this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
562 points (99.1% liked)

politics

23918 readers
3187 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that U.S. automakers are seeking a workaround to avoid increased expenses resulting from President Donald Trump’s controversial tariff policy: relocating manufacturing to China.

“Four major automakers are racing to find workarounds to China’s stranglehold on rare-earth magnets, which they fear could force them to shut down some car production within weeks,” the Journal reports. “Several traditional and electric-vehicle makers—and their suppliers—are considering shifting some auto-parts manufacturing to China to avoid looming factory shutdowns, people familiar with the situation said.”

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RedditIsDeddit@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago (2 children)

it's almost like Trump has no idea what he's doing

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world 8 points 1 day ago

He doesn't, but he takes advice from trade expert Peter Navarro, who has written many books, crediting the groundbreaking work on trade and tariffs by renowned expert Ron Varo (Navarro).

Yep, Trump's trade expert's best source for information is just making it up himself. It's all just imaginary, wishful thinking. Stupid people think they can just wish their fantasies into reality.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Trump knows exactly what he's doing: fucking over the US like his handler tells him to, while causing wild market swings that his friends (okay, associates) can make bank off of

[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 150 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If trumps ridiculous presidency results in even more outsourcing due specifically to his policies... when his whole thing is the exact opposite...

Chefs fucking kiss of massive failures. Time will tell I guess.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 72 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is on-brand. In the same style Putin's war to keep Ukraine from increasing the size of NATO with its inclusion caused traditionally neutral countries of Sweden and Finland to quickly join NATO.

[–] Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not all fuckups are fascist, but all fascists are fuckups. They just can't help themselves - an authoritarian life is a a desperate life full of violence, hatred, and fear.

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 18 points 1 day ago

The problem with getting rid of everyone who tells you things you don't want to hear is that bad things still happen to you but now they always come as a surprise.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm still of the belief that all of this is about the destruction of the US economy for Russia. He's a kremlin asset and has been for 40+ years.

He and the billionaires (because he isn't one) will make millions from short term panic in the market, just as they have already, and vacuum up everything they can to control it all directly and openly just like the Russian oligarchs did post-Soviet control.

This will make the US weaker both internally and internationally, where Russia can try and step in to some of the power vacuum that departure leaves behind. China as well as a side effect, as long as they can deal with the bullshit trade war in the beginning, which they can without issue honestly.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 1 day ago

Putin supported Trump with that view. I think it's wrong to view Trump as Putin's puppet. Rather, Trump is an agent chaos, and Putin hoped to use that chaos to put Russia on a better footing.

Problem is that Russia can't do it. They've been running on the fumes of a dead superpower for over 30 years. They can't build their own fighter jets, bombers, tanks, or boats bigger than a destroyer. Not at the scale they need for such a large mass of land. They've got oil and natural gas, but everyone is finding the exits on that.

China will step right into the void left by the collapse of Pax Americana. Putin is just handing it to them and doesn't realize it.

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

China was facing the possibility of total collapse before the trade war, and they are more vulnerable than the US to the effects of the trade war.

I'm not saying the US will "win" the trade war, (no nation will be better off.) but if China comes through on top it will be analogous to Vietnam, where the US has every conventional advantage but political pressure at home forces capitulation.

Trump doesn't know what he is doing, but there is a chance he gets his way more or less just because he was handed a deck stacked wildly in his favor.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m sure the 50% tariffs on steel aren’t helping.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

Nah they are totally just going to spin up steel mills in no time. All steel is the same and the mills just hang out waiting to be used so bringing them back on line would be no problem!

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 89 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Here's something a lot of folks supporting the tariffs as some bass-ackwards way of returning manufacturing to the US don't understand: in business, uncertainty is even worse than higher costs. Even if you end up paying a little more, it's worth it if that payment gets you stability.

Trump's instability in policy easily outweighs any benefits -- and that's assuming there were ever any benefits at all.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is the principle of insurance, get a certain loss today, to protect you against an uncertain loss in the future.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Could businesses buy "tariff insurance"? Someone else handles the risk (for a fee) and then they can focus on what they do. Like domestic metal futures or something?

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think Trump is too unpredictable to allow someone to put together an actuarial table around.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was thinking that you couldn't because it didn't has a random process behind, not now that you said this, the problem would be that it's impossible to model with traditional method, you would need some AS modeling or something like that, maybe RandomMoron, DrunkWalk or XBIGOTBoosting could help.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

As someone with a bit of experience around predictive models, those model names you came up with are hilarious.

