在线五月天av电影,国产在线视频福利资源站,巨胸喷奶水www视频网站

https://www.quora.com/If-tariffs-are-bad-why-do-other-countries-use-them-against-the-US
If tariffs are bad, why do other countries use them against the US?

如果關(guān)稅不好，為什么其他國家會(huì)對(duì)美國征收關(guān)稅？

Bobboi
Tariffs are not bad in and of themselves. They are a tool.
Let’s take an example. Let’s say you want to ensure you have thriving domestic agriculture, so that, you know, your country can feed itself.

關(guān)稅本身并不壞，它們是一種工具。
舉個(gè)例子，假設(shè)你想確保國內(nèi)農(nóng)業(yè)蓬勃發(fā)展，以便你的國家能夠自給自足。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

You’ve got plenty of arable land, but because of the prices of things in your country, Triticalistan can produce wheat and sell it to you for 80% of the price that you can sell your domestic wheat, and Triticalistan is very productive. If you just allow things to stand, your domestic wheat farmers have to change crops, or go bust. And soon you have nobody growing wheat domestically. So, you have two options. You either impose tariffs on wheat, to drive up the price on imported wheat until domestic wheat becomes financially viable, or you subsidize domestic wheat production. And that way you make sure you have a domestic wheat industry, in case you have a falling out with Triticalistan, and they stop selling you wheat.

你有大量可耕地，但因?yàn)閲鴥?nèi)物價(jià)的原因，Triticalistan（一個(gè)虛構(gòu)的國家）能夠以你國內(nèi)小麥價(jià)格的80%生產(chǎn)并銷售小麥，而且Triticalistan的生產(chǎn)力很強(qiáng)。如果你什么都不做，國內(nèi)的小麥農(nóng)民將不得不轉(zhuǎn)種其他作物，或者破產(chǎn)。很快，你的國家就沒有人種小麥了。那么，你有兩個(gè)選擇：要么對(duì)小麥征收關(guān)稅，抬高進(jìn)口小麥的價(jià)格，直到國內(nèi)小麥變得經(jīng)濟(jì)上可行，要么給國內(nèi)小麥生產(chǎn)提供補(bǔ)貼。這樣一來，你就確保在和Triticalistan發(fā)生矛盾，導(dǎo)致他們停止向你銷售小麥時(shí)，你依然擁有國內(nèi)的小麥產(chǎn)業(yè)。

And this is something that is effective if it is targeted. You pick and choose industries you want to protect, and levy tariffs on just those products.

這在針對(duì)性使用時(shí)是有效的。你可以選擇你想要保護(hù)的行業(yè)，對(duì)這些產(chǎn)品征收關(guān)稅。

Mexico lost farmers, and heritage varieties, of maize, because of free trade and how cheap American maize is. It would be very reasonable, to preserve their cultural heritage, and to preserve genetic diversity, for Mexicans to impose tariffs specifically on maize. If, however, they were to impose tariffs on all imports, that would hurt their economy, and severely limit the diversity of goods Mexicans could purchase.

墨西哥因?yàn)樽杂少Q(mào)易和美國便宜的玉米，失去了農(nóng)民和傳統(tǒng)的玉米品種。為了保護(hù)文化遺產(chǎn)和基因多樣性，墨西哥對(duì)玉米征收關(guān)稅是非常合理的。如果他們對(duì)所有進(jìn)口商品都征收關(guān)稅，那將會(huì)傷害他們的經(jīng)濟(jì)，嚴(yán)重限制墨西哥人能購買的商品種類。

Tariffs works well as a precision tool to achieve a specific goal. Blanket tariffs are a blunt instrument that smashes everything.

關(guān)稅作為一種精確的工具可以有效實(shí)現(xiàn)特定目標(biāo)，而一刀切的關(guān)稅是一種笨重的工具，會(huì)摧毀一切。

Alex Heney
Tariffs are not necessarily bad if they are applied properly.
Which means they are applied on specifically targeted goods/services in order to protect domestic producers of those goods. This only works if there are domestic producers alreadt, who are close to being competitive with the foreign producers.
Generically applying tariffs on all goods from certain countries is not properly targeted, and will inded almost always be a bad thing.

