Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yeah. Specially because the U.S economy is service-focused (and consumption as well).

Like, imagine now that all your computers will be more expensive/worse. This will affect services from like, a law firm - to a tech company. Will make harder for young buy good computers and start to code, etc.

I say this as a Brazilian, to us Brazilians watching, this is like: Why are the U.S repeating the same mistake?

I don't think Americans know this, but here in Brazil, we also have phone, tablet and PC national brands (Positivo¹, Multi², Philco³). National TV brands like Semp, AOC, Mondial. A ton of home appliances brands like Mondial, Philco, Britânia.

But why Americans don't know them? Because they only exists because of the tariffs. So they only exists in Brazil internal market. They are worse than foreign brands, but they exists because it's cheaper to buy a Mondial Kitchen Stand mixer than a Kitchen Aid!

And worse that most of these products are only white-label Chinese products, sold way more expensive than the real chinese ones.

This also create a whole gray market. A lot of people start smuggling products without import tax.

And this only with a 7% average tariff. Not the U.S 29% lol. Brazil with 31%~ prior to the 90's was WAY worse than this. A lot of brands just died when we opened a little the market (Consul, Brastemp, were Brazilian big fridge, Washing machine etc makers, they got bought by Whirlpool in the 90's)

American Brands then will now look for the U.S gov to ask for exceptions too, and this create a lot of corruption. And after you put these tariffs and there's a whole new companies made to internal market, it's almost impossible to remove because of the lobby from these companies (and corruption).

[1] https://loja.meupositivo.com.br/ [2] https://www.multilaser.com.br/ [3] https://www.philco.com.br/



Not for nothing, but Philco is/was an American brand. The Phil is for Philadelphia.

The fact that Americans don't even recognize it anymore may make a better case for the policy than against.


In Brazil, the Philco operation was bought by Gradiente (The company that sued Apple over the use of the iPhone trademark) in 2005. Before that, Philco was from Itau (a Brazilian bank).

https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradiente_(empresa)


Stop. Hold on. You just heard a solid set of examples and logic on why the tariffs were bad for Brazil's consumers and your takeaway was that one brand that couldn't compete in the US moved to the sheltered manufacturing environment and that is good?

The policy is good for uncompetitive manufacturing - and so you are in support of it? Why is that less-competitive manufacturer from Philly who couldn't compete anywhere but Brazil more important than the people of that country?


Not at all - I'm not really taking a solid stance one way or another because I'm not an economist.

My only point was that Philco was being used as an unknown crappy Brazilian brand example. It used to be an American company that actually made quality things, and through outsourcing and general 'physical and financial enshittification' is pretty much an unknown to Americans now.

If you're in favor of quality things being made in the US, it's an argument for said policy.


But the examples _just_ given show that the same kind of tariff policy in Brazil caused shitty local options that could never compete with the outside world and cited example after example. The whole "grey" market for un-tariffef foreign goods.

There is nothing that says tariffs cause quality things to be built locally and the examples are counter to that.


Yes I understood the post but the difference is that Brazil didn't have a burgeoning or top tier electronics industry at any point I can remember. The US did and slowly gave it away to cheaper producers. Further, the average American has more disposable income and won't necessarily just grab what's cheapest.

So it's not easy to conclude they are the same in any fashion.

The question is what would happen today if the US ends up in the same situation. Will we go back to producing top tier electronics, or get stuck with crappy brands taking advantage of the situation? It's hard to say. I'd guess a mix of both. Top tier stuff would probably in house what they can, but the low end would get much, much worse. But that's just me guessing.


So if we want electronics manufacturing, economists agree, targeted tariffs can encourage local electronics manufacturing.

The US does targeted tariffs all the time, including 100% on Chinese electric vehicles because otherwise they could undercut the entire US auto industry.

Blanket tariffs have been tried. We can point to examples. They are bad. Economists agree here too. The US and allies have worked long and hard at reducing barriers to trade and we have avocado toast in January to thank for it. The alternative is to suggest the US can and will be the best at everything (or at least at enough things to offset the obvious loss in purchasing power of people).

A bit of an aside: there is this bizarre "anti-global" thing gaining more traction. Global trade ties economies together disincentivizing war. Isolationism promotes war because you need to own more to grow the economic pie. It drives towards taking over other territories, like, say, Greenland or Canada. Trade expands the economic pie.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: