←back to thread

462 points JumpCrisscross | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
hippo22 ◴[] No.45078622[source]
I’d like to lay out an argument about why tariffs are good.

The only businesses that are derailing with tariffs issues are those that import goods to sell. The argument against tariffs is that they make goods more expensive.

Of course, this argument is true. But that’s not the end of the story.

Because prices are higher for imported goods, demand for domestically produced goods increases. This increase in demand leads to increased demand for labor, which can increase wages. Additionally, the money multiplier effect is higher when money is kept domestically vs paid to offshore parties.

Finally, I think it’s ridiculous to expect that this nation can maintain its wealth without producing anything. We act as if the producers of food are fungible cogs that businesses can swap out. But I think we’ll find that management is the fungible part. Anyone can sell a quality good. Knowing how to make it is what’s important. I’m surprised that mindset doesn’t resonate more with software engineers.

replies(14): >>45078640 #>>45078641 #>>45078655 #>>45078666 #>>45078667 #>>45078673 #>>45078695 #>>45078775 #>>45078850 #>>45079034 #>>45079108 #>>45080080 #>>45082608 #>>45082629 #
kristjansson ◴[] No.45078641[source]
A cogent, long range tariff and industrial policy might accomplish something like this over a period of years. Does that describe the last 6 months?
replies(2): >>45078664 #>>45095999 #
hippo22 ◴[] No.45078664[source]
Sure, a cogent policy would be ideal. But you can’t let perfect be the enemy of the good. America was getting their lunch eaten well before Trump. At least the tariff policy is an attempt at rectifying the situation.
replies(3): >>45078819 #>>45079080 #>>45083287 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45078819[source]
> you can’t let perfect be the enemy of the good

You can let bad be the enemy of both good and perfect.

Investment in manufacturing structures is down in ‘25 [1]. Manufacturing activity in the northeast is down, with “the new orders index dip[ping] into negative territory” [2].

Tariffs can reduce trade imbalances and incentivize domestic production. We’re not doing that. Our tariffs are too volatile. They tax manufacturing inputs. Tweets grasping for the straws of a Nobel prize cede prized export markets like India to China [3]. Cancelled licenses for nearly-complete projects add risk [4].

The policies of a degrowth leftist who wanted to reduce our industrial output and pivot to manufacturing would be virtually identical.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/C307RX1Q020SBEA

[2] https://www.philadelphiafed.org/surveys-and-data/regional-ec...

[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/30/us/politics/trump-modi-in...

[4] https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/us-orders-orsted-ha...

replies(1): >>45079656 #
1. hippo22 ◴[] No.45079656[source]
From your first link, investment in manufacturing is lower than in 2024 (by like 3%), but both 2024 and 2025 (Trump’s presidency) are the highest datapoints in that dataset.

Also, your second link generally paints a mixed picture, not an outright negative one:

> On balance, the firms indicated an increase in employment, and the price indexes rose further above their long-run averages. The survey’s broad indicators for future activity suggest that firms continue to expect growth over the next six months.

I think it’s misguided to interpret current data as evidence either for or against the current policies. This is something that’s going to take a decade plus to play out. Trying to use data to call winners 6 months in isn’t really possible.

replies(1): >>45124087 #
2. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45124087[source]
> investment in manufacturing is lower than in 2024 (by like 3%), but both 2024 and 2025 (Trump’s presidency) are the highest datapoints in that dataset

Sure, it’s down in ‘25 and has stalled a multi-year trend. The most-recent data show that trend spreading.

> something that’s going to take a decade plus to play out

Won’t get there. One, the policy is changing on a week-to-week basis. And two, there is no bipartisan buy-in to this policy.

The tariffs could have worked were they sensibly implemented. They weren’t. As structured, they are politically and economically infeasible for their aims. (Great if you’re an intermediary, though.)