Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If we keep going deeper and deeper into a trade deficit and deeper and deeper into debt (yes we need accountability on spending but we are looked at as the payout when **** happens). Both sides do not do this and that’s the whole point. If we made importing fees on semiconductors either as a chip or on a board at the same rate as China we wouldn’t be in this spot.

There are already few exceptions. For instance, ‘imports of semiconductors’—whether it’s chips or circuit boards—get a free pass, along with medicines and, well, Russian fertilizer (because who doesn’t want a little extra Russian fertilizer in their life?).

Now, if we threw in big players like Apple and TSMC as the shining examples of innovation, that’d probably make sense—at least in this industry.

But let’s be real, every industry is a tangled mess of complexity. And this blunt-force approach to trade? Well, it’s more like a wrecking ball than a solution—killing global trade in the blink of an eye. Plus, we can't expect some neat and tidy, custom-fit solutions to magically pop up for this chaotic circus show!
 
I would like to clarify that what I meant by Apple and other companies making a tiny bit less would be due to bringing operations back to the us, at least in some capacity. US should aim to produce at least a small percentage of all its needs and long term should be aiming to be independent of other nations. They can still allow companies to manufacture abroad for abroad markets. Trump should exempt all companies who pledge to do something along those lines and as long as they make continued progress continue to exempt them. You can’t bring manufacturing back in the blink of an eye, companies would see it as cheaper than the tariffs. Also this would reduce the impact of retaliatory tariffs from other nations since companies would opt to avoid such tariffs. Anyway that’s just my opinion on the matter, I guess we can only hope things go well in the end
 
Some regulations have good intentions, but policies should be judged by real world results, not their intentions. The fact of the matter is current policies have lead us to being close to $37T in debt, monthly trade deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars, the dollar has lost 99% of its purchasing power since 1914, and our manufacturing base being gutted in the process. You seem to think this is because American businesses and citizens aren't regulated enough? So if the government just regulated us more, taxed us more, re-distributed wealth more, we'd be better off? The reality is exactly the opposite. The wealth and income gap is so large because government is too big, too powerful, and too cumbersome in our daily lives.

Exactly, the US WAS the worlds richest economy, now it's the worlds biggest debt pile! It will take the US literal decades to pay it all off, don't blame Trump for it either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lovehateapple
oops ... wait .. you just made the case that we are not in a bottom or in the middle of a "sale" ..

i.e. things are not "on sale" .. but now priced back where they should be

(you quoted me replying to someone claiming this was a buying opportunity as things are "on sale")
And this is precisely why I cannot stand the stock market and how retirement is dependent on it so much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Do we need a new phone and operating systems every single year at this point? I hope this causes companies to slow the f--- down and release properly good products again.
 
Categorically different. He was deeply wrong and stupid as hell for the disinfectant comment. However, he is spot on and absolutely right for the tariffs.

Trump is proof that you can be incredibly stupid and incredibly right at different times on different things…much like most people in fact.

False. Trump’s tariff “solution” would’ve made sense 40 years ago, when most manufacturing jobs hadn’t yet gone overseas. You can’t undo four decades of bad policy that has decimated American manufacturing in just one, two, or even four years. It took decades to dismantle that capacity, and it will take a long time to rebuild it—either here or in nations that negotiate good, fair agreements with us.

So, dropping a tariff bomb on the American people now—rather than imposing them slowly over time to give manufacturers a chance to rebuild capacity domestically—means that all of Donald’s blue-collar, or formerly blue-collar and now outright low-income voters, will be unnecessarily hurt in the pocketbook. These are the very people who went to the polls to protest against inflation. Trump’s new taxes mean an economic slowdown and more inflation—exactly what his voters thought they were voting against.

His intentions and actions, while appropriate 40 years ago, are too much, too soon for an economy that voters are already unhappy with. Most Americans are against this, even more will be when prices rise, and most Trump voters had no intention of voting for tax increases or pro-inflation policies like this.

As soon as voters start feeling this in their wallets over the coming weeks, they’ll express their outrage and displeasure at the polls and no amount of blaming Democrats will change the fact that these new tariffs supported by Trump and MAGA Republicans in Congress are why it’s happening now that they are in office and have imposed them.

If it gets bad enough, there could even be a veto-proof majority in Congress to stop these tariffs and reverse or severely limit them while Donald is still in office.

It’s Congress—not the President—that holds the power of the purse. If MAGA politicians had any foresight, they would’ve passed legislation to prevent these tariffs and instead negotiated smart trade agreements with a sliding scale of tariffs. These could have been designed to financially reward companies that start bringing jobs back—with a goal of moving as many as possible over the short, medium, and long term—without devastating consequences for the economy.