關(guān)稅不一定是壞事，只要它們被正確使用。
這意味著它們應(yīng)該針對(duì)特定的商品/服務(wù)，用來保護(hù)國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)者。如果國內(nèi)已經(jīng)有生產(chǎn)者，并且這些生產(chǎn)者接近能夠與外國生產(chǎn)者競爭，那么這種方式是有效的。
如果對(duì)某些國家的所有商品一律征收關(guān)稅，這就沒有針對(duì)性，實(shí)際上幾乎總是壞事。

Brian Rauchfuss
What do you mean by “work”? Tariffs can be used to protect a critical industry at the cost of making it less competitive on the global market. That means every country needs to weigh the pros and cons for each industry carefully. Is it ok for say potash fertilizer production to move outside the country, or would we rather pay more and have more expensive food?

你所說的“有效”是什么意思？關(guān)稅可以用來保護(hù)一個(gè)關(guān)鍵行業(yè)，但這樣做會(huì)讓該行業(yè)在全球市場上的競爭力下降。這意味著每個(gè)國家需要仔細(xì)權(quán)衡每個(gè)行業(yè)的利弊。比如，是否愿意讓鉀肥生產(chǎn)遷出國家，還是我們寧愿支付更高的價(jià)格，換取更貴的食品？

Careless blanket tariffs like Trump is so fond of are an unmitigated disaster - companies never know what the tariffs are going to be next week, and so can’t make plans. The only safe option is to move production outside the USA and then only deal with the tariff chaos once with the final product.

像特朗普那樣不加區(qū)別地征收關(guān)稅簡直是一場災(zāi)難——公司永遠(yuǎn)不知道下周關(guān)稅會(huì)是多少，因此無法做出計(jì)劃。唯一的安全選擇就是將生產(chǎn)搬到國外，然后在最終產(chǎn)品上只處理一次關(guān)稅問題。

Joe Bean
US and Canada have been friends for better part of 70yrs. Why now. Yes, we've ad disagreements, but always resolved. Now you've elected a moron that thinks he has something to prove. Well guess what ?? We will , and can defend ourselves. And guess what, the guy that Shiztispants, tough it was going to be a cake walk. Well he needs to get is diaper changed again. Check the markets. Recession is also predicted. Everything tanked.

美國和加拿大已經(jīng)是朋友70多年了。為什么現(xiàn)在會(huì)這樣？是的，我們曾經(jīng)有過分歧，但總是能夠解決。現(xiàn)在你們選了一個(gè)傻瓜，他以為自己有些什么要證明的。結(jié)果怎么樣呢？？我們可以，也能保護(hù)自己。而且，那個(gè)看似輕松的家伙，得再次換尿布了?？纯词袌觯?jīng)濟(jì)衰退也被預(yù)測了。所有東西都崩盤了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

Gutboi
You can easily google a list of world countries and their average tariff rate. None are at 25% flat rate on all imports from the USA. Other countries have tariffs on sexted products to protect a sexted manufacturing sector. Tariffs do work in some situations. Trump has sexted Canada and Mexico your two largest trading partners and placed a flat 25% import tariff on goods from those countries. Think that will work?

你可以很容易地通過谷歌搜索世界各國的平均關(guān)稅率。沒有哪個(gè)國家對(duì)來自美國的所有進(jìn)口商品征收25%的統(tǒng)一關(guān)稅。其他國家對(duì)特定的產(chǎn)品征收關(guān)稅，以保護(hù)某個(gè)特定的制造業(yè)部門。在某些情況下，關(guān)稅確實(shí)有效。特朗普選擇了加拿大和墨西哥這兩個(gè)最大的貿(mào)易伙伴，并對(duì)這些國家的商品征收25%的統(tǒng)一進(jìn)口關(guān)稅。你認(rèn)為這樣會(huì)有效嗎？

Jeff M.
Do you even know what a tariff is?
A tariff is a tax charged by a country on imports into the country.
Usually they are not ‘used’ against other countries or specific countries.

你知道什么是關(guān)稅嗎？
關(guān)稅是一個(gè)國家對(duì)進(jìn)口商品征收的稅。通常，關(guān)稅并不是針對(duì)其他國家或特定國家的。

For example- before Trump(who knows what any U.S. tariff is hour by hour at the moment)
Automobiles imported into the EU were charged 10% tariffs/taxes by the EU
Automobiles imported into the U.S. were charged 2.5% tariffs/taxes by the United States.
Sounds like the EU has higher taxes than the U.S. right?

舉個(gè)例子，在特朗普之前（誰知道現(xiàn)在美國的關(guān)稅是多少），
歐盟對(duì)進(jìn)口汽車征收10%的關(guān)稅/稅。
美國對(duì)進(jìn)口汽車征收2.5%的關(guān)稅/稅。
這聽起來像是歐盟的稅比美國高，對(duì)吧？

Except tariffs are often different from item to item.
EU tariffs on pickup trucks are 10%
U.S. tariffs on pickup trucks are 25%
So who is using tariffs against who?

但關(guān)稅通常因商品不同而有所不同。
歐盟對(duì)皮卡車的關(guān)稅是10%。
美國對(duì)皮卡車的關(guān)稅是25%。
那么，誰在對(duì)誰征收關(guān)稅呢？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

The issue right now is not ‘tariffs’ themselves- but how they are being used as cudgels for any bee Trump gets up his bonnet. And the total chaos of the implementation of the tariffs- American businesses don’t know from day to day what taxes they will be paying.
Welcome to the Chaos Presidency.

現(xiàn)在的問題不是“關(guān)稅”本身，而是它們?nèi)绾伪划?dāng)作特朗普心血來潮的工具，以及關(guān)稅執(zhí)行的完全混亂——美國的企業(yè)每天都不知道他們要支付多少稅。
歡迎來到混亂的總統(tǒng)時(shí)期。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

Stuart Meyer
You have to specify what you mean by “tariffs don’t work” or “do work”. What’s the purpose? At the beginning of the American republic, tariffs had two functions: 1) they served in lieu of (other) taxes on the citizens to fund the government; and 2) they protected the nascent industries of the U.S. against the more efficient competition in Britain and other places. Tariffs served well for both these functions AT THAT TIME.

你必須明確“關(guān)稅不起作用”或“起作用”的意思是什么？其目的是什么？在美國建國初期，關(guān)稅有兩個(gè)功能：1）代替（其他）稅收來為政府提供資金；2）保護(hù)美國初創(chuàng)的工業(yè)，免受英國和其他地方更高效競爭者的沖擊。關(guān)稅在當(dāng)時(shí)很好地履行了這兩個(gè)功能。

Lately, we see tariffs being used to PUNISH other countries and this might or might not “work” since the tariff is essentially a tax on what our own citizens want to buy and there is the likelihood of inflation since prices will initially go up to account for the tariffs. Now the tariffs go into the coffers of the Treasury since it isn’t all bad. However, there are likely going to be several consequences.

最近，我們看到關(guān)稅被用來懲罰其他國家，這可能會(huì)或不會(huì)“有效”，因?yàn)殛P(guān)稅本質(zhì)上是對(duì)我們自己公民購買的商品征稅，并且由于價(jià)格會(huì)上漲以補(bǔ)償關(guān)稅，可能會(huì)引發(fā)通貨膨脹?，F(xiàn)在，關(guān)稅收入進(jìn)入財(cái)政部，因?yàn)檫@并不完全是壞事。然而，這可能會(huì)帶來幾個(gè)后果。

First, there is likely going to be RETALIATION which, as with the Smoot-Hawley tariffs of the Great Depression served to kill off trade and stifle our and other economies. If we have industries already competitive with the ones on which we are going to put tariffs, there will be more use of domestic products although the retaliation will likely reduce the exports of those products. The balance of trade will initially be affected and for those who think this is more important than it really is, that will seem to be a plus UNTIL the currency of the targeted (with tariffs) country deteriorates with respect to the dollar restoring (at least somewhat ) the price in dollars.

首先，可能會(huì)有報(bào)復(fù)，正如大蕭條時(shí)期的斯穆特-霍利關(guān)稅法所表明的那樣，報(bào)復(fù)性關(guān)稅會(huì)導(dǎo)致貿(mào)易停滯，扼殺我們和其他經(jīng)濟(jì)體的增長。如果我們對(duì)一些已經(jīng)在與我們競爭的行業(yè)征收關(guān)稅，雖然報(bào)復(fù)可能會(huì)減少這些產(chǎn)品的出口，但國內(nèi)對(duì)這些產(chǎn)品的需求可能會(huì)增加。貿(mào)易平衡最初可能會(huì)受到影響，對(duì)于那些認(rèn)為這比實(shí)際更重要的人來說，似乎這會(huì)是一個(gè)好事，直到被征收關(guān)稅的國家的貨幣對(duì)美元貶值，恢復(fù)（至少在某種程度上）美元價(jià)格。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

If you believe David Ricardo, everyone benefits from trade due to his principle of Comparative Advantage so tariffs ultimately would be better for all if set as low as possible. Mutual free ( or low ) trade zones such as the EU are beneficial to the members. The use of a common currency further benefits such efficient competitors as the Germans since their trade success cannot cause (what was once the Deutschmark ) their currency to rise too much.

