Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Tariffs and bikes
Date: 5 Apr 2025 15:42:26 GMT
Lines: 153
Message-ID: <m5d1b2F7nljU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <cmtvujp4du2ueafd153951ipsg86rkf38e@4ax.com>
 <vsp0k4$3qc5f$2@dont-email.me>
 <sb30vjd5lq5pq7e298ninvooid01bqsl07@4ax.com>
 <vsp375$3th0l$1@dont-email.me>
 <br40vj5rh6kqm1jd9cgsd65msj77q9h6l3@4ax.com>
 <5m21vj57bq9h5smrafjg4dergur4dcm8ju@4ax.com>
 <ato1vjdfa9ruh5u5gc2qlqjij3u6di3m5d@4ax.com>
 <4nq1vj91g2c1m1e3bpqoik41btg5lmlmjf@4ax.com>
 <alu1vjlh8ln3emcrot31n1cdd9s39mdq4l@4ax.com>
 <guu1vj5hvg6unog86omdo27hstcg8d5ri5@4ax.com>
 <fk22vj9f17vjfitmsh7q88i725fh5p40b0@4ax.com>
 <0m72vjt9d2o6dov7shr1va6merekps2v4a@4ax.com>
 <vsrd2t$28n8r$7@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net IIhe7FCLNB5xN+XQrCYHYA1zKnnOPxDRMpamSmi8efPyVzJDOY
Cancel-Lock: sha1:waCHRbFcH9Ca0lnAzsVNsWoUY4g= sha1:qL9HjFbTYk3jjnfat0aH08UzFno= sha256:JUDeUGuYYYVckhQ4LWGKd/h0U9G9LeKAfT+EDMdjpXY=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> On 4/5/2025 7:26 AM, John B. wrote:
>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, Catrike Ryder
>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 16:58:36 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 05:43:25 -0400, Catrike Ryder
>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:45:48 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms
>>>>>>>>>>>> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
>>>>>>>>>>>> on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Trickle-Down Economics."
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
>>>>>>>>>>>> new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
>>>>>>>>>>>> purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
>>>>>>>>>>>> like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
>>>>>>>>>>>> consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
>>>>>>>>>>>> more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be
>>>>>>>>>>> affected by tariffs.  The current high grocery prices are a product of
>>>>>>>>>>> the inflation that happened over the last four years.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> "when will they ever learn?"
>>>>>>>>>>> --Pete Seeger
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also
>>>>>>>>>> elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
>>>>>>>>>> rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even
>>>>>>>>>> though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force.
>>>>>>>>> It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do
>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Vegetable	Imported From	Total Market Value (USD)
>>>>>>>> Bell Peppers	Mexico	$1.4 billion
>>>>>>>> Cucumbers	Mexico	$607 million
>>>>>>>> Cauliflower,
>>>>>>>> Broccoli	Mexico	$301 million
>>>>>>>> Asparagus	Mexico                $386 million
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an
>>>>>>> import tariff might be the way to do it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in
>>>>>> the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are
>>>>>> imported. So why don't they?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Well, obviously, because the foreign stuff is cheaper. Perhaps the
>>>>> tariffs will change that.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Well, if the U.S. can manufacture cheaply it will work.
>>> 
>>> Presumably, it only needs to be cheaper than the cost of the foreign
>>> stuff after tariffs are applied...
>> 
>> The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and then the
>> other side applies a tariff.and at the same time the side with the
>> most to lose is looking for other sources.
>> 
>> In the U.S. China soybean battle the end result was that China found
>> another source and the U.S lost 1/4 of their sales to some country in
>> S.America.
>> .
>> 
>> 
>>> But how long
>>>> will you have to go without before U.S. production can replace the
>>>> foreign suppliers.  In that respect some years ago there was a program
>>>> to repair or rebuild some of the bays bridges in California. I read
>>>> the article and they were excusing the use of steel from China as
>>>> "steel of this specification and size is not manufactured in the U.S."
>>> 
>>> I suspect the goal is to get the tariffs applied by the other
>>> countries removed or decreased.
>>> 
>>> As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
>>> unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood
>>> by and watched it happen.
>> 
>> What unfair tactics?
> 
> 
> " The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and 
> then the other side applies a tariff.and at the same time 
> the side with the most to lose is looking for other sources."
> 
> Yes, that's right about usual patterns.
> 
> In this instance, Israel reduced duty on US goods to zero 
> within hours. Vietnam followed with deep rate cuts as have 
> others. And it's only been a few days so far.
> 
That’s rather cherry picking! China has hit back hard, and number of other
countries or blocks such as the EU are highly likely to respond in kind.

And would seem generally moves away from the US economy ie choose non
American suppliers and so on, or investment.

Predictions are as ever difficult but this isn’t going to end well for the
US economy or its people. Brexit wasn’t great for UK economy but it’s small
beer compared to this!

> I get the principles and history and reasoning overall, but 
> some of this looks just batshit crazy* to me.  But I'm an 
> outside observer with limited information.  I'll reserve 
> final judgement as the pieces on this board are all in 
> motion yet.
> 
> 
> 
> *Targeted protection for favored players (auto assembly) 
> will turn out just like Mao's backyard scrap steel kilns in 
> 1958. Really ugly.
> 

Roger Merriman