Tweak

joined 2 years ago
[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 0 points 1 week ago (5 children)

How am I trying to appease Trump? You call me a moron, and yet nothing you say makes sense.

At least we can agree that Trump is a cunt lol.

All I'm saying is that IF a country wants to apply a retaliatory tariff, they should do so in the interests of their own country. They should ring fence the revenue from the tariff and re-invest that in local businesses to replace the foreign imports.

However I don't think that's necessary. America isn't a cheap manufacturing source, it's expensive high tech. Tariffs are meant to balance prices - like tariffs on cheap Chinese EVs, such that other EVs can be competitive on price. American stuff is already more expensive, so a tariff doesn't change the equation.

People don't need tariffs to incentivise themselves not to buy American. They need alternative options to American goods and services. Tariffs won't do that, at least not without proper planning and re-investment.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Export tariffs would cause even fewer European goods in USA. Nah, let’s not do that.

Not necessarily. Canada has had some success with tariffing exports of electricity. The key part here is that the US can't stop buying electricity, so sales from Canadian electrical businesses don't go down, the US just pays more to Canada.

The point being, a tariff has to be clever. It has to minimise the damage at home and maximise the damage overseas. Trump's tariffs don't do this, because he's trying to damage America just as much as he's trying to damage everywhere else.

Other countries should not do what Trump's doing, as it will damage their own country.

We’re going to hit them where it hurts.

That's the thing, a retaliatory tariff probably won't hurt them. For one, it would only (mildly) affect certain US businesses. For another, people generally don't have an alternative source, so they end up just paying the tariff. Both US businesses and local people get hurt, the only benefit is that the government gets more money - but that's not really a benefit if the government isn't re-investing it. The US government doesn't really care about US businesses, so they're not going to capitulate. In the end no one wins except the two governments have more money to piss up the wall.

We're already looking at buying less from the US wherever possible. People want alternatives, and the US isn't a cheap source (like China is) so it's already easy for local businesses to undercut them on price - you don't need to add a tariff to tip the balance. Tariffs won't incentivise people, they're already incentivised, they need options.

If a tariff isn't paying for such an option then it isn't worthwile.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago

If only workplaces would stop using WhatsApp.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 1 points 1 week ago (7 children)

You are being ridiculous and calling me names. Grow up, slow down, read what I've said and actually think about it. Instead of just acting irrationally and emotional.

I didn't say not to respond, I said not to do the exact same thing he's doing.

Import tariffs are a tax on local people. Raising taxes must be justified. In particular, there must be a plan to spend the money raised through tariffs.

Trump has not given any plan, because he is almost certainly going to steal the money.

If any other country wants to implement a tariff, they must do so with a plan to better their country with the tariff revenue, otherwise they're no better than Trump. You are, in fact, trying to encourage them to do this with no plan. You are enabling other politicians to be like Trump.

Don't do that.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 0 points 1 week ago (5 children)

No, a good tariff includes a plan on what to do with tariff revenue. Ideally, such a plan should re-invest into incentives for local businesses to replace the foreign ones.

An import tariff is a tax on citizens. Taxes must be justified.

The effect of tariffs nationally should be considered before the international effects. Especially with import tariffs.

If you want a good tariff to target America, you should look at export tariffs. This is generally seen as less favourable, as this often means reduced sales for local businesses, but the actual payment is borne by the other nation. Canada has been doing this with their export tariffs on electricity to the US, and that seems to be a truly effective bargaining chip because the US can't stop buying it, so Canadian businesses don't actually see lost sales. It's literally Canada charging the US more for the same.


Import tariffs mean less business for the other country, but more expense for your people.

Export tariffs mean less business for your country, but more expense for their people.

Both result in raising tax revenue for your country. This is why governments are entertaining the idea of tariffs, not because they're good for their country necessarily, but because it might be a very good political opportunity for them to raise more money.

What makes the tariff good for the country is what the money is spent on. Trump will not spend it on America, he will steal it. If other countries want to create tariffs they should at least have a plan to make good use of the money, otherwise they're no better than Trump.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 9 points 1 week ago

She narced on herself to Canada, then America overheard.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Exactly. Canada refused her entry first, then when America learned why they detained her.

She should have been deported and put on the next flight at her expense, not detained for nearly 3 weeks, but she definitely fucked up and took the piss with her visa.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (16 children)

You seem like you're being willfully ignorant and clinging to that.

I've explained the reason: BECAUSE CITIZENS OF THE COUNTRY THAT SETS THE TARIFF PAYS THE TARIFF.

Americans won't pay the retaliatory tariff. A retaliatory tariff will only have a small effect on American businesses. It will have a big effect on citizens of the country that set the tariff.

Not setting a tariff isn't appeasing Trump. It's taking the wellbeing of your country first, and not getting drawn into a pointless trade war.

Literally the main and most immediate purpose of a tariff is to raise money for the government. America is taxing Americans with a tariff, but they have no plan to spend that money (because Trump is going to steal it). If other governments are also going to raise money through their own tariff tax, then they should do so with a plan to spend the money on their country - they shouldn't just copy Trump and do what he does, BECAUSE THAT WILL HURT THEIR OWN CITIZENS, JUST LIKE TRUMP IS HURTING AMERICANS.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They do a 60W C to C cable, that should definitely provide other charging modes. Probably 3A at 20V.

3A at 5V would be fairly slow, yes, but you don't get higher power levels by just increasing the current - in fact most charging modes don't go above 3A. I expect the other cables also allow for higher charging voltages.

Heat loss is proportional to current squared, so keeping current down is ideal.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We do actually need more of this, non-Chinese cable manufacture. USB cables these days contain microcontrollers (to negotiate charging power, it's not just between the device and charger anymore but a 3-way decision including the cable) and these microcontrollers can have all sorts of dodgy functionality on top - but are still indistinguishable through most inspection methods. Such functionality can include wifi hotpots allowing remote configuration and script injectors to hack devices plugged in.

This problem is so significant that Microsoft changed how Windows handles USB devices and made many existing USB to RS232 serial leads non-functional in Windows 11.

However €25 for a single 1m USB A to C cable is insane. That would be like €3 on Amazon or eBay.

view more: ‹ prev next ›