley once but then I saw the South Park episode - 'The F Word'. Put me off totally.

          2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
            Happy

            Re: "US bankruptcies

            Maybe they should try a Jaguar-style rebrand. Pink electric Harleys, anyone?

          3. JLV Silver badge

            Re: "US bankruptcies

            and the fact that there are only so many dentists in the US.

        2. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: "US bankruptcies

          >” The losers will be the workers.”

          Ie. Their fellow Americans..

        3. Irongut Silver badge

          Re: "US bankruptcies

          Harley have been close to going under for decades, at this point they are a clothes and accessories brand that manufactures motorcycles on the side.

          1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

            Re: "US bankruptcies

            I'm waiting for the Harley Davidson cat-walk show

            1. Antron Argaiv Silver badge

              Re: "US bankruptcies

              <wince>

              That's not a pleasant mental image...

        4. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

          Re: "US bankruptcies

          It appears that Harley Davidson is pretty close to going under

          The usual name for those bikes in the UK is "hardly ableson" due to the fact that pretty much any EU/Japanese bike is light-years ahead of them in performance and reliability..

          (Apart from some of the Italian marques - Ducatti bikes are made for sunnier climes than the UK..)

        5. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

          Re: "US bankruptcies

          > Harley Davidson is pretty close to going under.

          Their once midlife crisis customer base is now old and dying away.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "Trump's tariffs could result in the loss of 400,000 US jobs"

      The number of people employed in USA in ~160 million (ignoring kids, the disabled and the retired for now).

      So 400,000 direct jobs losses would be ~0.25%. But each direct job loss also affects other jobs - unemployed people spend less on beer, food, leisure, gas, etc. This is generally taken as around 10 indirect jobs are affected (this might be reduced hours/wages rather than losses) for every job that is directly lost. If these are all in one place it has a bigger impact - 1000 job losses in NYC would barely be felt, but 100 job losses in Farfield, Al (pop 10,000) would have a significant impact on the town and population.

      So you could be looking roughly at somewhere between 0.5-2.5% of all the jobs in America being lost as a direct or indirect result if the 400,000 estimate is correct.

    3. ITS Retired

      Re: "Trump's tariffs could result in the loss of 400,000 US jobs"

      The domino effect in action. 400,000 jobs lost. Those 400,000 people quit buying anything not necessary to survive. Business go out of business because not enough customers buying their services/widgets. Causing more people to be out of work, not buying stuff. Bigger business go out of business. Survival is harder because less stuff is available. 1929 collapse was just a minor hiccup.

      The rich and powerful buy everything for pennies on the dollar again.

  9. steviebuk Silver badge

    The US voters

    are to blame. The ones that voted the orange idiot back in. They are starting to wake up and realise their fuck up. Once such voted was mentioned on a video recently. Her friend asked her why she had stupidly voted for Trump she said "Because he's going to get rid of Obama Care. But I didn't realise that meant getting rid of the Affordable Care Act" her friend had to point out that are one and the same. "Now I don't know if I'm going to be able to cope if they take that away from me".

    This was the problem with the voters. They did no independant research, they believes his bullshit and now will pay the price. All he'll do for 4 years is play golf which making himself rich. He's never been interested in the role (people said it before who worked with him) and this time isn't any different. This time he did it to avoid jail. The more he plays golf, the more money he makes as the secret service have to pay for the accomodation at his hotels, so essentially the tax payers will be enriching Trump, again.

    Trump being back in office has made America one big embarrassement.

    1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: The US voters

      What do you expect from people who were brainwashed by the likes of Fox News, NewsMax etc?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The US voters

      Ah, the old 'voters are too stupid to vote for the right person' argument. This is part of why the dems lost. (combined with the loss of the millions of fake votes from 2020...) Same way Brexit ended up the way it did. The remain supporters were too busy insulting half the voter base.

      The simple truth is the ACA increased insurance costs for a lot of Americans. It was drafted with the help of the big healthcare companies for the purpose of forcing consolidation of the healthcare market.

      Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were a HUGE embarrassment to the USA.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: The US voters

        Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were a HUGE embarrassment to the USA.

        You're not wrong, but with 300m people to choose from is the orange ignoramus really the best alternative they could find?

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: The US voters

          Well Liz Truss wasn't a naturally born American. Boris was born in America but you have to assume it wasn't natural

      2. cmdrklarg
        Stop

        Re: The US voters

        **** Ah, the old 'voters are too stupid to vote for the right person' argument. This is part of why the dems lost.

        There were a number of reasons for Democrat losses.

        1. Constant sane-washing of the Florida Orange Man's speech and actions by right wing media (Fox, Newsmax, OAN, Twitter/X, etc.).

        2. Constant drumbeat of "Democrats Bad" from same right wing media.

        3. Pissed-off Progressives sitting out the election due to Biden/Harris not immediately fixing the Gaza crisis (as if the FOM is going to improve things?).

        4. Significant numbers of misogynistic voters who just could not bring themselves to vote for a woman.

        5. 2/3rds of the electorate treating elections as a team sport (voting for whoever has an (R) or a (D) after their name on the ballot).

        6. Significant numbers of voters who are simply anti-incumbent (AKA "throw the bums out").

        1 and 2 is due to 40+ years of right wing propaganda. Can't expect the vast unwashed masses raised on it to suddenly understand that they have been lied to for that long.

        I consider 3, 4, and 5 "stupid", so I suppose "voters too stupid" is valid. 5 is a wash as those are generally evenly distributed between the R's and D's. 6 I can understand, but I still call it stupid.