[–] Bob_Robertson_IX@discuss.tchncs.de 84 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I work for a company that manufactures medical equipment. We have manufacturing sites all over the world, but the vast majority is manufactured in the US. Last week it was announced that 20% of the manufacturing at my site is going to be moved to China due to the tariffs.

Lots of people in my deep red state will be losing their jobs because of this.

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ya because the tarriffs mean that a device already sold LOSES money to fulfil. Medical devices already don't have great margins...

[–] Bob_Robertson_IX@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh, I get it and I don't blame my employer. They are also moving some manufacturing from China to the US, however it won't be at my location... funny enough, it just so happens to be in a blue state.

If we weren't talking about real people's lives it would be funny to see just how miserably the trump tariffs have failed.

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

I'm with you, it's so fucked. And every time we lose manufacturing, we lose everything else. Engineering, sourcing, quality, follows manufacturing.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 2 points 23 hours ago

Auto parts, not whole vehicles. They need the factories in the US to keep selling in the US. If they move the factories out Trump will slap tariffs so high on them, they'd be unable to import, for the benefit of any company that's kept its factories in the US. Most if not all US autos have Chinese vehicle factories already. Doesn't change the fact that if some parts move to China, some US workers would lose their jobs and that's the opposite of what General Taco says he wants.

[–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 11 points 1 day ago

It's almost like making ALL THE MATERIALS WE NEED TO NAME THINGS MORE EXPENSIVE doesn't Incentivize business to build factories here.

Steel and aluminum imports just got 50% more expensive.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 70 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What?! The tariffs made American businesses uncompetitive? Who could possibly have guessed?!

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 day ago

No, decades of deregulation made business uncompetitive. Tariffs have fucked up the supply side economy these parasites have gorged themselves on.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago

Here's something I found on the web...

[–] BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz 34 points 1 day ago

This is 9D CHESS that only a STRONG Businessman who Bankrupted ALL his Previous Businesses could understand!

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

Hey Siri, file under “well what the fuck else could a reasonable person expect”.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Those cars will cost Americans 20% more. And the American car makers will just raise their prices and keep the profits.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago

There's an even worse case scenario for the USA on this. To protect the US EV market, there was a prior tariff of 100% on Chinese EVs which largely priced them out of being brought to the USA. With these reciprocal new Chinese tariffs, the increased costs could get closer or even achieve price parity with USA made EVs. So a Chinese EV could be the same price as a USA made one, but worse yet, the high import tariffs the USA would get from the US imposed EV tariff would be collected by the US government. This means that trump would actually be incentised to encourage the Chinese EV (with its massive tariff adding to government coffers) over a USA EV which gives his government nothing execpt brownie points with his base. Encouraning the Chinese EV path also screws Musk, who is currently criticized trump. We know how much trump cares about his voters, so I'm seeing trump take the Chinese EV path.

[–] SnarkoPolo@lemm.ee 10 points 1 day ago

The Gig Economy will rule America! Let the strong rule. /s

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

This would be a political disaster for Trump as well as an economic one for the communities of workers who would ostensibly lose their jobs if such a thing were to occur.

Coming soon to !leopardsatemyface@lemmy.world

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

American automakers would get eaten alive in China. They've got no hope of competing. Much safer to stick to Detroit.

[–] evenglow@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

They already did. That's been the big problem for years. Legacy auto made their money in the largest car market on the planet. Then people in China stopped buying them.

Just one reason why Chinese EVs are illegal in USA. Because Americans would buy them and Ford and GM would already have to have been bailed out.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I think it's not so much about going after the China market, but about cheaper approach to going after the worldwide market (except US). Going through US means taking huge hit on import tariffs on material and the pissing contest causes a lot of retaliatory tariffs further making things rough on the way into other countries. Since it keeps on changing, impossible to realistically plan around.

So the US market suffers as jobs exit and prices go up, but the prices were going to go up either way. The world except US is more preserved.

Also, to the extent that they could compete with China, this certainly wouldn't hurt.

[–] GoodOleAmerika@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nah, fascists are big on protectionism, because they live in the past. His problem is the Nazis were playing a different game in a different economy and following their plays in 2025 is just fucking stupid... But he's not even following the full playbook because Randian brainrot won't let him encourage state industry, just the privatization of what little we have left.

Next step is invading a rich neighbor with a similar culture to steal their money to pay off your deficit spending btw.