如果你相信David Ricardo的觀點(diǎn)，根據(jù)他的比較優(yōu)勢原則，每個(gè)人都能從貿(mào)易中受益，因此關(guān)稅最終應(yīng)該盡可能低，這樣才對(duì)所有人都有好處。像歐盟這樣的互惠自由（或低）貿(mào)易區(qū)對(duì)成員國是有益的。使用共同貨幣進(jìn)一步使像德國這樣的高效競爭者受益，因?yàn)樗麄兊馁Q(mào)易成功不會(huì)使（曾經(jīng)的德國馬克）貨幣升值過多。

Another disadvantage of tariffs, while useful to protect infant industries from foreign competition, they serve to protect domestic industries which might not become as efficient and competitive as they could be. The Japanese found a way to get the possible advantages and disadvantages by keeping such industries as autos protected from foreign competition by tariffs but also allowing vicious competition among Japanese domestic auto mfrs until they were quite competitive on the world stage at which time they were able to outcompete American mfrs at least in small cars (and various electronic products.)

關(guān)稅的另一個(gè)弊端是，雖然它們有助于保護(hù)初創(chuàng)工業(yè)免受外國競爭，但它們也會(huì)保護(hù)那些可能不會(huì)變得像應(yīng)該那樣高效和具有競爭力的國內(nèi)產(chǎn)業(yè)。日本找到了在保護(hù)汽車等行業(yè)免受外國競爭的同時(shí)，通過關(guān)稅保護(hù)國內(nèi)競爭的可能優(yōu)勢與劣勢，并允許日本國內(nèi)汽車制造商之間進(jìn)行激烈競爭，直到他們在世界舞臺(tái)上變得相當(dāng)有競爭力，這時(shí)他們能夠至少在小型汽車（以及各種電子產(chǎn)品）領(lǐng)域超越美國制造商。

Most economists believe in the THEORY of Ricardo’s argument and are usually inveterate free traders. However, there are political considerations which make the idea work in theory but not always in the real world. Thus, tariffs often DO work for certain functions.

大多數(shù)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家相信Ricardo理論，并且通常是堅(jiān)定的自由貿(mào)易支持者。然而，現(xiàn)實(shí)中有政治因素使得這一理論在實(shí)踐中并不總是成立。因此，關(guān)稅在某些功能上確實(shí)有效。

Helen Jones
Against? They are not a weapon.
They are often created as part of a trade agreement, as in this case on Trump is tearing up any agreements including ones he's forgotten he negotiated.
They may used where a country subsidises an industry and it’s to balance that out. Not the fake subsidy that Trump is referring to with Canads as that's simply because Canadians don't want to buy US products. UK and EU countries are similar in that we import from the US pnly things we want to but from them but in many caes they are actually being manufactured here. That's anything from cars to Heinz products. There's a Heinz factory in Wigan (England) built in 1959.

反對(duì)？它們不是武器。
它們通常是在貿(mào)易協(xié)議的一部分中創(chuàng)建的，就像這個(gè)例子中，特朗普正在撕毀任何協(xié)議，包括他已經(jīng)忘記自己談判過的協(xié)議。
它們可能用于一個(gè)國家補(bǔ)貼某個(gè)行業(yè)時(shí)，作為平衡。并不是特朗普提到的關(guān)于加拿大的假補(bǔ)貼，因?yàn)槟侵皇且驗(yàn)榧幽么笕瞬幌胭徺I美國的產(chǎn)品。英國和歐盟國家也類似，我們從美國進(jìn)口的東西通常是我們想要的，但很多時(shí)候這些東西實(shí)際上是在我們這里生產(chǎn)的。從汽車到亨氏產(chǎn)品都有。亨氏工廠位于英格蘭威根，建于1959年。

John Bradley
That is why it is called a trade war, Trump forcing tariffs on imports from other Countries, forces those other Countries to respond in kind with tariffs on imports from the United States.
Trump’s tariffs are isolating the United States economically from other Countries, causing the United States to be more expensive than importing tthe same goods from Countries without tariffs.
Meaning less people will want to buy U.S made products or export their products to the U.S for the American public to buy.
Tariffs are a lose/lose situation for the United States.