        **** The simple truth is the ACA increased insurance costs for a lot of Americans.

        The "simple truth" of the ACA was that insurance costs were increasing regardless of the ACA. It did force insurance companies to cover "pre-existing conditions" and to get rid of cheap but essentially useless plans. I for one didn't care for it because it once again was a way to answer the question "how do we pay for healthcare" instead of the real question "how do we lower the cost of healthcare".

        I wanted single payer national healthcare, but that wasn't gonna happen with GOP obstruction plans.

        **** Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were a HUGE embarrassment to the USA.

        Horseshit. Our foreign allies regarded Biden/Harris as an orders of magnitude improvement over the FOM. It's people like you who fawn over the FOM that are the embarrassment.

        My $0.02, YMMV, some restrictions apply, see your dealer for details.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: The US voters

          "1. Constant sane-washing of the Florida Orange Man's speech and actions by right wing media (Fox, Newsmax, OAN, Twitter/X, etc.)."

          Oh sweet child, did you not see CNN, MSNPC, ABC, WaPo, NYT etc. all busy propping up Biden's constant stream of gaffes and flubs and the actual editing of the presidential records by his staff?

          "2. Constant drumbeat of "Republicans Bad" from same left wing media."

          FIFY.

          People on the left leaning channels were actually calling Trump Hitler and calling for people to murder him.

          3 you had the small minority of very vocal screechers who were comparing Israel to 1930s Germany and calling for violence against anyone who supported Israel and then you had the rest of the country who thought that the retaliation for Oct 7th was justified. And they chose to try and appease both and pissed off both.

          4 those would be Democrat supporters as the MAGA were never going to vote blue. Ignoring the fact that the candidate they installed was awful and not due to her skin colour or gender assigned at birth.

          5 always happens, vote blue no matter who ring any bells?

          Same for 6.

          As I said the ACA was literally written by the heathcare corps for Obama so of course it was going to cost people more. If he had been a good president he would have written the ACA from the standpoint of the end user, not the people profiting. But then it was not a good president as he had a majority in both houses in 2009 and after running on codifying roe v wade suddenly decided 'ahhh no'. Oh if only he'd done what he said he was going to do... things would be much easier today.

          Your 'foreign allies' consists of money laundering via Ukraine and funding Israel while claiming to want peace in the middle east and everyone else is getting a bit sick of the endless wars the US keeps starting.

          1. JLV Silver badge

            Re: The US voters

            Meh, there are plenty of people who were unimpressed with the Democrat leadership's overfocus on wokeness and energizing their own "base". Plenty of people who thought that Trump getting shot was a massive problem, nothing to be celebrated. Plenty of people who thought the Dems were way too dismissive of polls re. illegal immigration: whatever you think of immigration, it's not an election-winning formula when 60%+ of your electorate claims it's a problem and you claim it's not. And, yes, CNN is too biased to be taken too seriously, just like Fox is hardly worth listening to. And yes, Biden shouldn't have run in 2024.

            A reasonable Republican candidate, whatever that might mean in the mid-2020s, would be one thing. An inveterate bully, liar, convicted sex offender, incapable of mastering any governance topic (other than getting elected), Putin chum, election denier and profoundly unprincipled goon like Trump is another.

            To put it differently: Reagan he ain't, and whether or not one approves of Reagan changes nothing to that statement. He's an embarrassment to have been elected, twice over. First as POTUS, but mostly during the primaries. Republicans claim to be care a lot about the Constitution and checks and balances against overbearing government? Look at them, the same people are clamoring for more executive power for Trump.

            He's stands up against China, eh? How about this: "if Taiwan gets invaded, I won't help cuz they stole our chip industry". Well, OK, stable genius, what happens if China listens to you and the 90% of Western advanced chip manufacturing is now held by China? Or if the Taiwanese electorate gets scared and decides to cut a reunification deal with China?

            Ever listened to some of the QAnon drivel? It's like a sizable part of the country has been lobotomized.

            1. georgezilla

              Re: The US voters

              " ... wokeness ... " ? Do you even know the actual definition of the word "woke"? I don't think that you actually do. Because it isn't actually the insult that you think it is.

              " ... Trump getting shot ... " And who was it that actually did the shooting? It wasn't some left-wing crackpot.

              " ... illegal immigration ... " Who is it that actually makes immigration LAW? Who is it that allocates funds to pay for enforcement? Hint: It's NOT PotUS or the VP.. It's Congress. And who was it that TWICE voted AGAINST bills to do something about it? Not Democrats or the PotUS/VP.

              ". ... An inveterate bully, liar, convicted sex offender, incapable of mastering any governance topic (other than getting elected), Putin chum, election denier and profoundly unprincipled goon ,,, " And yet that is exactly what we ended up with.

              1. JLV Silver badge

                Re: The US voters

                ... My definition of the word woke is people who would rename a high school renamed after Lincoln due to some past injustice. Otherwise, yes, I am aware of the - more positive - traditional meaning of the term, but thanks for the arrogance.

                ... I never claimed Trump was shot at by a left winger. I do note some people complained about the shooter missing.

                ... I never made any claims about who was funding what on the border. Merely that Dems forgot how Obama was a lot more clear headed about the electoral risks of losing the ball.

                ... At least that's a statement we both agree with. But I will add that you seem like precisely the kind of "base" that the Dems should have spent a lot less time chasing, being so effin' sure of yourself and being right about everything and so upset that anyone dares disagree with you. How dare they!

