Liberal Forum

LowIQTrash » 19 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

19 minutes ago

Bad takes from people on both sides.

Tax incidence (burden) falls on the side that is more inelastic.

If consumers desperately want Apple products (which they do, you would be hard pressed to find a more fanatical herd), and Trump passes a tariff on Apple products made outside the USA, the consumer would bear the majority of the burden.

For something like GE appliances vs Samsung or Whirlpool appliances, I assume consumers have more elasticity / are brand agnostic, so it either ends up being a wash (both sides share the tax burden) or the company that manufactures overseas will have to absorb the majority of higher costs. 

There is no “tariffs good” or “tariffs bad.”

@Cannonpointer

Yes, in general, tariffs simply steer consumers otherwhere. In the case of Apple or Toyota - two examples of brands with fanatical customer loyalty (though Toyota will never foreseeably be threatened with tariffs) - the cost would be absorbed at least in large part and likely in toto by the customer.

As you said, there is no "tariffs good" or "tariffs bad." Tariffs can be disastrous or they can be godsends or they can be of little import. They are a prodigious tool to manage a nation's consumer market, applied properly. Democ rats used to adore them, back when the democ rat party represented workers and not wall skreet.

Detroit was softened and almost ruined by tariffs. When they were lifted, Detroit lost a **** of a lot of market because of their slack-assed ways. The conjobs have this much correct: competition drive competence.