這就是為什么它被稱為貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)，特朗普對(duì)其他國家的進(jìn)口加征關(guān)稅，迫使這些國家以同樣的方式對(duì)來自美國的進(jìn)口加征關(guān)稅。
特朗普的關(guān)稅政策使美國在經(jīng)濟(jì)上與其他國家隔離，使得從沒有關(guān)稅的國家進(jìn)口同樣的商品變得更便宜。
這意味著人們不太愿意購買美國制造的產(chǎn)品，或者將他們的產(chǎn)品出口到美國供美國公眾購買。
關(guān)稅對(duì)美國來說是一種兩敗俱傷的局面。

Jim Anders
Because they got away with it because we didn’t insist on reciprocity. They were on the gravy train.
For example, Canada imposes tariffs on American dairy products that exceed certain quotas. These tariffs can be as high as 298.5%
Not a good trading partner.

因?yàn)樗麄冎疤用摿素?zé)任，因?yàn)槲覀儧]有堅(jiān)持互惠原則。他們享受了好處。
例如，加拿大對(duì)美國的乳制品征收超出某些配額的關(guān)稅。這些關(guān)稅最高可以達(dá)到298.5%。
不是一個(gè)好的貿(mào)易伙伴。

Karl D (aka Gonzo)
Tariffs are only bad if the US uses them
Basically, everything in the United States does now that Trump is in office again is open for the minority of the world to express dismay at the USA.
Likely yet another troll question.

關(guān)稅只有在美國使用時(shí)才不好。
基本上，現(xiàn)在美國做的所有事情都為世界的少數(shù)人提供了表達(dá)不滿的機(jī)會(huì)。
這可能又是一個(gè)挑釁問題。

P. D.
I recently read somewhere, that 70% of everything Trump says is a lie. I think that's a credible number. At least when you include statements like “I am hungry”. Else I would assume the number to be higher.

我最近讀到某個(gè)地方提到，特朗普所說的70%都是謊言。我覺得這個(gè)數(shù)字很有可信度，至少包括像“我餓了”這種說法。如果不包括這些，我猜數(shù)字可能還會(huì)更高。

So with everything that clown or one of his cronies tells, it is safe to assume it is a lie or half truth at best.
So please take claims from Trump about all those bad countries and their unfair treatment of the USA with a big grain of salt.

所以，對(duì)于特朗普或者他的一些追隨者說的每一句話，最好假設(shè)它是謊言或半真半假的。
至于特朗普所說的那些關(guān)于那些壞國家和它們對(duì)美國不公平待遇的言論，最好持懷疑態(tài)度。

Tariffs are a way to protect certain industries against competition or, in certain cases like tariffs on Chinese EVs, to compensate for unfair advantages that have the purpose of gaining monopolistic power like Chinese financial support for Chinese EV manufacturers.
So until recently, at least among the formerly allied national, no one used tariffs against the US. If tariffs existed (and let me clarify one thing: Overall, those tariffs were on level with US tariffs) they served the purpose of protecting certain industries.

關(guān)稅是一種保護(hù)某些行業(yè)免受競爭的方法，或者在某些情況下（比如對(duì)中國電動(dòng)車的關(guān)稅），是為了彌補(bǔ)不公平的優(yōu)勢，目的是獲得壟斷力量，比如中國政府對(duì)中國電動(dòng)車制造商的財(cái)政支持。
直到最近，至少在以前的盟國之間，沒有人會(huì)對(duì)美國加關(guān)稅。如果有關(guān)稅（讓我澄清一下：總體而言，這些關(guān)稅與美國的關(guān)稅相當(dāng)），它們的目的通常是為了保護(hù)某些行業(yè)。

What happens now is not so much about economics, but about politics and about standing up to a bully. It’s about influcting pain in reverse, while causing as little discomfort as possible for the own population, to prevent Trump and his MAGA cult from causing more damage to the world economy than they have already done.

現(xiàn)在發(fā)生的事情不完全是經(jīng)濟(jì)問題，而是政治問題，是對(duì)抗一個(gè)霸凌者的問題。其目的是反向施加痛苦，同時(shí)盡量減少自己民眾的不適，以防止特朗普和他的MAGA崇拜者對(duì)全球經(jīng)濟(jì)造成更多的損害。

You might have noticed, that EU tariffs against the US don’t touch all products yet, but only easily substituted products like Bourbon, peanut butter or Harley Davidsons?
Why do you think is the reason behind this? Certainly not to generate government income from tariffs!