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: The US voters

                "wokeness"

                There is what woke should be and what woke actually is. The wokerati are hyper focused on being seen to virtue signal about things that the general populace really don't care about. It has gone so far beyond the basic principals of social justice to the point where it is actively ignored. You have to be the right combination of intersectionality and dissenting opinions are strictly forbidden.

                "And who was it that actually did the shooting?"

                Doesn't matter. What matters was the response from the US political left which was to vocally complain about how the shooter missed, wish someone else would try again or claim it was staged/faked. And not forgetting the t-shirts. The hatred on the political left is so raw and visceral that they really do want anyone who opposed them dead. Whereas on the political right we tend to go by 'meme them until they cry and then meme about them crying'.

          2. georgezilla

            Re: The US voters

            " ... everyone else is getting a bit sick of the endless wars the US keeps starting. ,,, " So the US started the war in the Ukraine? Or between Israel/Palestine? Huh, I didn't know that about either of the. So how about you just explain that to me. Or better yet .... just take you bullshit and fuck the hell off. Because that's all it is. Bullshit.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: The US voters

              > So the US started the war in the Ukraine?

              It goes back to Obama, Biden and Victoria Nuland when they decided to wrestle Ukraine from the soviet sphere of influence and derail the growing friendship between the EU and Russia. It was intended to prevent Russia coming in from the cold, to avoid allowing a bloc which would be a threat to American dominance.

              That was put on hold when Trump beat Clinton but now Biden, along with Nuland, have finished the job. Ukraine has always been a sacrificial pawn.

              Obama said at the time it was the best few $billlion America had ever spent and he was right on that in respect of securing American supremacy. Trump, MAGA and America's rightwing simply won't see it that way because it was a Democrat operation.

              1. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

                Re: The US voters

                > when they decided to wrestle Ukraine from the soviet sphere of influence

                Not that is a clearly Putin sponsored comment. Of course an AC. Ukraine decided for themself what direction to take, with a clear leaning toward where the better opportunities lie. The result was typical Putin-does-his-Alpha-Male-thing-again. And the result of that was: Other countries strengthened their border and made it clearer than ever before which direction they do not want to take.

                But in one thing Putin does the same as US: Calling it a "Police Action".

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: The US voters

                  Oh lordy, there are call recordings between high level US officials detailing how they are going to assert control over the government in Ukraine. And now we have a bombed out country and tens of thousands of dead. I would not call that an improvement for anyone.

                  I bet you think the US was right to carpet bomb Vietnam and invade Iraq.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: The US voters

                I recall the comment being along the lines of 'F*** the UK'.

                And its many many billions and has not secured American supremacy but has secured them as a meddling nation of warmongers who are happy to destabilise far off lands so they can launder a few billion into their friends arms companies.

                The 'merkins in general have a rather warped vision of war as the major hot wars in the last 100 and a bit years have all been thousands of miles away from their shores. Only 1 person died during WW2 in the lower 48 and that was a guy poking at a balloon bomb sent over from Japan. If the fighting was raging in Mexico or Canada and the occasional rogue missile landed on US territory it would be a different matter. The 'merkins might have seen the picture of the milkman amongst the bomb damage in London but their parents or grandparents were likely safely on the far side of the Atlantic. My grandad was in the ARP so watched it live.

            2. Roopee Silver badge
              Headmaster

              Re: The US voters

              Perhaps you should read a bit of history instead of social media feeds - you might find it edifying (and widening for your vocabulary).

              Dictionaries are available.

              1. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

                Re: The US voters

                Nothing wrong with https://simple.wikipedia.org , or https://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/sendung/tagesschau_in_einfacher_sprache if you want to learn German.

          3. cmdrklarg

            Re: The US voters

            **** Oh sweet child, did you not see CNN, MSNPC, ABC, WaPo, NYT etc. all busy propping up Biden's constant stream of gaffes and flubs and the actual editing of the presidential records by his staff?

            And? Biden's been a gaffe machine for YEARS. We all knew that going in. What's your excuse for the Florida Orange Man's gaffes, flubs, and general insanity?

            **** FIFY.

            You fixed nothing. Yes, the left wing media hammers the GOP (and for good reason). Does not change the fact that "Democrats Bad" is a frequent mantra from the RWNJ media.

            **** People on the left leaning channels were actually calling Trump Hitler and calling for people to murder him.

            I'm sure there were. Fortunately for the FOM none of the attempts on him have been from a left winger.

            **** 4 those would be Democrat supporters as the MAGA were never going to vote blue. Ignoring the fact that the candidate they installed was awful and not due to her skin colour or gender assigned at birth.

            And? Did I not mention Progressives? #4 had absolutely nothing to do with MAGA mouthbreathers or anyone's demographics.

            **** 5 always happens, vote blue no matter who ring any bells? Same for 6.

            I did mention that 5 was a wash, apparently you don't read very well.

            6 was a factor for Democrats this time around, since Harris was effectively the incumbent.

            **** As I said the ACA was literally written by the heathcare corps for Obama so of course it was going to cost people more. If he had been a good president he would have written the ACA from the standpoint of the end user, not the people profiting. But then it was not a good president as he had a majority in both houses in 2009 and after running on codifying roe v wade suddenly decided 'ahhh no'.

            Obama can be quoted as to wanting "everyone to have coverage". That's all. Besides, Obama was not who was going to write the bill, that was the job of Congress.

