this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2025
205 points (99.0% liked)

Global News

3688 readers
752 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Country prefixCountry prefix can be added tothe title with a separator (|, :, etc.) where title is not clear enough from which country the news is coming from.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon generated via LLM model | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Modelling of how Trump’s tariffs will hit global trade suggests the US will be the biggest loser – while a few nations may emerge as surprising winners.

Archived version: https://archive.is/newest/https://theconversation.com/new-modelling-reveals-full-impact-of-trumps-liberation-day-tariffs-with-the-us-hit-hardest-253320


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.

top 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rene@lemmy.world 7 points 11 hours ago

The EU does not imposse 39% tariffs on US imports. The trade deficit is 39% Not the same thing. So they took the trade deficit and divided it by 2 to calculate the tariff. Guess pissing of the whole world will make everyone buy American...

[–] Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml 29 points 18 hours ago
[–] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 47 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Dumpf bankrupting a former powerhouse with the policies every right wing party wants is the best advertisement in the world against the far right parties.

Thanks USA for being the world police yet again and leading by example. Be strong!

[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 9 points 18 hours ago

Oh. He and his buddies will buy the slump from the vast array of options available in the next few months and walk away with more wealth than before. Question is: who's gonna do anything about it?

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 60 points 22 hours ago (5 children)
[–] dryfter@lemm.ee 24 points 20 hours ago

> Fuck

That's an understatement, more like

spoilerimage

Forget about a recession, the U.S. is headed directly towards a possible depression and bringing Canada down with it if those numbers are even remotely true. That's almost 1-2 months salary wiped out for 1/3 of households in the US when most of those people are living paycheck to paycheck.

[–] taldennz@lemmy.nz 31 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

If we're very quiet precious, my love, maybe he won't notice us down here near the bottom of the table.

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 17 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

probably it's not in his map.

[–] Zotora@programming.dev 10 points 19 hours ago

One of the few times where being left off a map is a win.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 16 points 21 hours ago

Aha! Trump is secretly doing the bidding of the Kiwis! No, not New Zealanders, not even the bird… it’s the fruit’s fault!

[–] oce@jlai.lu 9 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

I don't understand why some countries get a gain from additional tariffs.

The article doesn't explain the mechanism.

Some nations gain from the trade war. Typically, these face relatively low US tariffs (and consequently also impose relatively low tariffs on US goods). New Zealand (0.29%) and Brazil (0.28%) experience the largest increases in GDP. New Zealand households are better off by $397 per year.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 24 points 20 hours ago

My unfounded guess is that they sell products that normally compete with a soon to be crippled US market, so their products can fill the void. Think car sales from China to the EU after the tarrifs cripple manufacturing, for example.

[–] shirro@aussie.zone 15 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Australia's top 3 export markets are China, South Korea and Japan. If they put retaliatory tariffs on the US we should pick up extra business as we will have a price advantage. When the US duped our old conservative PM, Scummo, into pissing of China they put up trade barriers and our "mates" including Canada, NZ and USA all gained at our expense. It's nothing personal.

We don't export much to the US and 10% is as low as it goes. Without retaliation the US tariffs would only be a tax on US consumers. But the retaliation from other large economies will damage US exports and jobs and give opportunities to other nations. Thanks, I guess.

[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 6 points 18 hours ago

Also Australia is actually trading at a deficit with the USA. We buy way more from them than they buy from us. Which shows this narrative of Trump to reduce the trade deficit is bullshit.

For this reason though I don't think Australia will do retaliatory tariffs. Why hurt ourselves more when the USA is less than 5% of our exports?

[–] subignition@fedia.io 18 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I think it is because countries impacted the least by new tariffs are most likely to have new trade with OTHER countries affected more heavily by the tariffs.

[–] 50MYT@aussie.zone 9 points 20 hours ago

Yep. NZ and Aus bout to be flooded with cheap goods USA normally gets

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 12 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

If country A is tariffed 20% and country B is tariffed 10%; that mean country B have an advantage against country A and can get some of the marked A is losing.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

Maybe they already had some sort of tariff? Maybe it modifies the existing trade deal somehow? Idk I'm not an economist just a peasant.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 7 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Does Russia not get hit? Interesting.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 11 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Aside from fossil fuels, they mostly only trade with China, right? They're kinda "isolated" like Best Korea.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 4 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

With a whole shit ton of sanctions. Still interesting that they're not getting hit by this, whatever the reasons.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 8 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Can't be hit when you aren't even trading. They'll probably see video games get more expensive on Steam

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

They might be hit indirectly through China.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

Thats probably a definite unless China is willing to absorb the cost for whatever reason. They seem to be in a generous mood (relatively, terms and conditions apply) ever since Trump soured the world to the US.

