this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
814 points (98.6% liked)

World News

45372 readers
4330 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Among the reciprocal tariff levels Trump announced:

China: 34%

European Union: 20%

South Korea: 25%

India: 26%

Vietnam: 46%

Taiwan: 32%

Japan: 24%

Thailand: 36%

Switzerland: 31%

Indonesia: 32%

Malaysia: 24%

Cambodia: 49%

United Kingdom: 10%

Rest of the world: 10%

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] houseofleft@slrpnk.net 77 points 1 day ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (5 children)

In case anyones looking at this and asking question like "Why has Cambodia been dunked with 49% when they're clearly not a competitor to the US" or "Why is Trump claiming that the European Union has a 40% tariff on the US when the actual mean tariff on US goods into the EU is less than 5%", here's your answer to how these figures have been calculated.

  • Take the US trade deficit with a given country (eg. China is $292bn)
  • Take the total good imported by US (for China that's $439bn)
  • Divide the first figure by the second! Why? Who knows! It's a number! Less talk more first grade arithmetic (if you're still following that gives us 67%)
  • That gives us a random number which we'll pretend is that country's tariff of US goods even though it's completely unrelated in every way. We'll divide it by two to get the new tariff rate for imports from that country. Why? Honestly if you're still expecting there to be an answer to that question I'm wondering if you've been following. (that gives us 34%, well actually it gives us 33.5% but I'm not sure the Trump administration understands the idea of fractions so we'll just round it up from there)

The "reason" behind this is that Trump seems to think trade deficits are really bad, which is bad news for the US because it's had a trade deficit for the last 50 years. We'll ignore the fact that based on GDP it's been the wealthiest country in the world for that time though.

Anyway, just to give everyone an idea of how completely, utterly unrelated to anything meaningful that figure is, let's take Cambodia. The country is very poor compared to the US so can't afford to buy anything that the US manufacters (Cambodians aren't driving round in Teslas or IMessaging each other). Some US companies use it for clothing manufacture because labour is cheap in Cambodia (see the previous bit about Cambodia being much poorer than the US). This means that Cambodia imports close to nothing from the US compared to what it exports, giving it a close to 100% trade deficit, so we wind up with a 49% tariff on Cambodia.

I genuinely don't understand the mindset that looks at the US's explotation of cheap labour in Cambodia and interprets the US as the victim in that relationship, but hey-ho maybe I'm just not biggly-smart enough to understand the 4d chess moves at play here. . .

Reference (because unfortunately none of what I said was made up and that geniunely is the calculation): https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/03/trumps-idiotic-and-flawed-tariff-calculations-stun-economists

Edit: After making fun of Trump for not understanding the enconomy, I went and conflated per capita GDP with GDP. Doh! Now corrected.

[–] kerrigan778@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Uh, we have absolutely not been the wealthiest country by per capita GDP that whole time. We have been the wealthiest country by GDP

[–] houseofleft@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 hours ago

Yeah, you're right. Sorry! Although US have definitely been one of the highest GDP per capita for that time (but like you pointed out, not the top which is what I original said)

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 6 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Why does he think tariffs are equal to trade deficits?

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 5 points 20 hours ago

Run headfirst into a brick wall a dozen times and then maybe you will start to understand

[–] bishbosh@lemm.ee 7 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Putting on my best swiss cheese brain, maybe they are treating it 'like a business' and trying to do debt to income ratio? So our deficit is the debt then they look at tariffs on the imported goods as the income.

Do you know if this holds for other countries too?

[–] houseofleft@slrpnk.net 5 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

I honestly have no idea, maybe? Deficit isn't really debt though, it just means you bought more than you sold. The US isn't in debt to Cambodia any more than you're in debt with McDonald's. They just have a one way buy/sell relationship.

[–] spicehoarder@lemm.ee 3 points 21 hours ago

That's a really good explanation, there's no realistic way to make your money back from McDonald's

[–] bishbosh@lemm.ee 2 points 19 hours ago

Absolutely, but if one has no idea what they are talking about, they might massive brain worms about the US debt and it being caused by our budget deficit. Then they look at all these other countries and learn about the 'deficit' we have with them and that's the same word, same thing, ezpz. Now you simple get a solid 50% debt to income ratio by dividing the two and cutting it in half, check mate economists.

[–] Poop@lemmy.ca 4 points 23 hours ago

Thanks for the explanation! It is unbelievable that these are the folks with nuclear codes.

[–] ericatty@infosec.pub 4 points 1 day ago

Thank you for the reference, I scrolled to the bottom to check if you were copypasta-ing us before going back and reading it. We just all live in Crazytown now I guess.