            Democrats only had a 60 vote Senate supermajority that could bypass GOP obstruction via the filibuster for a brief time in 2009. Between the delayed resolution of the Coleman-Franken race and the death of Ted Kennedy they had a grand total of 60 working days where they could pass legislation without GOP interference. Also bear in mind that the GOP was in obstruction mode, where they would block no matter what, so that Obama would be a "one term President".

            **** Oh if only he'd done what he said he was going to do... things would be much easier today.

            Indeed. Let's hope that the promises that the FOM made during the campaign come to fruition. I'm expecting grocery prices to drop immediately after his inauguration! /s

            **** Your 'foreign allies' consists of money laundering via Ukraine

            You heard it here first folks! Military aid is now money laundering!

            **** and funding Israel while claiming to want peace in the middle east

            Granted! See, even the broken clock shows the right time occasionally.

            **** and everyone else is getting a bit sick of the endless wars the US keeps starting.

            Also granted! I'm sure the peace-loving FOM is totally joking about annexing Greenland and the Panama Canal.

            On that I shall leave this... peace out, and good day!

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: The US voters

              If the Trump white house staff had edited the official record as they did for Biden it would have been front page news on every outlet for a year.

              "the left wing media hammers the GOP (and for good reason)"

              Except most of those left wing media pundits are now busy cosying up to Trump. The only 'good' reason to hammer Trump was to promote division and hatred.

              "Harris was effectively the incumbent."

              Actually she wasn't. Joe was the incumbent. If they'd 25th'd him or this was his second term then yes, she'd be incumbent.

              "You heard it here first folks! Military aid is now money laundering!"

              Umm.. this has been said for 20+ years. How much have the likes of Halliburton made from Iraq and Afghanistan?

              In 2007 Obama co-sponsored the Freedom of Choice Act which would have codified Roe v Wade. It was all ready to go. He just decided that now he was president it didn't matter.

      3. georgezilla

        Re: The US voters

        " ... Ah, the old 'voters are too stupid to vote for the right person' argument. ... " But the fact, reality is that for the most part they actually are. So you think ignoring fact and reality is a good thing? If so, that puts you in that group. I'm an "old" ( 70 years old ) voter. And I didn't vote for the Orange Shit Stain. But I live in an apartment complex filled with they. And the fact is that most of them are that fucking stupid. And guess who it will be that whines first and the loudest when the realize that they have entered the Find Out part of FAFO. And then blame someone else for it. Beginning to find out already.

        " ... This is part of why the dems lost ... " So "dems" are responsible for the stupidity of "old" voters? Okay. But a question ..... just what fucking reality are you living in?

        " ... (combined with the loss of the millions of fake votes from 2020...) ... " JHFC!!! Proof of this? Actual, REAL proof of it at all? Nope. None. so back to the question I asked above .... just what fucking reality are you living in?

        " ... The remain supporters were too busy insulting half the voter base. ... " No actually. They may have felt insulted by pointing out to them the fact, that they really are fucking stupid. But that's their problem, not the problem of those pointing it out. Their just to damn stupid to understand that fact. It is not "insulting" them by pointing out that they are.

        1. Jimmy2Cows Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Their just to damn stupid to understand that fact.

          Says the commentard misusing "Their" instead of "They're"...

          Doesn't really help your argument about who exactly is stupid. But that's ok; it's not insulting to point this out.

    3. JLV Silver badge

      Re: The US voters

      My favorite was a (Western) moron who recommended not voting Harris to protest against the Gaza War. As if Trump wasn't known to be much worse. His nominee for ambassador now, Mick Huckabee, is on the record as stating all of the place - Israel proper, Gaza, West Bank - are all biblically part of Israel.

  10. Groo The Wanderer - A Canuck

    Did anyone expect different results from this round of Drumpf tariffs than the last one? The only thing he accomplished last time was to increase prices for American consumers so American corporations could increase their profits.

    Because in the end, that is all Drumpf cares about or understands: corporate profits.

    1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      re: all Drumpf cares about

      is enriching himself and his family. Everything is about HIM and two fingers to the workers.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: re: all Drumpf cares about

        Are you sure you're not talking about Joe Biden?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: re: all Drumpf cares about

          Does one exclude the other?

        2. georgezilla

          Re: re: all Drumpf cares about

          " ... Are you sure you're not talking about Joe Biden? ... " Yes actually we're sure. You on the other hard, we're not sure what you're talking about. Care to enlighten us on exactly what that would be?

  11. codejunky Silver badge
    Pint

    Eh?

    "There's also the question of retaliatory tariffs being levied against American exporters"

    But why? Unfortunately protectionism is popular because while people like having cheaper and better things they also want their job to be protected from outside competition and may even genuinely worry about a loss of skills in the country.

    However since we are smart enough to realise tariffs are bad then why would we retaliate by making our own shopping more expensive? And also why do we make things more expensive anyway with the tariffs we already have?

    Usually people argue pro-protectionism, but that is also Trumps position. Let the fun begin (beer because there is no popcorn icon)

    1. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

      Re: Eh?

      We export far less to many countries than we import!

      No one complained the last time he was President when he increased tariffs on China.

      The US pays higher tariffs and faces outright bans of our agricultural products in many countries

      Countries can open real free trade with us and not suffer, failure will mean the gravy train ends!

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Eh?

        @Cliffwilliams44

        "No one complained the last time he was President when he increased tariffs on China."

        I seem to remember some squeaks that faded into the void against it.

        "Countries can open real free trade with us and not suffer, failure will mean the gravy train ends!"

        Unfortunately not with our current government. But hopefully one day.