At this point, with this move, when Democrats retake the White House, the House, and the Senate (as they did during Obama’s first two years in office after the Great Recession), they’ll undo all of it at voters’ insistence. Then nothing will be done in the medium or long term to undo the 40 years of damage—and the four years of higher taxes on nearly everything will have been for nothing.

It’s the right idea long term, but absolutely the most foolish thing you can do in the short term. The wave of voter opposition, and the impulse to flush all tariffs down the toilet or lower them back to levels that encourage unfair trade, will ensure that we miss the chance to adopt sustainable policies. The result? No real change—just more pain for lower- and middle-class Americans, who will see their pocketbooks squeezed and be forced to pay higher prices for everyday goods they rely on, goods that still aren’t made here and won’t be even a few years from now when all this is repealed.
 
Last edited:
Tariffs are paid on imported goods, not sales price. Apple doesn't pay tariffs on the margin they apply for research, design, marketing, profit.

An iPhone 16 Max costs Apple $485 to manufacture (material and assembly). So, that would be $210 in tariffs on top of the $1099 phone, or effectively 19%. Maybe they are going to reroute through one of the 10% tariffs countries, I'm sure they will be creative.
 
Hey Tim, how are you feeling about that bribe … err … “donation” to Donald Trump now? If somehow the Donald doesn’t impose taxes on Apple phones or on smartphones in general it’ll be a bribe well spent but with Musk the decision maker in tech for this administration, whose businesses won’t be hurt if taxes go way up on phones, I don’t think the Donald will be hearing much opposition out of him for taxes on phones.

Looks like I’ll have the 15 Pro for the next 4 years until the orange one is out on the streets. Bad timing for Apple. Most iPhone users don’t have a device that can even run Apple Intelligence yet and that’s where they’ve been spending most of their software and hardware resources the last few years.

Nobody is going to pay those prices for a bunch of garbage Apple Intelligence features they can easily live without. Apple needs to open up iOS and truly integrate with OpenAI and/or Gemini and completely and totally rethink their own AI strategy because doing it on-device is going to be cost prohibitive for most in tariff-land.

So solutions that are more cloud centric, with data centers that can be built in other countries without tariffs, will clearly be the way to go for consumers given new tariffs that prevent many from upgrading their hardware.

My wife can run the ChatGPT app from her iPhone 13 that she won’t be upgrading anytime soon if prices go up by $100 or more and there would be no compelling reason for me to ditch my iPhone 15 Pro either.

In fact I might just snap up a new or refurbished one with more storage because I was planning on upgrading from 128GB on this device to a 17 with 256. Might as well go with a cheaper 15 Pro at 256 GB now then try and upgrade at even more of a premium once the tariffs hit.

Either that or Apple needs to turn the other cheek to those from the US who buy their phones carrier unlocked from users overseas on websites that won’t collect and pay the tariffs.

Apple better start building AI capable data centers on steroids for a cloud based AI approach or they need to get together with Google, Samsung and other phone manufacturers who make hardware and send more bribes Donald’s way.

Why not figure out how to bribe Donald with a billion so he can really be a billionaire instead of faking it and boasting about it with daddy’s money? That should do the trick to get him to not tax Apple devices by much more or at all. It’s not like Apple can’t afford it. They are worth trillions. A billion is a drop in the bucket.
 
Last edited:
The US does what it is good at doing and exports what is not cost effective. For example, Apple software development is mostly done in the US. /s
 
False. Trump’s tariff “solution” would’ve made sense 40 years ago, when most manufacturing jobs hadn’t yet gone overseas. You can’t undo four decades of bad policy that has decimated American manufacturing in just one, two, or even four years. It took decades to dismantle that capacity, and it will take a long time to rebuild it—either here or in nations that negotiate good, fair agreements with us.

So, dropping a tariff bomb on the American people now—rather than imposing them slowly over time to give manufacturers a chance to rebuild capacity domestically—means that all of Donald’s blue-collar, or formerly blue-collar and now outright low-income voters, will be unnecessarily hurt in the pocketbook. These are the very people who went to the polls to protest against inflation. Trump’s new taxes mean an economic slowdown and more inflation—exactly what his voters thought they were voting against.

His intentions and actions, while appropriate 40 years ago, are too much, too soon for an economy that voters are already unhappy with. Most Americans are against this, even more will be when prices rise, and most Trump voters had no intention of voting for tax increases or pro-inflation policies like this.