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 16 points 19 hours ago

I said in November that I hoped that MAGAts get every single thing they voted for.

I still do

HAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

I want to see Trump fall on his face as much as the next guy but, is there any chance this is actually going to work? Even in isolated cases?

The US' own industry groups are saying it's fucked.

Most countries seem more determined to hunker down the harder they're hit.

Canada for example seems to have suddenly lurched back to the left and are ready to stand their ground just on principle. I presume Mexico is the same.

Certainly this stuff isn't helping conservative politics in Australia and in fact will possibly or even likely cost our conservative party the next election.

[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 33 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Not really. Tariffs can accomplish legitimate policy goals but this approach of starting a massive trade war with every major trading partner simultaneously is not an effective strategy for accomplishing anything. Inflation is all but guaranteed to return now.

[–] bingBingBongBong@lemm.ee 32 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

I honestly think that this should not be viewed through the lense of legitimate economic policy. This is blatant treason - exempting russian oligarchs from sanctions, while simultaneously crippling the US economy for decades to come.

This is no administration, it is a flat-out russian occupation of the US.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago

It's not about exempting Russians specifically, it's about bullying everyone into kissing Trump's ring. If you run a business or a country you have to go kiss his ass in exchange for an exemption from tariffs.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 15 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

The US is backing itself into a corner .... and when you corner animals, they tend to strike out at things

War is the only industry that American prides itself for the profit and I've got a bad feeling that the only answer the Americans will come up with is to come up with a war of some kind in some part of the globe. A war where they will force themselves to fire up their war machine and force their country to produce stuff because of conflict. Same old tactic as always ... except this time, they will really have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find a reason to go to war somewhere.

[–] Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca 14 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Probably true. It is Trump backing the US into a corner. No other country in backing them there. Americans need to decide, do they get rid of him, or are they willingly sacrificing their family members so he can increase his net wealth (and that of his kids) at average Americans' expense? Unfortunately I expect Americans will be "patriotic" and die to give Trump not only all their money but also their health and lives.

[–] Drusas@fedia.io 6 points 20 hours ago

We can't get rid of him even if we want to.

He controls every branch of government. The only way to get rid of him right now is through violence. At a time when he is ignoring court orders and deporting people illegally to one of the world's worst prisons. And setting up Guantanamo Bay to house tens of thousands of detainees.

We'll see what happens.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah. Hardships won't dissuade Trump supporters, it's just fuel for fascist agendas.

[–] te_abstract_art@lemmy.world 5 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

"Hmmm things seem to be worse since Trump was elected. Maybe if we go even more right wing, they'll get better?"

MAGA crowds, probably

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 14 hours ago

Well, I guess the problem is that people believe what he says. He will blame Canada and greenland and Europe. It's nuts but thats where we are.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

A war where they will force themselves to fire up their war machine and force their country to produce stuff because of conflict. Same old tactic as always … except this time, they will really have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find a reason to go to war somewhere.

We've already got the war machine fired up. 20 years in Afghanistan and then straight into Ukraine and Palestine, while sabre-rattling with China to justify more defense spending. Biden increased military spending to an all time high (before counting all the foreign aid), higher than the next 9 countries combined.

Americans love war so much that they hardly need a reason. Every war starts with overwhelming support, with only a few cranks holding out. In time, people sour on the war and start giving up on it, but, like Lucy tempting Charlie Brown with a football, all they have to do it again somewhere else and they'll immediately be all for it.

If they're crazy enough to want it, it'd be trivially easy to start a war with China or Iran (or anywhere else) in a way that nearly everyone would be on board. We're talking about a country where 30% of one party and 19% of the other support bombing Agrabah, a country that doesn't even exist, and 30% still say sending troops into Vietnam was the right decision. Those are people will support any war with anyone regardless of anything, even without propaganda, and propaganda, freshness, and engineering the right circumstances will easily convince the rest to get the levels of support seen at the start of Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc.

We're definitely always going to be in a constant state of conflict, like this right now where we have at least three proxy wars going is our "zero point." I just hope it doesn't reach the point of ending the world in nuclear hellfire on the way out.

[–] lemmydividebyzero@reddthat.com 7 points 18 hours ago

Tarrifs depending on the trade deficit?

Bro, I (from EU) make sure, the trade deficit gets even higher.

[–] Tempus_Fugit@midwest.social 14 points 21 hours ago

I'll just have to cut out $3.5k from my budget.

[–] Ilixtze@lemm.ee 5 points 17 hours ago

I don't want to win; I want America to lose everything!

[–] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 9 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Paycheck to Paycheck

A surgical strike
Destroys one month's salary
There may be some pain

[–] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 4 points 21 hours ago

“Derp, derp, derp…”, stated Trump.