      2. Yankee Doodle Doofus Bronze badge

        Re: Eh?

        < "No one complained the last time..."

        What bubble do you live in?

      3. georgezilla

        Re: Eh?

        " ... No one complained the last time he was President when he increased tariffs on China. ... " Uuummmmmm ....................... so you weren't paying attention? Why is that not surprising?

      4. The Travelling Dangleberries
        Facepalm

        Re: Eh?

        This reminds me of the "Cakeist" approach taken by Brexiteers in both the run up to, and post the Brexit referendum prior to the amazing trade deal that was definitely going to be negotiated with the EU.

        Their idea was that the EU needed the UK more than the UK needed the EU.

        Therefore, if the UK left the EU then shortly afterwards the EU would come running to the UK cap in hand begging to be able to sell their cars, cheese and bubbly tariff free to UK customers. Thus giving the UK a trade deal with the EU single market that was better than the deal (as a member) that the UK already had.

        How did that work out?

        However, the problem is that the instability that such ideas create, (if pursued with any vigour) is that the resulting chaos will only be of benefit to the "Chicago Boys" disaster capitalists and the alt-right poster boys who hang on their coat tails.

        History shows that what happens to the rest of us will become irrelevant.

        1. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge

          Re: Eh?

          There was also some brexiteer bullshit that, once we had escaped the evil clutches of the EU, we would be free to forge a trade deal with China which would deliver us £150 billion a year.

          How's that goingt?

    2. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Eh?

      >” why would we retaliate by making our own shopping more expensive?”

      In the case of the UK, you have a valid point.

      Trump has already fired a warning shot that he thinks the UK’s 60Bn trade surplus with the US is not right and will be looking for ways to get the UK to buy more from the US…

      Without the benefit of the (relatively) large US trade surplus, the post Brexit export environment becomes even more challenging…

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Eh?

        @Roland6

        "Without the benefit of the (relatively) large US trade surplus, the post Brexit export environment becomes even more challenging…"

        I am not following what this has to do with not retaliating with high tariffs.

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: Eh?

          The general discussion about tariffs seems to be more at a very simplistic tit for tat level. I’m cautioning that given the UKs dependency on imports and thus equitable global trade, we need to be a little more mindful about applying tariffs (to US imports) in response to whatever Trump decides to do, as it is in the UKs interests to retain that favourable trade surplus.

          I assumed your question had more thought behind it than just a knee jerk.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: Eh?

            @Roland6

            "The general discussion about tariffs seems to be more at a very simplistic tit for tat level. I’m cautioning that given the UKs dependency on imports and thus equitable global trade, we need to be a little more mindful about applying tariffs (to US imports) in response to whatever Trump decides to do, as it is in the UKs interests to retain that favourable trade surplus."

            Thanks for clarifying, I do agree.

            "I assumed your question had more thought behind it than just a knee jerk."

            Just trying to clear up ambiguity in your post. You seemed to somehow put brexit into your comment as though that was some sort of problem. The UK is now able to set its own tariffs and not part of the EU so brexit would be a benefit to the idea of not retaliating with increased tariffs (we wouldnt have had a choice if the EU retaliates that way and we remained).

            1. Roland6 Silver badge

              Re: Eh?

              @codejunky

              Brexit - we will differ on whether or not it was a good or bad thing, however, in this context it has happened and thus my reference was to the current post-Brexit situation we are actually in, not wishful thinking.

              However, even if the UK were still in the EU, I would still be cautious about jumping on the tariffs bandwagon, as our favourable trading relationship with the US was built up whilst we were members of the EU, it hasn’t suddenly just happened.

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: Eh?

                @Roland6

                "Brexit - we will differ on whether or not it was a good or bad thing"

                I know and understand that and I said I agreed with your response, I am not for more or increased tariffs I just dont see how brexit related to your post.

                "However, even if the UK were still in the EU, I would still be cautious about jumping on the tariffs bandwagon, as our favourable trading relationship with the US was built up whilst we were members of the EU, it hasn’t suddenly just happened."

                This is the only place I can really see brexit and tariffs coming into the conversation (which I didnt bring up at all) which is that in the EU it is the EU that sets the tariffs. Outside the EU the UK has the sovereign right and responsibility to set its own. The UK already had the favourable relationship with the US and then we joined the EU. We are not friends with the US because of our EU membership but despite it.

    3. doublelayer Silver badge

      Re: Eh?

      "However since we are smart enough to realise tariffs are bad then why would we retaliate by making our own shopping more expensive?"

      Generally, because they're hoping the tariffs will be dismantled. What they're trying there is basically "See how much this tariff isn't helping you? We don't like yours either. Why don't we call this whole thing off?", and it works. When Trump tried some of his tariffs the first time, for example ones on Canada and Mexico, those countries responded with targeted tariffs, ones that would hurt industries in areas represented by Trump's allies. Many of the tariffs concerned were removed, with the retaliatory ones going too. The challenge is what you do when you try that method and the other side doesn't turn off theirs. You don't really want to keep yours, but if you eliminate them too quickly, people learn that they can put unilateral tariffs on you and you'll cave quickly. That's when an otherwise tariff-reluctant government can find that they don't have much of a choice and why more generalized anti-tariff agreements have been set up.

      "And also why do we make things more expensive anyway with the tariffs we already have?"

      Either those diplomatic reasons, they think some kind of malfeasance is going on, or some local industry has succeeded in getting protection for themselves. Those are the general reasons, and it's not as if the people of opposite opinions on the effectiveness of tariffs disagree on the reasons. They just disagree on whether that is a good thing.

