Summary

Trump’s proposed tariff hikes on Chinese imports, potentially reaching 60%, could accelerate China’s shift to alternative markets and offshore production.

Exporters in Yiwu, a hub for small goods, report declining U.S. sales and are increasingly targeting regions like Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.

Trump also plans to close tariff loopholes, such as the $800 duty-free exemption, which would heavily impact low-cost exporters and American consumers.

Many Chinese manufacturers are relocating production to countries like Vietnam and Mexico to evade tariffs, but further restrictions could disrupt these strategies.

  • catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s not meant to make the US competitive, it’s to make it isolated. Like I’m all for domestic manufacturing, but their goal here is to knock the US down a few pegs in every metric.

    Yesterday I saw on Fox News someone saying that we could save $1t by eliminating the department of education… But nothing about how much it would cost us in competitive advantage against other countries.

        • Kvoth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Usually they say “save x amount” but neglect to say over what time period we would save it. 10 years is common but not universal. It’s more about “sticker shock” than the actual truth

            • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Why?

              We should be spending an incredible amount on education. The entirety of our advancement as a species relies, fully, on our ability to train and educate our generations. A country’s advantage on the global stage, it’s ability to make good decisions, it’s stability, quality of life…etc All hinge on education.

              The “return on investment” is massive.

              Just to mainain requires incredible effort, nevermind get better.

              • chingadera@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                I could not agree more, it might be the thing I’m most angry at. Our education system has been purposely fucked for decades and it’s the biggest tragedy I’ve seen.

                What I’m saying is, it would surprise me very much if we actually even spent 100B a year on education, the previous comments estimate on how the 1T amount was broken down for “savings.”

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Like I’m all for domestic manufacturing

      How do you propose we achieve a healthy domestic manufacturing sector? It’s not possible for US Companies to compete on price when they pay higher wages and deal with a dramatically more expensive regulatory burden relative to global competitors who are farcically still labeled as “developing” so they can skirt WTO rules.

      To pick an example and lay it out plainly it’s not possible for Ford / GM / Chrysler to make and sell vehicles for $30,000 USD while paying their workers $40USD per hour and conforming to US Labor and Environmental laws. This is also why vehicles built in the EU are so fucking expensive for Europeans to purchase.

      Auto manufacturing is a single example but the same things holds true for nearly all manufacturing sectors and its why so much production shifted to other areas of the world.

      If we want to continue this “race to the bottom” on consumer prices then we must accept the consequences of doing so. If we want to have healthy domestic manufacturing sectors that keep people employed while paying them living wages and protecting both them and the environment then we must accept the consequences of doing so.

      Yesterday I saw on Fox News someone saying that we could save $1t by eliminating the department of education

      It would save the Federal Government a trillion dollars and likely costs the States in aggregate at least a trillion. We wouldn’t really “save” anything, just cost shift it back to the States themselves. Which may, or may not, be a fair trade off. Both Red and Blue states seemingly want more control of their education systems and arguably we should give it back to them…as long as they themselves are willing to pay for it.