你可能注意到，歐盟對(duì)美國的關(guān)稅并沒有涉及所有產(chǎn)品，而是針對(duì)那些容易替代的產(chǎn)品，比如波本威士忌、花生醬或哈雷摩托車？
你覺得這背后的原因是什么？肯定不是為了從關(guān)稅中獲取政府收入！

George Long
Because the US imposed unreasonable tariffs themselves and other countries were (obviously) not going to vectored off just to satisfy Mr Trump. Did he really expect they would just lie down and have him walk all over them? He is like a childish bully. Bur naive.

因?yàn)槊绹约杭恿瞬缓侠淼年P(guān)稅，其他國家顯然不會(huì)為了滿足特朗普而屈服。他真的指望他們會(huì)乖乖地讓步嗎？他就像個(gè)幼稚的惡霸，天真無知。

Donna Porcella
Dropping bombs on countries is bad too. That is how wars start. What we are seeing now is a “trade war” started by President Trump.

對(duì)其他國家進(jìn)行轟炸也很糟糕。這就是戰(zhàn)爭開始的方式。我們現(xiàn)在看到的是由特朗普總統(tǒng)發(fā)起的“貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)”。

S Perro
Tariffs are used to protect an industry when that industry isn’t able to survive on its own. So, in general it isn’t a good tool because you are encouraging an industry that isn’t viable. In certain cases, it can be useful when the country of manufacture has a labour cost that is very low like China. Most western countries cannot compete with Asian labour costs.

關(guān)稅通常用來保護(hù)那些無法獨(dú)立生存的行業(yè)。所以一般來說，它不是一個(gè)好的工具，因?yàn)樗膭?lì)那些不可行的行業(yè)。在某些情況下，它是有用的，尤其是在制造國勞動(dòng)成本很低的情況下，比如中國。大多數(shù)西方國家無法與亞洲的勞動(dòng)成本競爭。

Christian Donzel
The “tariffs” aren’t really a problem as soon as they are stable and reflect a functional need. One country can even accept that imports from another country are tariff-free until a predefined amount, weight or volume. But they need to be managed seriously, not as an instrument of racket and without any need. The US aren’t producing enough aluminum. They buy 90 % of those they export from Canada. Nobody will find more aluminum to extract in the US because the US are rising the tariffs against Canada. Aluminum the US export will cost more and sell less. The “l(fā)umber” episode of the “tariffs” sitcom from White House Productions, Inc. was one of the most stupid theater play people have ever seen, the actor never saw any lumber and just imagined what it is, like a six years old boy.

“關(guān)稅”問題并不大，只要它們穩(wěn)定并且反映了實(shí)際需要。一個(gè)國家甚至可以接受來自另一個(gè)國家的進(jìn)口在預(yù)定數(shù)量、重量或體積之前是免關(guān)稅的。但它們需要被認(rèn)真管理，而不是作為敲詐工具或沒有必要的手段。美國并沒有生產(chǎn)足夠的鋁。它們買了90%的鋁都是從加拿大進(jìn)口的。由于美國對(duì)加拿大提高了關(guān)稅，不會(huì)再有更多的鋁被提煉出來。美國出口的鋁將變得更貴，銷售量也會(huì)減少?！澳静摹标P(guān)稅事件就像白宮制作的一出最愚蠢的劇作，演員從未見過木材，只是像六歲小孩一樣想象它是什么樣的。

Brad
Because tariffs are bad, it's the Democrats who are afraid President Trump will succeed with the economy where the Democrats keep failing. Maybe it is the simple fact that President Trump actually understands how the economy works and the Democrats do not!!!!!

因?yàn)殛P(guān)稅不好，民主黨害怕特朗普總統(tǒng)在經(jīng)濟(jì)上取得成功，而民主黨一直失敗。也許就是簡單的事實(shí)，特朗普總統(tǒng)真的理解經(jīng)濟(jì)運(yùn)作，而民主黨卻不理解！??！

Erik
They’re not the worst thing Trump is trying to enforce. It encourages domestic production which could lead to lower costs for goods and services. Countries don’t want to be reliant on other countries, and Trump doesn’t want the US to be reliant on China. So no, they’re not “bad” in theory.

它們不是特朗普試圖強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行的最糟糕的事情。它鼓勵(lì)國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)，這可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致商品和服務(wù)的成本降低。各國不想依賴其他國家，而特朗普不想讓美國依賴中國。所以，從理論上講，關(guān)稅并不是“壞的”。

如果關(guān)稅不好，為什么其他國家會(huì)對(duì)美國征收關(guān)稅？

如果關(guān)稅不好，為什么其他國家會(huì)對(duì)美國征收關(guān)稅？