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Eh?

        @doublelayer

        Well said. But it does leave the interesting situation of watching someone shoot themselves in the foot and then think 'terrible idea, lets respond by doing it to ourselves'.

        1. doublelayer Silver badge

          Re: Eh?

          In a way, but a lot of this argument has boiled down to trying to say that only one side pays for the tariffs. Pro-tariff people shout "China will pay for the tariff". They are wrong. Anti-tariff people have at times reversed this and say things along the lines of "only we are paying for the tariff". They are also wrong, or rather, they are simplifying so much that they're lying, because they know that, in reality, both trading parties to a tariff suffer. Only the government in the middle stands to gain some revenue, and even it may not get as much as it was planning when it all resolves.

          The point of all of this is that, when a retaliatory tariff is put in place, it's not really seen as shooting yourself in the foot. It's seen as shooting the other guy, who recently shot at you without provocation. You won't benefit from that, which is why most of the retaliatory tariffs are put in place with the idea that they should be removed as soon as possible, but the diplomatic equivalent of a fist fight where one party is hoping that the other fighter will back down isn't going to work in a painless way. The question you can consider is what you would do to someone who started making things worse for your economy. Would you accept their penalty because any action you take in revenge will also harm you, or would you take some revenge in the hope that it makes them reverse course? Neither answer is always right. With hindsight on how long the tariff was in place can let you calculate which was the best option in each case, but you don't have any of that at the beginning because it revolves around what a diplomat or executive in this case was thinking.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: Eh?

            @doublelayer

            "Anti-tariff people have at times reversed this and say things along the lines of "only we are paying for the tariff""

            For the most part they seem to be right. As per this article if tariffs rise then the people (screw the gov) lose out due to higher prices. The people are consumers and businesses so it is the economy that loses out. The other side that cant sell to this protectionist market still has domestic and the rest of the trading globe.

            "The question you can consider is what you would do to someone who started making things worse for your economy."

            Ok so assume the US put tariffs against the UK as an example. How are we better off by making our economy suffer because the US chooses to make its economy suffer? And if tariffs are so bad then we should be pretty much removing them in total but for domestic security needs. Hobbling our economy in reaction to another hobbling their own economy doesnt make a lot of sense.

            *Edit: I am appreciating the conversation and differing point of opinion. I dont want you thinking this is arguing or trolling as some may do here.

            1. doublelayer Silver badge

              Re: Eh?

              "The other side that cant sell to this protectionist market still has domestic and the rest of the trading globe."

              That is true. Depending on the markets they have, that may give the supplier the easier side. That is not guaranteed. If a Chinese company specialized in manufacturing things that are mostly used by US consumers and they invested a lot in partners selling in the US, then they still have to change a lot to sell to other countries and may fail if their product was more popular there than it would be in other countries. Generally speaking, the smaller the protectionist market, the more the suffering will hit that market versus the suppliers. The US is quite a large market, meaning that loss of it can be painful. That doesn't alleviate the pain experienced by the consumers there, but tariffs do hurt both sides with the only question being who suffers more.

              "Ok so assume the US put tariffs against the UK as an example. How are we better off by making our economy suffer because the US chooses to make its economy suffer?"

              It's the age-old problem of active versus passive response to a negative situation which we make every day. I do it and I imagine you do too. If something I don't like happens, I have to decide whether it will be more trouble to argue about it or accept it. If I argue about it, maybe the person doing it will stop, and then I don't have any problem, but maybe the person doing it will just get angry and do something else I don't like. If I do nothing, maybe the problem will go away, maybe I'll get used to it, or maybe the person doing the thing I don't like will decide that they can do more of that because I must be fine with it. Retaliatory tariffs are the active option, used in the hope that the protectionist guy will stop. They are considered worth doing because tariffs on UK producers do hurt those producers, especially those that mostly exported to the United States. If you don't work at one of those, you may not really notice, but people who lose their jobs or profits will notice and they can complain really loudly.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I get a real kick out of the people saying democrats are no longer the party of the working class and then go vote for the party of tax cuts for billionaires and repealing consumer protection.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "no longer the party of the working class"

      They never have been.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        True, and GOP is even further from it.

    2. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

      Everyone got a tax cut under Trump, the middle class got the highest % of a cut!

      But you leave that out because that doesn't support your demoralized narrative!

      1. revdjenk

        "Everyone got a tax cut under Trump, the middle class got the highest % of a cut!"

        I paid a higher % after T**** tax cut (for the rich), and I'm low-middle income.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "Everyone got a tax cut under Trump"

        No one said otherwise.

        "the middle class got the highest % of a cut!"

        The top 1% with get a $60,000 on average cut. The bottom 60% will get around $500. To be in the top 1% you have to make over $400,000 a year btw.

        Who do you think could actually use the money more?

        https://taxpolicycenter.org/model-estimates/conference-agreement-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-dec-2017/t17-0314-conference-agreement

        1. georgezilla

          And let's not forget that in his first term, Trump had a net LOSS in jobs.

      3. HereIAmJH Silver badge

        Tax Cut

        Everyone got a tax cut under Trump, the middle class got the highest % of a cut!

        Not everyone. I received more per check, because they changed the withholding tables to make it look like you were getting more. But my tax return was decimated (literally). I lost some important deductions that far exceeded the increase in standard deduction as well. And I live in a Red state, not a high SALT one. An additional factor to this is my charitable contributions dropped dramatically, because I can't claim them without itemizing, and I no longer have the deductions to itemize. I estimate a 1 to 2% pay cut due to the 'tax cuts'.

