I can easily see local Chinese governments issuing fake id cards to ghosts. With millions of people in a province faking the taxes collected from any given citizen would be easy. Rural farmers don’t pay enough taxes to make them hard to fake. The nonexistent money goes to pay nonexistent government employees to do nonexistent jobs supporting nonexistent rural farmers who paid the nonexistent taxes.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Sunday, March 16, 2025 - 02:01 pm: Edit

can anyone say “PONZI Scheme”?

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Monday, March 17, 2025 - 03:08 pm: Edit

Well, until the Commies draft some of those ghosts into the Army and start digging.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, April 07, 2025 - 07:52 pm: Edit

Some of you have seen the press release from Steve Jackson Games about how the new tariffs affect their game production in China. It's a pretty brutal kick in the pants, with costs/prices skyrocketing 50%. That assumes that China doesn't do what dozens of other countries have done, and come to the table to negotiate a fair trade deal. For those interested, ADB isn't affected much as we don't buy much from overseas, but a lot of things we buy have had the prices go up due to inflation. The current batch of die cut counters (now expected in the second half of this month; I originally expected them in January) have gone up in price by 1/3 over the previous ones due to the price of everything in the US going up. I'm not going to make fun of my friend Steve J for getting caught in the China squeeze; we almost bought games in China but the kickstarter never started as we didn't have the manpower to do the things needed to get Tribbles ready for such a launch. That said, the current tariff situation will surely resolve itself one way or another before we can consider doing Tribbles. That said, I'd rather print in India or Vietnam, but we'll see.

By Tom Lusco (Tlusco) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 07:30 am: Edit

Stonemaier also published a detailed analysis "the math of tariff's." Probably a pretty similar story, though for sure the end result is similar: bad news for everyone in the chain.

Makes a real mess of 'finished but not delivered' crowdfunded games, since those prices are set and manufacturing costs for pretty much all of them are skyrocketing.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 09:22 am: Edit

I wonder if the Philippines could be an option; they have a large underutilized workforce that mostly can communicate in English.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 11:07 am: Edit

The very detailed Stonemaier anti-tariff hit pieces are entertaining reads.

I know it's hard to wean oneself off the artificially low prices engineered by a government (China) that has been committed to dumping products on the market to destroy industries in other nations for decades. But those "low" prices were never real. It was fun while it lasted, and now it's time to pay the piper.

And Stonemaier's assertion that their "Chinese partner" Panda is a shining beacon of good working conditions and low pollution is comical. Every Chinese vendor tells every US customer the same thing, and all the Chinese firms magically pass all the vendor audits. So then every US customer can then say: But our Chinese vendor is different from all the other ones!

--Mike

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 11:15 am: Edit

The 99% of Chinese production sweatshops give the other 1% a bad name.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 11:23 am: Edit

Seriously, no one understands economics; there are too many moving parts for any analysis to work. If it could be done, we'd all have gotten rich in the stock market.

The bottom line is the myth of free trade. Allow other countries to sell us cheap versions of what we buy, and our consumers have more money to spend on cheap stuff that wears out and has to be replaced. How many steel mills and auto plants closed in this country in the last half-century? (Answer: most of them.) Basically we're killing manufacturing jobs to give consumers cheap stuff. Some of that cheap stuff is very nice quality, to be sure, but the low price comes at the cost of turning Detroit into a ghost town. In the end, we become economically dominated by countries that don't like us. We work to produce money and that money then leaves the country. Sixty years ago you bought from a store in town and the money stayed in town. Today, you shop at Walmart and the money goes to China.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 02:25 pm: Edit

SVC:

Of course no one understands economics.

That is why it is found in the Social Sciences department of Universities and liberal Arts Colleges.

It is fundamentally an Art, not a “hard” Science like Mathematics or Physics.

The best computer models (be it weather or business applications) are accurate enough in the short term (often measured in days, not weeks, months or years.)

