this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2025
89 points (98.9% liked)

New York Times gift articles

1007 readers
126 users here now

Share your New York Times gift articles links here.

Rules:

Info:

Tip:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SteveCC@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

"...The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative released its methodology and cited an academic paper produced by four economists, including me, seemingly in support of their numbers. But they got it wrong. Very wrong. I disagree fundamentally with the government’s trade policy and approach. But even taking it at face value, our findings suggest the calculated tariffs should be dramatically smaller — perhaps one-fourth as large..."

[–] Auntievenim@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

what are these? Tariffs for ants?

[–] ghost9@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

They already tariffed penguins. Ants are next.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"If 1/4 tariff is good, 4x as much tariff must be 4x as good!"

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 months ago

I'm all for tariffs, but... Reduce by a 1/4? That is also idiotic. General tariffs are bullshit. Tariffs can and should be used, but in a surgical way. Full blast globalism allows nations like China to dump with the objective of killing other countries sectors. Also, they should be decided by political consensus, in a long term strategy, and supplemented with incentives, to allow local reindustrialization to happen.