        I'll also note that after receiving part of the first COVID stimulus payment, I earned too much for any subsequent ones.

        But I'll sure get to pay my part of the massive debt generated by GOP administrations. Taken directly from my Social Security checks.

      4. georgezilla

        " ... But you leave that out because ... " Because it's just not true. And extending it this year will add another $4.7 TRILLION to the deficit. You know, that thing that Republicans whine about the Democrats doing? All the while it's the Republicans that have ran it up the most. By a large margin.

      5. JLV Silver badge

        Can you spell d-e-f-i-c-i-t?

        Or is that only a word when Dems are in charge? All Very Stable Genius did was to run up the credit card some more and call it natural economic growth.

        Modern day right wingers are just at crap at economics as old style tax ‘n spend folk. They just forego the tax bit to spend for their goodies.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "Modern day right wingers are just at crap at economics"

          As we watch Starmer and Reeves spiral the UK economy into the ground with their tax, borrow and give to their mates plan.

          1. JLV Silver badge

            Oh, you missed the part where I was heaping praise on modern left wing economics. You know why you missed it? Because I didn't.

            Though now that you mention it, Blair - Labour, Clinton - Democrats and Macron - originally split off from PSF, did do a pretty good job. Thatcher did too, I am not dogmatic. And even Reagan achieved running the USSR into the ground.

            Damn lot better than Trump or the Brexiters, economics n deficits-wise.

  13. JohnMurray

    Hmmm,,,,,

    At a White House dinner in February of 2011, President Obama asked former Apple CEO Steven P. Jobs what it would take to build iPhones in the United States.

    The answer was not what Obama wanted to hear. “Those jobs aren’t coming back,” Jobs said.

    https://www.tuck.dartmouth.edu/news/articles/bringing-macs-back-to-the-u.s

  14. Howard Sway Silver badge

    predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

    I thought all these pointless new "AI" stuffed machines with expensive GPUs were going to cost about that much more to get anyway, so that'll be another 45% on top of the original planned 45%. Take into account that the chaos in the rest of the economy will mean that fewer people can afford to pay this extra money, and Trump could have killed off the AI hypewagon, albeit in a stupid and damaging way.

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

      The international repercussions are going to be interesting.

      Given the vast majority of laptops on the market, regardless of brand, are manufactured by 6 Taiwanese companies: Quanta, Compal, Wistron, Inventec, Pegatron, and Foxconn…

      As we have seen with Huawei, Trump can be expected to poison international trade, so that US allies are bullied into buying the US manufactured product over the cheaper and better non-US version. Ie. Dell Europe will have to source from Dell US and not from Taiwan…

      1. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

        Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

        There is no reason we wouldn't import from Taiwan! As far as I know there are no current nor proposed bans on Taiwanese companies.

        You are confusing Taiwan with China!

        That is why this article is complete BS!

        1. Tom 38

          Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

          Cliff, if the US allows Russia to annex part or all of Ukraine, and if the US themselves have expansionist agendas, there will be no confusing ROC with PRC as there will only be PRC.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

            Do you support reunification of Ireland and Northern Ireland?

            1. georgezilla

              Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

              I live in neither of those countries. So my opinion is more then meaningless, irrelevant. As is yours if you don't either..

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

              Reunification is always an interesting word in that context. Ireland went from having 4 provinces, each with its own king, to being a unified country subservient to England about 900 years ago. The southern ¾ then broke away 100 years ago. Reunification would imply a return to a situation where the whole island was part of the UK. I don't think they'd like that.

            3. Tom 38

              Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

              No, I support Ipswich Town Football Club

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

          He proposed tariffs on all imports. Just higher tariffs on China. Taiwanese companies have factories in mainland China. Foxconn is Taiwanese, but build iPhones in Shenzhen.

      2. HereIAmJH Silver badge

        Re: predicted the price of laptops and tablets would rise 45 percent for American buyers

        Trump can be expected to poison international trade, so that US allies are bullied into buying the US manufactured product over the cheaper and better non-US version.

        Which allies would those be? Canada, Mexico, Denmark? If the US doesn't honor trade agreements, why bother dealing with us at all?

        Top 5 US trading partners in November 2024

        1 Mexico

        2 Canada

        3 China

        4 Germany

        5 Japan

        https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/topcm.html

  15. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

    Another biased west coast article

    "Trump's argument is that slapping more tariffs on electronics that are made in China and imported into the United States will force manufacturers to onshore their factories, back to the US, and build products domestically. The report doubts this will ever happen, and instead, manufacturing will simply shift from China to other countries that are cheaper to operate in than the US, and have lower tariffs, which is in line with earlier research on the topic."

    So the author states that the premise of the article, that goods will become more expensive, is most likely not going to happen because manufacturing will shift to other countries with a more equal trade position than China, which is exactly what the point of the hard line trade policy is about! This isn't about tariffs, it's about forcing other countries to stop taking advantage of this country.

    And let's face it, the majority of the important parts of personal computers is not made in China, they are made in places like Taiwan!

    And here is another fact the author deliberately leaves out! Under the 1st Trump Admin he put tariffs on Chinese goods, no one complained! The Biden regime left them in place!

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Another biased west coast article

      The 'important parts' ie the CPU is made in Taiwan. Only the motherboard, screen, battery, case and assembly is Chinese.

      We only have to transfer the low skill, low cost assembly to plants in the USA and buy all the other components from China through Vietnamese middlemen.

