https://hackaday.com/2018/06/15/making- … in-the-us/
Since most sellers will see an opportunity to make a few more cents on the dollar, I can see any Chinese tariff might translate to 25% and a little bit extra.
I have also noticed a recent trend on ebay at least. Previously it was worth looking on ebay.com as well as ebay.co.uk since .com often was a few cents cheaper. This isn’t the case quite so often these days, and in fact .co.uk is more often the cheaper of the two (but not always, so still worth checking).
I also suspect that any “US tariff” will probably be applied to all sales, so the rest of us get the “benefit” of Mr Trump’s self declared “jeeenyus” once more. 
given that 25% is a pretty big ‘margin’ to buy from china directly, so some ‘agents’ would make use of the opportunity and make the difference by buying direct and selling from a different country?
so far, worked quite well
srp
China will drop the prices..
EU will buy the parts cheaper in China..
Good so
PS: EU will resell the parts to UK with 35% uplift
Maybe the wise Chinese will wait – even a Trump goes away – and the’ll concentrate to the rest of 81% especially Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea – so this countries will export it straight to the USA.
The really “poor” people in the USA will be the startups and hobbyists, the major companies will find a way of exception.
http://www.worldstopexports.com/chinas- … -partners/
United States: US$431.7 billion (19% of total Chinese exports)
Hong Kong: $281 billion (12.4%)
Japan: $137.4 billion (6%)
South Korea: $102.8 billion (4.5%)
Vietnam: $72.1 billion (3.2%)
Germany: $71.2 billion (3.1%)
India: $67.9 billion (3%)
Netherlands: $67.3 billion (3%)
United Kingdom: $57 billion (2.5%)
Singapore: $45.7 billion (2%)
Taiwan: $43.9 billion (1.9%)
Russia: $43.1 billion (1.9%)
Malaysia: $42 billion (1.8%)
Australia: $41.6 billion (1.8%)
Thailand: $38.8 billion (1.7%)
Backyard Furnace
that’s a good thing for all parties involved: china gets less pollution and the rest of the world gets less junk. I wouldn’t mind spending more to supply a fellow countryman / woman. in the end a more balanced trade is good for everyone.
the mistake china made in all this is their lack of export country: they sold their wares too cheaply so they are competing against themselves. they could have easily made more money on less export by putting “export taxes”.
[dannyf – Thu Jun 21, 2018 3:03 pm] –
we can expect all of our “cheap stuff from China” to be not so cheap in the near future.
…
that’s a good thing for all parties involved: china gets less pollution and the rest of the world gets less junk. I wouldn’t mind spending more to supply a fellow countryman / woman. in the end a more balanced trade is good for everyone.
…
I suspect our insatiable appetite for junk will continue pretty much unabated, and by the same token it will continue to be supplied by the cheapest source, since despite what we all claim, namely that we would rather buy good quality goods from a local supplier, the lure of “really cheap” tends to triumph over our self proclaimed “rational” response.
Incidentally I would suggest that local suppliers and local labour per say are no more “worthy” of my business than those of some other part of the world.
I am not sold on the idea of “Buy British” or “America first” or indeed “Make in India” they are generally doublespeak for the somewhat jingoistic “ideals” that lie behind them.
The only real benefit of local production comes from the decrease in fuel use when transporting all of the raw materials and the finished junk round the world, not in the feeding of one individual at the expense of another.
In which case either the USA will need to accelerate its current drift towards becoming a low wage economy, with all that this entails, if it wants to produce goods cheaply at home. Alternatively it will need to import more low wage citizens. Neither of which is likely to be the outcome which the average US citizen is hoping for.
The “law of unintended consequences” is likely to kick in, but you can be sure of one thing. Those who are already comfortably off will be cushioned from the worst of its effects, while those at the poorer end of the spectrum, no matter where they are on this small planet of ours, will bear the consequences.
The rich “landlords” of Scotland, or the Oil barons and Property Magnates of the US or the Russian Oligarchs will continue to milk the profits while the rest of us do the work, and this group cares not a jot where they do business, nor whom they pay to do that work.
Trade wars, like conventional wars, are waged for the benefit of the profit makers and paid for by those at the other end of the social spectrum.
.. anyway as someone said earlier in this thread, perhaps politics, sex and sport are best avoided when chatting round the water cooler.
So perhaps literature might be safer ground. If you haven’t already read them, I thoroughly recommend “Catch 22” ( ISBN 10: 0099477319 ISBN 13: 9780099477310 ) and “Who owns Scotland” Publisher: Canongate Books Ltd (15 April 1997) ISBN-10: 0862415853 ISBN-13: 978-0862415853
[zoomx – Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:13 pm] –
I read Catch 22 many years ago, Closing Time more recently.
“Closing Time” is on my must read list, probably when I’m next travelling, or in the winter months. Another related work Slaughterhouse Five is also on the list.
Speaking of content with a perhaps rather dark theme, I tripped over this animated movie while on a flight to Dubia. In This Corner of the World (2016) It was surprisingly good.
by buying local, part of your money stays in your community. Those sellers, if they buy local too, will help additional economic expansion in your community. Economists call that the “multiplier effect”.
a real economy will be much leakier than that but the basic principle holds.
To put it another way, a $4 blue pill produced locally costs you less than a $4 blue pill produced in China. But very few people have enough common sense to understand that.
[dannyf – Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:00 pm] –
To put it another way, a $4 blue pill produced locally costs you less than a $4 blue pill produced in China. But very few people have enough common sense to understand that.
There is an element of truth in this idea, but a $4.01 bluepill produced locally costs one cent more than a $4.00 blue pill produced in China, and this is unfortunately what ultimately drives prices.
Production costs are the concern of most businesses as they have shareholders breathing down their neck, and therefore if they can source and use the $4.00 bluepill (in 1,000 unit lots or whatever), then they will do so in preference to the $4.01 locally produced unit.
This is therefore not a simple matter of common sense being exercised by individuals, it is a fundamental principle of capitalism.
Now that is not to say that capitalism is the best or indeed only way forward.
It could in fact be argues that capitalism is a blind faith religion, with its pseudo scientific “market forces” and other dogma. That it is an oversimplification of how we should meet our needs as a society and is in need of a fundamental rethink, but that is a whole ‘nuther argument altogether.
that’s the leakage problem mentioned earlier. some people used it to justify tariffs.
high costs of low prices. I wish more people are aware of it.
In other words, the economy of my town is interconnected with the economy of the next town, in the sense that I can go there to shop, same as I can stay here and shop. If I shop there, has my money “leaked” in to the next town?
[dannyf – Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:00 pm] –
by buying local, part of your money stays in your community. Those sellers, if they buy local too, will help additional economic expansion in your community. Economists call that the “multiplier effect”.
It depends a lot in the definition of my community. It can be my family, my town, my region, my country, EU since I live in Italy, the entire world.
I have an STM plant nearby!
it is a leakage in terms of quantifying the multiplier effect on your town;
it is not a leakage in terms of quantifying the multiplier effect on your state / province / country…
the point is that it can be of lower cost to buy local.