As soon as voters start feeling this in their wallets over the coming weeks, they’ll express their outrage and displeasure at the polls and no amount of blaming Democrats will change the fact that these new tariffs supported by Trump and MAGA Republicans in Congress are why it’s happening now that they are in office and have imposed them.

If it gets bad enough, there could even be a veto-proof majority in Congress to stop these tariffs and reverse or severely limit them while Donald is still in office.

It’s Congress—not the President—that holds the power of the purse. If MAGA politicians had any foresight, they would’ve passed legislation to prevent these tariffs and instead negotiated smart trade agreements with a sliding scale of tariffs. These could have been designed to financially reward companies that start bringing jobs back—with a goal of moving as many as possible over the short, medium, and long term—without devastating consequences for the economy.

At this point, with this move, when Democrats retake the White House, the House, and the Senate (as they did during Obama’s first two years in office after the Great Recession), they’ll undo all of it at voters’ insistence. Then nothing will be done in the medium or long term to undo the 40 years of damage—and the four years of higher taxes on nearly everything will have been for nothing.

It’s the right idea long term, but absolutely the most foolish thing you can do in the short term. The wave of voter opposition, and the impulse to flush all tariffs down the toilet or lower them back to levels that encourage unfair trade, will ensure that we miss the chance to adopt sustainable policies. The result? No real change—just more pain for lower- and middle-class Americans, who will see their pocketbooks squeezed and be forced to pay higher prices for everyday goods they rely on, goods that still aren’t made here and won’t be even a few years from now when all this is repealed.
You're partly right but miss an important part. Reversing globalization might have made sense 30 years ago. If, and big if, any manufacturing moves back it'll be even more automated. The jobs are gone and are never coming back. Period.

The US manufactures more than it ever has in $ volume, second only to China. The jobs have not scaled because of automation. If someone thinks all these factories are coming back along with high paying jobs, just look at the manufacturing already here.

A second order effect that might occur is that it spurs even more investment in automation, leading to the loss of the few manufacturing jobs that are left.
 
You're partly right but miss an important part. Reversing globalization might have made sense 30 years ago. If, and big if, any manufacturing moves back it'll be even more automated. The jobs are gone and are never coming back. Period.

The US manufactures more than it ever has in $ volume, second only to China. The jobs have not scaled because of automation. If someone thinks all these factories are coming back along with high paying jobs, just look at the manufacturing already here.

A second order effect that might occur is that it spurs even more investment in automation, leading to the loss of the few manufacturing jobs that are left.

Automation and the AI to power it will be the winners here. I agree 100% with what you said. The jobs won’t be back like they were even if capacity is rebuilt here, but rebuilding it here will mean jobs for those who can still do things automation and AI can’t in the short or medium term. Somebody has to design, build, program and physically maintain these machines in the short and medium term. Long term with AI if we actually ever get real AI or closer to it than LLM’s can provide right now, then all bets are off. Until then I’d argue there could and would still be gains if we get the capacity back here.

There just won’t be jobs that can sustain and grow the middle class k the same way they once did. I agree that time is gone for good but let’s not say in the short and medium term there would be no benefit to getting these jobs back here. Do we want the capacity to be able to produce the weapons necessary to win World War III if we ever have to fight it? It’s how we won World War II and with our inability to manufacturer at a large scale anymore I have my doubts today about whether or not we could do it again if we had to. Those manufacturing jobs that built the tanks, ships and planes couldn’t be scaled up here in America at this point to get of there before China could. Oops…
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatalinApple
They can charge whatever they want. But at $2,300, they're going to lose a lot of sales. Apple is going to have to find a way to either eat the tariff increase or cram a discount down the throats of their suppliers. I'm guessing the second. Either way, someone is going to have an unpleasant meal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatalinApple
There are already few exceptions. For instance, ‘imports of semiconductors’—whether it’s chips or circuit boards—get a free pass, along with medicines and, well, Russian fertilizer (because who doesn’t want a little extra Russian fertilizer in their life?).

Now, if we threw in big players like Apple and TSMC as the shining examples of innovation, that’d probably make sense—at least in this industry.