      Something something great again.

    2. georgezilla

      Re: Another biased west coast article

      " ... Trump's argument is that slapping more tariffs on electronics that are made in China and imported into the United States will force manufacturers to onshore their factories, back to the US, and build products domestically. ... " To paraphrase Steve Jobs, founder of Apple .............. BULLSHIT!

    3. georgezilla

      Re: Another biased west coast article

      " ... This isn't about tariffs, it's about forcing other countries to stop taking advantage of this country. ... " Taking advantage? It's called "capitalism". It's how shit actually works.

      And yes we actually DID complain. You just weren't listening. And didn't want to hear it. People still believe that China is paying for the tariffs. In spite of what their wallets are telling them.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Apple's margins

    Cost, or price? The cost will squeeze Apple's giant margins. But the price will stay the same, as salaries will not increase 68%.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Apple's margins

      Apple won't be affected by tarrifs.

      Apple can contribute a $Bn to a Florida golf course and be exempted.

      It can declare that the 'value' of the Chinese made iPhone is only $100 for duty purposes because the $1500 worth of iOS is added in America.

  17. FuzzyTheBear
    Mushroom

    Nutcase

    PS i encourage Vulture Central to introduce a new Clown icon. For obvious reasons.

    He dosen't care about reality. Threatening to take Quebec by force. Greenland , Panama , the whole of Canada.

    He's obviously a clown that forgot a few details : NATO for one and the fact he's not a Russian but an American.

    Imagine a NATO country being attacked by the USA. NATO being NATO he'd just have declared WW3 against the whole of the world.

    Obviously an idiot.

    Vote for the clown show , get idiots as a bonus.

    I pity the Americans. I used to look up to them , now i spit on them.

    Signed a Quebecer.

  18. JLV Silver badge

    From Trump 1.0 we can generally assume 2 things:

    1. Trump will demure on doing, or be unable to achieve, a lot of stupid unrealistic things he has committed to do/achieve.

    2. Trump will do lots of stupid things on the spur of the moment that no one saw coming.

    The ratio of 1 to 2 is unpredictable and unclear with his advancing age and ever increasing whacko-ness: "let's invade Greenland and Panama, while incorporating Canada".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I'm less concerned about random Trump bullshit this time around as all the people who have attached to him.

      The ones with actual plans

      1. JLV Silver badge

        You're right. A number of people from Project 2025 - that Trump "knew nothing about" - are being nominated to senior positions. Still, one hopes that sanity will prevail.

        https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-project-2025-cabinet-picks-1989565

  19. galbak

    This is good, instead of buying cheap laptops, then throwing them away in a few years or so, increasing waste, people will keep them longer.

  20. FuzzyTheBear
    Mushroom

    Only thing

    that Trump cares about is himself. The Americans that voted for him will be thrown under the bus and that's it.

    Voting for a convicted felon might not have been your best bet.

    1. codejunky Silver badge

      Re: Only thing

      @FuzzyTheBear

      "that Trump cares about is himself. The Americans that voted for him will be thrown under the bus and that's it."

      Amazingly stated as though Biden cared about anyone or that he didnt throw the people under a bus. With full support of Harris, dems, media, so on.

      "Voting for a convicted felon might not have been your best bet."

      4 years under the protected one propped up by Harris was better? At least Trump has a good previous record to fall back on.

      1. Yankee Doodle Doofus Bronze badge

        Re: Only thing

        < "At least Trump has a good previous record to fall back on."

        I hate to insult the intelligence of so many voters, but anyone who believes that was either not paying attention, or should never have advanced past 3rd grade.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: Only thing

          @Yankee Doodle Doofus

          "I hate to insult the intelligence of so many voters, but anyone who believes that was either not paying attention, or should never have advanced past 3rd grade."

          Are you sure? Why was Obama trying to take credit for Trumps economy? I am assuming you would like to look instead at the virus from China and somehow blame Trump for that, except his response was great. He did what he needed to for the US to be supplied and get the vaccine quickly and didnt become a deranged authoritarian dictator And he still spent less than the Biden admin with an actual emergency to deal with.

          1. ChodeMonkey Bronze badge

            Re: Only thing

            In addition to Operation Warp Speed, where he diverted money from covid response to vaccine rollout, Trump also pushed the boundaries of science by floating new ideas and asking ground breaking questions such as, could we hit the body with ultra-violet or very strong light? Or even bring the light into the body via the skin or some other way. Or using cleaning agents? Musing if there's a way to use something like that, by injection inside them inside people or almost a cleaning.

            What other administration could have done this?

            And not a single accolade. What a shame.

            Second time may be the charm.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: Only thing

              @ChodeMonkey

              "What other administration could have done this?"

              Sure he did very well dealing with the global emergency of Covid. I expect there are others who could also do a good job but I wouldnt assume such competency nor ability from Biden or Harris.

  21. Bbuckley

    Actually a very clever move that the socialist dummies never thought of - if you want cheaper laptops manufacture them in the USA, not China.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Doomed

    Were all doomed and all goverments/leaders are as bad as each other.

  23. Grunchy Silver badge

    Bah

    I cast about and I’ve got at least 5 laptops kicking around. Sure, they’re all “obsolete” but they all run Win10 just fine, which means they’ll run Mint even better.

    I checked out the tech dumpster at work and harvested two more Dell laptops, both Win11 class. 1 had a dead battery ($40), the other needed a new screen ($100).

    Shit, now I’ve got SEVEN laptops kicking around ! !

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like