this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
71 points (91.8% liked)

Games

32711 readers
1345 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] misk@sopuli.xyz -3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Won’t the tariffs incentivise domestic production and give work to more regular folks? There’s also less stuff to be hauled around the world so there’s environmental benefits too. Sounds like a leftist idea to me.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

We don't have infrastructure to produce a lot of the components in the things we buy, and even if we did, it would inherently cost a lot more to produce than in the countries that are about to have tariffs placed on them. That the US ever was a manufacturing powerhouse was, in my understanding, a very "place and time" sort of deal after World War II. Not only were all of our competitors recovering from being bombed, but we also advanced to a services based economy very quickly, raising the standard of living beyond a point that manufacturing jobs can typically afford to support. I'm no economist though; I just watch one on YouTube, and "the middle income trap" is a frequent topic.

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz -1 points 51 minutes ago (1 children)

Tariffs can serve as a stimuli to build out local manufacturing capacity, which sounds pretty leftist to me. I understand arguments for laissez faire policies but at heart they are liberal and not left. It’s the refusal to accept it that led to far right being as popular as it is.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 36 minutes ago (1 children)

Anyone promising to return people to previously prosperous economic conditions will be popular, even if people don't know that the promise can't possibly be delivered. Coal isn't coming back either, and there's no "clean" version of it, but if all you've done in your life is coal, you'll vote for the guy who says he's bringing coal back.

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 0 points 19 minutes ago* (last edited 18 minutes ago) (1 children)

I’m not here to convince liberals that they should try to care for the poor. I’m here to argue that the jig is up - people are voting for literally anyone, including fascists, that promises to change the course.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 points 13 minutes ago

That second part is exactly what I just said. Is it caring for the poor to lie to them about economic realities, or to raise the cost on everyday items via tariffs when money is already tight? Again, I'm no expert, but I'd rather vote for promised solutions that I understand to actually work rather than the ones that sound good and don't work.