But let’s be real, every industry is a tangled mess of complexity. And this blunt-force approach to trade? Well, it’s more like a wrecking ball than a solution—killing global trade in the blink of an eye. Plus, we can't expect some neat and tidy, custom-fit solutions to magically pop up for this chaotic circus show!
I agree this is blunt force, and I don’t think it’s meant to stick, I think it’s meant to shock nations into realizing that tariffs that hurt us won’t be tolerated. When it all shakes down I think there will be renegotiations of tariffs on exports and imports.
Would I have done it this way? Nope, but I also think sometimes you have to take a drastic stand to make a point and remind people how much we all need to be working together instead of continuing to bury us in debt and trade deficits.
 
but what exactly you want regenotiate? Weighted average tarrif imposed by EU on US import is just approx 1%
 
Some regulations have good intentions, but policies should be judged by real world results, not their intentions. The fact of the matter is current policies have lead us to being close to $37T in debt, monthly trade deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars, the dollar has lost 99% of its purchasing power since 1914, and our manufacturing base being gutted in the process. You seem to think this is because American businesses and citizens aren't regulated enough? So if the government just regulated us more, taxed us more, re-distributed wealth more, we'd be better off? The reality is exactly the opposite. The wealth and income gap is so large because government is too big, too powerful, and too cumbersome in our daily lives.
99?
 
False. Trump’s tariff “solution” would’ve made sense 40 years ago, when most manufacturing jobs hadn’t yet gone overseas. You can’t undo four decades of bad policy that has decimated American manufacturing in just one, two, or even four years. It took decades to dismantle that capacity, and it will take a long time to rebuild it—either here or in nations that negotiate good, fair agreements with us.

So, dropping a tariff bomb on the American people now—rather than imposing them slowly over time to give manufacturers a chance to rebuild capacity domestically—means that all of Donald’s blue-collar, or formerly blue-collar and now outright low-income voters, will be unnecessarily hurt in the pocketbook. These are the very people who went to the polls to protest against inflation. Trump’s new taxes mean an economic slowdown and more inflation—exactly what his voters thought they were voting against.

His intentions and actions, while appropriate 40 years ago, are too much, too soon for an economy that voters are already unhappy with. Most Americans are against this, even more will be when prices rise, and most Trump voters had no intention of voting for tax increases or pro-inflation policies like this.

As soon as voters start feeling this in their wallets over the coming weeks, they’ll express their outrage and displeasure at the polls and no amount of blaming Democrats will change the fact that these new tariffs supported by Trump and MAGA Republicans in Congress are why it’s happening now that they are in office and have imposed them.

If it gets bad enough, there could even be a veto-proof majority in Congress to stop these tariffs and reverse or severely limit them while Donald is still in office.

It’s Congress—not the President—that holds the power of the purse. If MAGA politicians had any foresight, they would’ve passed legislation to prevent these tariffs and instead negotiated smart trade agreements with a sliding scale of tariffs. These could have been designed to financially reward companies that start bringing jobs back—with a goal of moving as many as possible over the short, medium, and long term—without devastating consequences for the economy.

At this point, with this move, when Democrats retake the White House, the House, and the Senate (as they did during Obama’s first two years in office after the Great Recession), they’ll undo all of it at voters’ insistence. Then nothing will be done in the medium or long term to undo the 40 years of damage—and the four years of higher taxes on nearly everything will have been for nothing.

It’s the right idea long term, but absolutely the most foolish thing you can do in the short term. The wave of voter opposition, and the impulse to flush all tariffs down the toilet or lower them back to levels that encourage unfair trade, will ensure that we miss the chance to adopt sustainable policies. The result? No real change—just more pain for lower- and middle-class Americans, who will see their pocketbooks squeezed and be forced to pay higher prices for everyday goods they rely on, goods that still aren’t made here and won’t be even a few years from now when all this is repealed.
I’m not even sure Trump’s “solution” was appropriate 40 years ago. He has a mercantilist world view that was more appropriate for the 19th century - just like Vladimir Putin. Both men’s thinking is at least a full century out of date.
 
I agree this is blunt force, and I don’t think it’s meant to stick, I think it’s meant to shock nations into realizing that tariffs that hurt us won’t be tolerated. When it all shakes down I think there will be renegotiations of tariffs on exports and imports.
Would I have done it this way? Nope, but I also think sometimes you have to take a drastic stand to make a point and remind people how much we all need to be working together instead of continuing to bury us in debt and trade deficits.
Bury you in debt and trade deficits? No country has forced the US to buy from it nor to sell to it.
 
Actually she was pretty good, she knew what to do to fix things though and the establishment didn’t like it so they destroyed her. If you look into it it was the Bank Of England who caused the issues, not Truss. What Labour are doing now is a million times worst.

Anyway this is a thread about Trump and his crazy tariffs.
Truss destroyed herself. She was told what was going to happen with Sterling and the bond market, then did it anyway. The Bank of England was forced to stabilise the bond market due to her incompetence. There was no conspiracy, she lost the confidence of her own party and had to resign. Britain has a Parliamentary system and leaders cannot govern without the backing of their party.

Oh and 'anyway', you were the one who brought the UK government into this discussion to make a poor political point.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.