this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
257 points (99.2% liked)

politics

19088 readers
3525 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Americans, frustrated by high grocery prices, are looking to President-elect Trump for relief. Trump has pledged to lower food costs through tariffs on imports and by reducing energy prices, arguing that these measures would benefit U.S. farmers and consumers.

However, experts warn that tariffs could drive up prices by increasing costs for imported goods essential to food production and risk retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports.

Economists also doubt Trump’s short-term impact on energy costs, noting that sustained grocery price drops are challenging without major economic shifts.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 20 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone who understood what tariffs are could of told you this. Harris may not of had any economic plans other than ctax the 1%', but Trump's was demonstrably counter productive with tariffs

[–] [email protected] 8 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Let me put it there for those idiots.

Tarrifs on food imports would be great for US farmers because they no longer have to compete with low priced imports, as the cost to import increases. You would induce a shortage at the current price point, resulting in less food avaliable and at a higher price.

Small point - farmers would probably still miss out as resellers and supermarkets take much of the marginal profit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago

On the other hand, with all of their workers having been deported, farmers wouldn't be able to produce anything at all. This is why I want to believe that Republican talk of deportation is just bluster, but I thought that about Roe v. Wade as well.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I think you might be looking at this wrong. Over 20% of agricultural products are exported in the US, less than 15% is imported. Food is a substitution commodity, if you can't buy one kind, you will buy another.

There is and will be no shortage of food in America. Food grown in central and south America? Maybe. This will just hurt all those farms exporting soy beans when the retaliation comes in to play.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, you are correct but I disagree on few technicalities that make a difference.

  • products do have substitutes, but you are talking comming down from a global market. Calories are there, but we don't eat based on calories. You can't substitute soybeans for tomatoes, potatoes for corn, or many others i don't have examples for.

  • when the US starts putting in tarrifs for import, other nation states will likely do the same. Your exports of unwanted goods will no longer be competitive in the global market, leading to an excess of unwanted, cheap food and shortage of wanted, expensive food.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 hours ago

You should look up the last time the US employed massive tariffs in a trade war. Spoilers, it was just before the Great depression.