Sceptiksky

En écoutant chanter Potier

In the scenario local good is still worth $100 but given that you refund all good by the amount added by the tariff later, you have $20 refunded (not really $20 as i tried to show previously, but $20 x total_tariff / total_amount_of_good_bought_locally_and_imported, so somewhere between $80 and $100 net for local production and between $100 and $120 for imported good, depending on the ratio import/import+localprod

Ah yeah I see I forgot this part, more bureaucracy and delay might hurt cash flow. Thanks that’s a good thinking.

It’s just a though experiment, in real life it’s not a nice math problem to solve like you said.

Ahah Tesla is like a 2000s knock-off of good existing technology

Wouldn’t refunding the amount of the tariff to the customer fix this? Ignoring the very important diplomatic and retaliation tariffs which makes the whole post unusable for real life

• Canada sells a product A $100.
• Tariffs makes it $120 when you buy it
• so Canada gets $100, USA gets $20, USA customer pays $120.
• USA has now $20, they can directly refund the customer for $20 via a policy to reduce the price of the category of A.
• So customer gets $20 reduction of the product A via tax something, so USA now has $0 and USA customer actually paid only $100.
• Except now if USA company make the product A they can sell it for like $100 and customer pays $80.
• There is a slight increase of imported goods price here because tariffs cannot actually refund $20, it will be a % of the local vs imported production.
• Over time you can expect to get a local advantage because of this price inequality, so local companies will be subsidized by imports until imports are no longer significant.

Where am I wrong here ?

By the way, if tariffs are directly sent back to the customer through tax reduction on the tariffed category of products, wouldn’t it be painless for the company/customers (if you forget the retaliation tariffs) while increasing you local insensitive to production? (all things equal if you imagine companies reduce the cost of the products properly etc which is not realistic)

It it was a fair deal, investment from the US to build more infrastructures, doubling their investment capacity to mine stuff.

3 competing possibilities

• compentent military leadership, but not resisting political leadership: either needs a coup and kill political leader (not likely) or will fail (likely)
• incompetent ML, and but dumb enough to have their own agenda, crippling the plan (optimistic)
• incompetent ML, and very submissive, allows the worse the occurs and succeed (bad)

Hitler did not only have yesmen for his wars. There was even plots against him late in the war and he killed a lot of them too.

It’s roughly 1 death for 3-4 injured and out of combat

I’m so glad I have actually good friends we can compliment and joke around without feeling uncomfortable ahah.

TIL thank you

It’s just an error on the date, just wait a few weeks

It’s several cooperative and competitives projects. Diversity is not bad for science anyway. ITER itself involve tons of countries.

No tech will give you a better timeline, back on the floor please ^^ It’s a political problem before anything else, and energy production is far from being the first problem.

Article said 2.6GJ input, 2.6 output so 1Q, but I’m not certain it’s really the case.

Edit: I can’t find my source back, so it’s likely false

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China

“National Economy – 10.Total Population Went down and Urbanization Rate Continued to Grow (31 December 2024)”. www.stats.gov.cn. National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC). 17 January 2025. Retrieved 17 January 2025.

It seems like robust assertion to me. For the final analysist I’m no expert in chinese questions.

Ok i’ve found something on one of my national media, 2023.

For context “lefigaro” is a right wing conservative french paper. It’s interviewing PA Donnet.

Pierre-Antoine Donnet is a experimented journalist with significant knowledge and experience with China since ~1980 (he was not happy with the Tibet events around 1985 and was present physicaly here for the Agence France Presse, the primary main source of most mainstream french media - independant medias have their own investigations). He’s been cited twice on mediapart (independant leftist journal very respected here) on the topic.

He says basically:

• China population declined officially in 2022, and “it started before despite the official source” as part of the source of the problem
• PIB growth lower than targets and historical values, as a symptome of vicious circle
• Some talk about the CCP internal conflict

I guess he’s the primary source, but I don’t want to buy his book to give you a summary :D

I’ll see if I can find my source back just in case we can get something more specific. From memory it was about China going back under 1 billion people over the next 50-100 years or something

Oui mais http ne peut pas être backdoré, contrairement aux messageries chiffrées. Parce que https c’est le protocole de chiffrement qui protege les comms avec ta banque et la leur. Https encapsule le contenu des comms donc si tu envoie un message chiffré avec un messagerie p2p, le fai ne peut en principe pas savoir qu’il s’agit d’une messagerie chiffrée car il y a la couche de chiffrement du https par dessus.

C’est imaginable de backdorer signal, mais pas une app p2p opensource audité correctement imo. Sauf totalitarisme type Corée du nord bien sûr.

Other analyst say the contrary, with demographic decline to come and econnomy slower. So they say reunification window is limited to maybe 10 years or something before it becomes harder. Not that I’m capable of saying which of you is right