Mark Twain famously said, “there are liars, •••• liars, and Statisticians”.

The point that everyone seems to be missing, is the President Donald Trump is not claiming to be an Oracle or a prognosticator of future business activity.

He is focused on removing barriers to trade.

If it works, (and I am not endorsing or condemning his actions) the result will be no tariffs on trade.

If that were to happen, everyone benefits.

One foot note:

Japan, traditional ally and trade partner of The United States, maintains a 700% tariff on American produced Rice. Not intended to generate tariff income, it is a trade barrier intended to protect domestic Japanese rice producers from foreign competition.

I do not believe President Trump has addressed Japans Rice Tariff. He has said in the past (some years ago now) that countries should have the right to raise protective tariffs to protect them selves from unfair competition from foreign countries.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 03:04 pm: Edit

For those wondering "what the heck is with the giant rice tariff in Japan?":

Japan imports 770,000 metric tons of rice without tariffs each year under a 1995 “minimum access” deal with the WTO; beyond that threshold, Japan imposes a tariff of ¥341 ($2.30) per kilogram (which, based on current wholesale prices for rice, is roughly 400%). U.S. exports of rice to Japan do not come close to approaching this threshold, typically totaling between 300,000 tons and 400,000 tons annually.

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 03:17 pm: Edit

When I was stationed at Ft Lewis (now Lewis/McChord), one major news item was Japan buying Apples from WA....
In Japan, these sold for $8 to $15 ea....
Then Japan had little to no apple production/growth,
Apples were a special item, not a staple like the states....
No idea if there was a tariff on the shipments, though selling a fruit for that price, when many Americans just take a bite out of one and toss it aside, seems out of place....

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 06:27 pm: Edit

According to the Japan Times, March 25, 2025, the assessed rate negotiated with the WTO approximately to 778%. (Documented as part of the 2005 trade negotiations.)

Argue all you want, but a credible news journal in Japan states a different number, one is closer to what is being attributed to President Trump and Attorney General Bondi.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 08:50 pm: Edit

In percentage terms the tariff fluctuates with the price of rice. It was 778% between 1999-2001 but it is only 400% based on current prices (source: Japan Times, March 12, 2025).

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 09:17 pm: Edit

China refused to come talk deal, so Trump raised the tariff on China from 54% to 104%. Someone tell Steve Jackson.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Tuesday, April 08, 2025 - 10:42 pm: Edit

I don't want to kill him.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 07:43 am: Edit

Could you at least help talk him off of the ledge?

At his age, a fall from the roof of the warehouse could cause serious injuries….

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 09:57 am: Edit

China is a bad actor on the economics front, but one could argue that they are creating industry that just didn't exist prior to the 1970s.

My big beef with China, other than them being murderous Commies, is how they blatantly rip off Intellectual Property. THAT is the basic secret of how they keep up. They steal ideas, fail to pay the People/ Companies that invented the tech, and then pump out copies.

Personally, I would formally recognize Taiwan/ Formosa/ ROC, and tell China to go pound sand. If the Communists get mad and say stuff like "there is only one China" I would just say, "We agree and it isn't in Peking..."

I would treat Taiwan much like how we treat Israel or NATO, an ally we can use to leverage our enemies.

Taiwan does need to modernize their sub fleet. With something like a Kokums or other AIP small attack subs.

As for the "rice tariff" it can also be seen as a form of protection for a crucial national industry. Japan and other countries do have a right to protect those industries that are crucial for their survival. And agriculture is one of those.

"Free trade" scream those that conveniently ignore the barriers the US erects. For example, in the US we don't follow the same safety standards as most other counties do for their cars, And don't make "right hand drive" versions for sale to Japan, India, Ireland, and the UK.

Also, I don't know if the "balance of trade" figures match up to the realities. Do they include non "stuff" transfers of value? So license fees paid to GTA V creators? Fees paid to US firms to participate on Wall Street? Monies transferred overseas and never redeemed back in the US (for example, in many countries the use of US dollar CASH is common as a way to store value when the local currency is extremely inflationary). That CASH is basically no longer existing as far as the US is concerned.

