Who pays for these extra tariffs? Is it the corps? I thought conservatives were pretty much pro capitalism to any lengths and means?
American business may absorb some (in which case some investors/401ks will hurt for it) or more likely, the American consumer will pay the bulk of it. Bad news either way.
...because of the sex-offender in the Oval
Ohh so you buying it from a Chinese store yourself ? Then it doesn’t make any sense - then you will pay the extra tariffs when it arrives (or shortly after - they are sometimes being charged at a later point)- there can always only be 1 of two that pay the tariffs - either the shop that imports or the customer that imports
then many americans get hit twice
by increased costs past on by american businesses who pay rumps tariffs
and by losses to their 401 k
And I thought Democrats were pro-union jobs?
Too funny that when Trump is pushing for more American manufacturing jobs by forcing corps to manufacture in USA, even then they scream. Cause it's TRUMP!!!!!
The UAW gets a new contract during Biden admin, dems go 
. Trump pushes for more made in America, with results, dems go 
. Both end up raising costs.
@UNIMAN
Ok so the usual DEM retort with some spin which has nothing to do with my comment. My comment was conservatives are pro capitalism to any lengths and means. Do you understand what that means and why the entire premise of tariffs is imploded with the underlying concept of capitalism is the core economic foundation of conservatives? You cannot be anti government pro capitalism and also in support of retaliatory anti-capitalism tariffs, you are being a selective hypocrite in supporting tariffs and also being against government involvement in economic activity.
It is almost like conservatives are in support of whatever suits their purpose not in a core value they pretend to support, that means you cannot be both and cannot have both and then be a partisan hack like you are and were above in the reply. The union DEM tag is kind of a multi decade old relic which has less and less meaning as unions are not anywhere near as powerful and prevalent as in prior generations, especially politically.
I get it, definitely more fun to speak in generalities and hypotheticals than examine a real life example, especially in support of whatever suits one's purpose.
However, I dug deeper from the sourcer to see how they're addressing.......and transferring the cost to me the consumer. Below is their published information as if May 12th.
While the 90 days reduction in tariffs from 145% to 30% is good news, we are not out of the woods yet. The De Minimis exemption seems to be gone for good, so that means:
1. 54% tariffs must be paid for direct from China to consumer.
2. There will likely be a "customs brokering fee" for every parcel
3. This is likely to cause gridlock at US Customs.
4. This is only a 90 day reprieve!
We will be researching and discussing with DHL about the best approach for resuming shipping to the USA from our .COM site. We are planning to pay all the tariffs and fees on our side so you as the customer won't need to bothered to deal with with that, but we need to pin down the costs first. We will likely absorb most of the costs so that if we need to raise prices on our offerings it will be minimal. Any price increases will be for USA customers only. Other countries will not see any price increase.
UPDATE: De Minimis for under $800 is now set at 54%. Not good!
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/05/modifying-reciprocal-tariff-rates-to-reflect-discussions-with-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
@unplucked_gem
Think through the comment you made above or quoted or whatever I am not sure if you copy pasted that stuff or came up with it yourself. The wording about the consumer not needing to deal with it, how is this even a concept that anyone would try and make? The consumer pays for goods and services, we are the demand for consumption and without it there is no product or commerce. The consumer absorbs every single part of costs including tariffs, shipping, customs fees whatever. When Starbucks said that the cost of coffee beans was going up and that meant higher prices, that means as an input cost goes up so does the cost of the end product/service in a JIT inventory economy.
Any increase in costs is borne by the consumer since the consumer is the buyer of the goods/service in question.
It does suck to be wrong, but no need to question my integrity:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1J3NQimW8Y/
Ordered before tariffs and ordered after tariffs = essentially same price. Looked into why and the company absorbed the cost.
Im not a business owner but would guess they'd rather eat into their mark up and move merchandise/keep customers than pass on the cost increase and lose both.
Either way I dont care cause it was the same cost pre and post tarrif thus anecdotally sinking the arguments ramroded here
@unplucked_gem
If you are trying to prove a point based on a single item or even hundreds of items that is really not the point. I saw your tea comment but didnt reply since you are quite rude to me and the concept of tea either proving or disproving a macro point is just a bit off in my book. If a business wants to erode margin by not passing along cost increases that is their choice but the point isnt that your tea was cheap and is still cheap after customs and tariff costs. My point was that the CONSUMER absorbs all costs, we as consumers are buying the goods and services so whatever increase in costs is absorbed when you purchase your tea or a cup of starbucks or a e-bike made in China. The buyer is the one who is paying so any and all costs are absorbed by the buyer of the item.
