News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I think I'm with the companies here, which feels weird to say. The Trump admin imposed these ridiculous tariffs, which the companies had to pay. Makes no sense for them to lose money on the products they sell, so of course they raised prices, which we all said they would have to when the tariffs were imposed. Meanwhile, the administration pocketed the money. Then the tariffs were ruled to have been illegal.
So yes, I want the companies to go after the money that the administration illegally bilked them (and, indirectly, us) out of. I hope they figure out ways to pass the recovered money back to customers; Costco has said it will use the money to lower prices. But it's actually more important to me that the administration not get away with the illegal tariffs.
I mean, sort of, but not really. The money went into the Federal budget, and even if some of it did get embezzled by Trump cronies, the money that comes back isn't going to come back out of their pockets.
If the embezzlement happened, that's a separate, additional crime on top of issuing the illegal tariffs themselves.
Then the only correct solution is prison (or worse) for the officials involved. Making the Federal government (i.e., we, the people) pay back the illegal tariffs does fuck-all to punish the corrupt officials responsible.
I'm not saying the illegal tariffs shouldn't be refunded, I'm just saying it isn't the punishment you're looking for.
(Oh, by the way: the next step in your recap of the situation is going to be "the Federal government raises taxes to cover the 'shortfall' caused by refunding the illegal tariffs." I haven't heard anything about it yet, but you'll see. We, the people will be left holding the bag again.)
I'm with you on prison.
I understand that our taxes will go up. This administration is screwing the vast majority of the American people. Only the wealthy are benefiting.
Product sells for $10. After tariffs of $2 it sells for $14.
You pay $2 tariff and $2 convenient price hike. Company makes $2 for hiking price more than value of tariff.
Company requests refund for $2, company made $4 total.
You paid $4 extra total, which the company made. It's a completely standard transaction, money from your packet to company's. And more tax money will be wasted for the costs of processing the refunds.
Company brings price down to $12, you're still overpaying, and are you necessarily buying that product again?
I'm sure some companies did that, but do you have data suggesting that was a widespread practice? Because what I read was that lots and lots of companies tried to stock up on materials before the tariffs went into effect, so they wouldn't have to raise prices, and then many just ate the extra cost for a while - hoping the tariffs would be short lived - because they knew they would lose customers, before ultimately raising prices to cover. Many companies did lose money on the deal, according to what was reported.
But I'll read whatever you have from a reputable source.
No. They stocked up on the product BEFORE the tariff and then raised the prices to match the upcoming costs. Ask anyone in actual retail management (not middle managers but those that buy the products and set the prices).
Any company that sold their current stock at the old price was making a rookie mistake. That's like resale 101. You can't possibly sell products for less than what it costs to replace them. If they were doing that they don't deserve to get any money back because they don't understand how to use it.
If they're able to have a lower price than their competitors, they can take so of the sales, unless they're illegally price fixing, which some likely did.
You're still saying a lot of things as absolute fact without any citation. Do you have a source for any of this?
Decades of sales experience. Retail management during COVID price hikes.
I saw this first hand. I don't need to read reports because I lived it.
But sure. Show me all the great companies that tried to keep prices low, to what, be nice to the consumer?
That ain't how things work.