For example, I would bet a dollar that if I showed up in Kabul again, I could still buy an Makarov with hundred dollar bills and get change in20 dollar bills.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 10:52 am: Edit

Regrettably, we're no longer at the point of China merely copying western tech. Look at BYD; by any reasonable standard, their EVs are far and away more advanced than, say, what Tesla is manufacturing. To be certain, they're still behind the curve on a fair lot of military tech (advanced fighter engines, warship hulls, etc), but they've surpassed western tech in other areas.

We sat on our laurels too long, and they've manage to pass us by.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 03:55 pm: Edit

Is it fair to say - we changed?

From SVC's post

"Allow other countries to sell us cheap versions of what we buy, and our consumers have more money to spend on cheap stuff that wears out and has to be replaced."

Depending on how old you (sorry it is probably a generational thing)?

When my parents bought a Washing Machine or Fridge Freezer (while I was growing up) - they lasted 10 yearts plus... but cost a 'fortune'.

Now- they cost not alot - and last, 5 years?? (OK our Fridge/Freezer has last 10 years I think, but it's not working as well as it shoukd!!!) - but I think we have had 3 Washing Machines in the last 10 years.

So - do you want to save up for a nice machine, which last 10 years +.... or spend a couple of hundred on a machine which is twice as good as the old/broken one and a newer one in 5 years tine will be twice as good as the one it replaces?

Cheap, built in the Far East - but does the Job or cost 3 x as much and was built just down the road?

By Vincent Solfronk (Vsolfronk) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 04:01 pm: Edit

Since Trump caved (except for China), there goes the "tariff threat". It was also meaningless unless you could persuade the Democrats to go along, since they would rescind the tariffs upon regaining the White House. Why move tot eh USA where costs are higher and since the tariffs wouldn't survive beyond Trump anyway?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 04:16 pm: Edit

Thing to remember is many Politicians spoke in favor of tariffs when they were younger. Victory in politics leads to personal wealth and less support, but Shumer and Pelosi made their money and are fine exanamples of ours is the best Congress money can buy.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 05:24 pm: Edit

Trump didn't cave, the other nations did. Trump brought the entire world to the bargaining table and isolated China. Few if any other nations are siding with Beijing. He ended the chaos after forcing the world to deal. They know that one step back toward the old ways will snap the tariffs back faster than they can say OUCH! The deals will follow.

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 08:32 pm: Edit

Frankly, given the timing of his pause, after the EU announced 25% tariffs on some US products, it looks like President Trump caved.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, April 09, 2025 - 10:48 pm: Edit

They came to the table to negotiate and he paused to allow negotiations. He didn't drop sanctions; he suspended them during negotiations. That's not caving. That's "Do I have your attention now? Are you going to behave?" This is standard Trump negotiating tactics straight out of his book. He gets your attention, then stops hurting you when you agree to work with him, all the while you know that he will start hurting you again if the negotiations don't go his way.

As for a future president changing them, well, he could, but remember that Trump doesn't want to impose tariffs; he wants to remove foreign tariffs. If Trump succeeds in getting other nations to equal tariffs, why would any subsequent president change it? Say Trump imposes a 50% tariff on Luxembourg cheese. The Luxes drop their tariffs on US cars and Trump cancels the tariffs on Lux cheese. Now, a new president is in office. He cannot reduce tariffs which Trump set at zero. If Luxembourg reinstates high tariffs on US car it's going to cost the future president votes if he doesn't slap the Luxes back into line.

As far as China goes, say it works out that China and the US both hold tariffs at 100%. China's economy will collapse long before Trump leaves office. So China swallows and makes a deal. Now a new president enters office and the first thing he does is to allow China to start screwing us again? There's a vote-winning strategy for you.