The largest point though in all of this is as a conservative the core of your economic belief system is that government not be involved in the capitalist structure we have so why is the government arbitrarily and punitively imposing tariffs something that the TNC and any conservative republican would support? If a US business cannot compete with whatever the dynamic is then isnt the principals of capitalism that said business does not deserve to exist? If you are a conservative then tariffs go against your construct and yet here we are Trump playing with his plastic baseball bat trying to be a bully and your side seems to forget about capitalism and having the government out of the economic equation.
you are trying to prove a point based on a single item or even hundreds of items that is really not the point.
Not trying to prove anything.
Sharing my anecdotal experiences that run contrary to generic examples here....up to and including a coffee / Starbucks example in response to a tea discussion.
My point was that the CONSUMER absorbs all costs, we as consumers are buying the goods and services so whatever increase in costs is absorbed when you purchase your tea or a cup of starbucks or a e-bike made in China. The buyer is the one who is paying so any and all costs are absorbed by the buyer of the item.
I view this largely as semantics. Similar to the argument.....I mean discussion about whether the winner or loser of a bet pays the juice. But your point is not invalid.
why is the government arbitrarily and punitively imposing tariffs something that the TNC and any conservative republican would support?
Not saying he's right or wrong, but DJT believes their is disparity and the US is being taken advantage of, so this is his recourse. He is the policy maker so it is what it is. I'll buy qhat I want, avoid what I dont, and make a note when voting comes back around....if the pain is to unavoidable.
If a US business cannot compete with whatever the dynamic is then isnt the principals of capitalism that said business does not deserve to exist?
Definitely agree here. Much larger discussion with unions, labor costs / conditions. I would very loosely liken this to restaurants in covid shifting to takeout. Adapt or die.
If you are a conservative then tariffs go against your construct and yet here we are Trump playing with his plastic baseball bat trying to be a bully and your side seems to forget about capitalism and having the government out of the economic equation.
Asked and answered.
As to the rest, im just a citizen and dont have a bat. They all do stuff I agree with and other stuff I dont.
I do know there are very few things in that track on a linearly out of a text book. Meaning you can have some conservative values and be pliable should there be a need for it.
@unplucked_gem
Ok so tip toe around a core belief is curious, conservatives are against government interaction and especially the federal government that the capitalist economy is the decider of who wins and loses not the government. Trump allegedly imposing tariffs is pretty much 100% inverse to what conservatives believe and to me it does not work anyway.
Disparity is not a term used in capitalism, any inequality has to either be equalized by efficiencies or technology or that business just does not survive, that is capitalism. If we really were serious about a level playing field and equality and disparity we would stop subsidizing our defense contractors, our farmers and all our ag producers. The reality is that people are clueless about what they support and what their core beliefs are especially since we are not a capitalist economy at all.
If we want to eliminate communist subsidizing of our goods and service the only way to accomplish this is to close trade borders completely and isolate to only service our domestic demand and do not engage with parties which are counter to capitalism, IF we really are interested in disparity, these tariffs are stupid kiddie crap that accomplish nothing..he is not teaching any lessons or making a level playing field when we are subsidizing our own businesses and there are a million ways around tariffs.
Disparity is not a term used in capitalism, any inequality has to either be equalized by efficiencies or technology or that business just does not survive
Disagree here. Not every country has capitalism as their system.
In this case Trump has equalized by leveraging the reserve currency and the might of the US military.
Again Trump viewed disparity and applied tariffs. Seemingly without regard to appropriate capitalism terminology.
Time will tell if the "gap" closes.
I wonder if he forgets how much damage we could do to each other economically (and has to be told everytime when the deadline approaches) or what the purpose is of this dance we have going
Cause even though I am aware that we could basically wipe you out economically it still comes across quite pathetic that he switches around being tough and being a p.ussy when dealing with us 
If any of you have connections to the White House please tell him the truth from me - that you economically is a road kill and you live on our mercy - thank you
We kind of have a war on our continent (versus the largest atomic countries on earth) we could use the time addressing if you don’t mind - I am sure you can find some South American or African countries you can bully with tariffs if you need to feed your God complexes
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
