Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- We're rapidly approaching a time in which America doesn't make anything that can't be replaced.
If Carney was serious he'd fly to Beijing and shake Chinese hands. That would utterly terrify the few responsible adults left in Washington to back the fuck down.
by TitaRusell - You mean like Carney did in January? Trump cannot be shown reason once he has convinced himself his gut feel is correct.by hodder
- I assume the data source citations are referencing Census Department API endpoints, I would make the data sources explicit by adding links.
You also might want to consider archiving the data if you aren't already given this administration's tendency to remove data that doesn't further their agenda.
by bpt3 - Am I the only one who finds this site undecipherable?
Take this snippet for example:
What does "sits in headings Canada taxes" mean? Whatever this means, how does it jump to $26.5B from $16.0B on a single date? Don't things have to enter for tariffs to be collected?American exporters $16.0B of what American exporters sell to Canada sits in headings Canada taxes today, 10.5% of the total. From 8 September it is $26.5B. See whose jobs"See whose jobs" is even more confusing. Nothing about jobs was mentioned. It's talking, presumably about an increase in a tariff collected by Canada. I can understand this will affect certain jobs, but "See whose jobs" just confuses the situation more. I cannot figure out for the life of me what's going on.
Here's another example when you click the "nuclear option" it jumps, without context beyond "Canada’s energy supply is a fourth exposure, and a different kind" to this:
Am I really dumb for not understanding this site, or is this the infogram equivalent of a Nigerian prince email?The nuclear option Canada has not done this, and nothing here predicts it will. But tariffs are the smaller lever. Flip the switch to see which states buy their energy from Canada, and whether they have anywhere else to buy it. Crude cost per gallon $1.86 what everyone else charges, up 26¢ a gallon Both figures are prices the United States actually paid this year: $67.17 a barrel to Canada, $77.92 a barrel to everyone else, across 704 million Canadian barrels. Careful with the gap, though. It is not a pump price, since refining, distribution, tax and margin all sit on top of the crude. Nor is it really a discount: Canadian barrels are mostly heavy crude, and heavy crude sells below lighter grades wherever it goes, so a lot of the difference is just the grade. What replacing one with the other would cost is a question this page does not have the data to answer.by spacemule - It is AI slop. It was written using Claude Code.
The language is very like Claude Code with Opus 5: no prepositions, unclear references, ambiguous, bad phrase transitions, ...
And the css is exactly the same that Claude Code uses for its artifacts and documentation.
by diego_moita - It is AI slop, which has the veneer of sense without the substance. https://cymerys.com/w/im-becoming-ai-blind
- > What does "sits in headings Canada taxes" mean?
My guess would be it's refering to the Harmonized System[1], used to classify goods on import and export declarations:
The HS is organized into 21 Sections, which are subdivided into 96 Chapters (Chapters 1 to 97 with Chapter 77 reserved for potential future use by the HS). The 96 HS Chapters are further subdivided into 1,228 headings and 5,612 subheadings in the current 2022 edition of the HS.
Most countries have additional subdivisions, for example in US the HS is used as a basis for the Harmonized Tariff Schedule[2].
The classification is used to determine tariffs, taxes and restrictions, but those are often applied to the broader groups, so covering say all imported aluminum, rather than say aluminum of a particular kind for use in a particular sector.
> Whatever this means, how does it jump to $26.5B from $16.0B on a single date?
Because Canada announced it will impose tariffs on more types of goods on that day, ie more headings, affecting more of the exported value.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonized_System#Structure
by magicalhippo - Last time I checked, Canada was the largest trading partner of 27 states, directly and indirectly. Disclaimer; I’ve lived in both countries and am a dual citizen so not unbiased.by apercu
- I like the idea behind the site, but I have some nits.
First, when you list something like a financial figure, you must also include the relevant time period. E.g. you say 16.0B in taxes collected by Canada from American exporters. But you don't list the time period.
Second, you say 313 are taxed today. What is this in reference to? Goods? People? Companies? Percentage?
The labels need some serious love.
by ryanisnan - What I don't think most people realize is that for many consumer goods coming from Canada the Americans are not paying the tariffs, Canadians are paying it instead because USPS is not setup to actually collect tariff payments from their own people and refused to do so. When I buy USPS shipping labels for my business that ships to the US, as a Canadian, I have to pay the fucking US tariff out of my own pocket and I have no way to charge my customer other than jacking the fuck out of my price. I lost so much money last year after the tariffs first went into effect and no one (UPS, USPS, US Gov't) knew what to do, how to charge, how to collect, but eventually after a 1.5months I managed to get CUSMA figured out. This 50% tariff is still the same scenario, I'm expected to pay the tariff on behalf of my American customer, so WTF. Oh and I got no refunds from anyone for that first 1.5months of insane costs as I'm not from the US.
I can ship UPS instead and then push the tariff back where it belongs, but nobody wants to pay 4x for shipping and then get another bill afterwards. US Customers already screamed bloody murder about a total $4 duty fee, which anyone in Canada would kill for on an international purchase.
by CosmicShadow - I'm trying to think of the number of people I (an American) know who considered trade with Canada to be a real issue.
The answer I keep coming back to is I know zero people who considered that.
Does the US have a trade imbalance that causes problems, particularly in our manufacturing sector? Yes. Can tariffs kind of help with that? Also yes. Really, you need to instill some sort of sense of duty to country in business leaders, which is a far heavier lift, but this at least puts a number to it.
Does picking a tariff fight with Canada, our closest cultural ally, solve the above problem to the point where it justifies the costs? Hell no.
by lenerdenator - But does America have a trade imbalance with Canada?
Canada has things that our economy needs desperately (e.g. potash).
by apercu - I mostly agree, except that trade imbalances are not problems and don't really cause problems.
Buying and selling don't need to be equal between buyers and sellers, and it's really just an incoherent idea.
- at this point one can't really assume it was about picking a tariff fight with Canada any more than the Gaza peace plan was about bringing peace to Gaza. guy is just a shit-thrower. that's his one move, throw some shit and see what he can get out of it. walk into a restaurant and claim that he's been treated so badly they're going to have to sign the whole thing over to him, and settle for 10 free meals and a pack of steaks from the walk-in.by convolvatron
- > Really, you need to instill some sort of sense of duty to country in business leaders
Goods are imported because business is a competition and consumers prefer cheap imported goods. Its not like american executives flatly want to offshore, if a competitor does and they dont their customers will leave. The only solution business leaders can have here is collusion, which is illegal. If we want goods to be manufactured domestically it is on us as consumers to buy domestic products over cheap imported ones.
by HDThoreaun - Every side benefits from a trade. That's why the trade is made. The US is able to afford a trader imbalance because the USD is the world's reserve currency. Other countries are subsidizing our trade imbalance. It's a huge win for the US.
Tariffs will not bring back manufacturing. They increase prices of inputs, reduce incentive for competitiveness and invite retaliation. Look how well tariffs have worked for Brazil and Argentina or for the US under Smoot Hawley.
by ajmurmann - Its all a precursor to setting up a reason to invade Canada. If Canada moves on with a threat to do something with energy then buckle up.by voidfunc
- > Does the US have a trade imbalance that causes problems, particularly in our manufacturing sector?
I have a trade imbalance with the local grocery store: I buy lots of vegetables, but they don't buy mine.
My employer has a trade imbalance with me: They buy lots of my labor, but I never buy any of theirs.
The term has become unhelpfully pejorative, the "imbalance" is often desirable and beneficial.
by Terr_ - America's trade imbalance with Canada is basically crude oil. Which they get at a significant discount because it's much more expensive to export anywhere else.
America then refines it and exports it as finished product or uses it internally -- one of the reasons why America has relatively cheap gasoline prices.
This "trade imbalance" is a massive benefit to America.
by bryanlarsen - This site looks good, and it's nice that it has data sources, but it would also be nice if it was clear about who built the site.by Marsymars
- Why does it matter? The data sources are cited and are publicly available.
It's basically just documenting the utter stupidity of a trade war with a close ally with whom we are tightly coupled economically.
by bpt3 - Claude built the site, it's obvious from the style.
Which is to say that anybody with a $200 subscription and access to Namecheap and Netlify could have built the site in one hour flat. There's no longer any need for an NGO, media nonprofit, or lobbying group to build such things; the effort required has been reduced to near-zero, so anybody can do it.
by A_D_E_P_T - I have anecdotal experience that makes the ~$1,600 per house hold feel like an underestimate.
We purchased a Subaru Outback right around the first round of tarrifs. We were in the market for the base trim, no bells & whistles. We ended up getting the highest trim bc all the remaining base trims were post-tarrifs and and cost $3.5k more than the pre-tarrif higher trim that was already in the lot.
Mind you the Subaru outback was assembled in IL, USA so it is not just imported entirely from Japan.
And that's not considering all the other "consuming" we do (which is quite limited being outdoor ppl).
- I wouldn't say that's an underestimate. It just sounds like you're the one bringing the average up
Not everyone is buying brand new cars
by ChrisRR - >We purchased a Subaru Outback right around the first round of tarrifs. We were in the market for the base trim, no bells & whistles. We ended up getting the highest trim bc all the remaining base trims were post-tarrifs and and cost $3.5k more than the pre-tarrif higher trim that was already in the lot.
The average car on the road is ~15 years old. The actual lifetime is likely higher. Therefore for proper tariff accounting, your subaru's contribution to this year's tariffs should be 3500/15 = $233, not $3.5k. Not to mention much of the items people buy are either:
1. domestically produced (this includes housing, the biggest cost for most people)
2. tariff exempt (think oil)
3. produced abroad, but have fat markups
by gruez - I have nothing to offer except my recent dumb purchase. Could only find an out of print Moleskine black page artist notebook from a Canadian seller. It's important that it matches with a book I already have.
Learn from my mistake:
* $19.99 item cost
* $21.25 shipping
* $2.99 tax
* $31.94 import fees (billed directly by UPS)
Total cost: $76.17
by franksvalli - Imagine you want to build a factory in the US. You pay tariffs on the factory equipment you need - much of it is made overseas. You pay tariffs on your input goods. And then when you try to export your customers get hit with a retaliatory tariff. I don't agree with tariffs but even if we accept some level of protectionism you can't tariff everything the way this administration wants. You have to pick what you actually want to prioritize and choose your battles.by sobellian
- I totally disagree. The same factory would be made infeasible without the tariff.
What do we need that shouldn't make domesticially?
by NoidFonsense - Trump tariffs aren’t for economics reasons. He’s using that as a bullying tactic. It’s pretty obvious given that each tantrum is followed by a new tariffby dgellow
- Protectionism and tariffs simply don't work in the global world.
Capitalism will keep producing things where they make sense not where politicians want.
Exceptions make sense only to protect industries that are absolutely vital and critical for security. Ship building should be one of those for countries like US or UK.
Or when you want to kickstart an industry and need to protect it for a limited amount of time (Koreans and the Japanese both did so with some of their industrial sectors, but it was always time limited).
This administration thinks it can make every industry thrive through tariffs.
I don't see how it can work, even for a country with the resources of the US.
by epolanski