當(dāng)對(duì)外國(guó)商品征收關(guān)稅時(shí)，為什么美國(guó)制造的產(chǎn)品不會(huì)變得更便宜？

Why don't American-made products become cheaper when tariffs are placed on foreign goods?

當(dāng)對(duì)外國(guó)商品征收關(guān)稅時(shí)，為什么美國(guó)制造的產(chǎn)品不會(huì)變得更便宜？

Jay Valenci
I purchased a Japanese made Mazda CX-5 back in November in anticipation of the tariffs. I'm certainly glad I did because not only is it a great car, but the 25% tariff will raise the price from $35,000 to $43,750. Guaranteed the American car companies will raise prices accordingly. Maybe not the entire 25%, but close. As many of you have pointed out, American cars are loaded with foreign made parts. They do not get to escape tariffs. That's just how capitalism works.
Used car prices will also go up because of increased demand from consumers who are priced out of the new car market.
Trump is telling you that tariffs are going to make us rich. That's fine as long as you realize that the tariff money is coming from you in order to pay for the tax cut for the rich.
Tariffs were actually the primary method for the Federal government to raise revenue up until the income tax was established by the 16th Amendment in 1913. Income tax was only imposed on incomes over $3000 which is about $96,000 today. In other words if you were earning $3000 in 1913, you were doing well. The income tax was meant to replace the regressive tariff tax system with a progressive income tax system.
Today Trump is doing just the opposite. Making the rich richer on the backs of working people.
How anyone can support this makes no sense to me.

早在 11 月我就買了一輛日本產(chǎn)的馬自達(dá) CX-5，當(dāng)時(shí)就是考慮到關(guān)稅的問(wèn)題。我確實(shí)很高興自己當(dāng)時(shí)做了這個(gè)決定，因?yàn)檫@輛車不僅很棒，而且 25% 的關(guān)稅會(huì)讓它的價(jià)格從 35000 美元漲到 43750 美元?？梢钥隙ǖ氖牵绹?guó)的汽車公司也會(huì)相應(yīng)地提高價(jià)格。也許不會(huì)漲 25%，但也會(huì)接近這個(gè)幅度。正如你們很多人指出的那樣，美國(guó)汽車?yán)镅b滿了外國(guó)制造的零部件。它們也逃不過(guò)關(guān)稅。這就是資本主義的運(yùn)作方式。
由于消費(fèi)者在新車市場(chǎng)中因價(jià)格過(guò)高而被擠出，二手車的需求增加，二手車的價(jià)格也將上漲。
特朗普在告訴你，關(guān)稅會(huì)讓我們變得富有。這沒(méi)問(wèn)題，只要你知道關(guān)稅的錢是從你身上來(lái)的，是為了給富人減稅。
關(guān)稅實(shí)際上一直是聯(lián)邦政府的主要收入來(lái)源，直到 1913 年第十六修正案確立了所得稅制度。當(dāng)時(shí)所得稅僅對(duì)超過(guò) 3000 美元的收入征收，相當(dāng)于如今的 96000 美元。換句話說(shuō)，1913 年如果你的收入達(dá)到 3000 美元，那就算不錯(cuò)了。所得稅旨在用累進(jìn)的所得稅制度取代累退的關(guān)稅制度。如今特朗普卻反其道而行之，讓富人更富，而犧牲的是工薪階層的利益。有人支持這種做法，我實(shí)在想不通。

Ross Langerak
One of the reasons used to justify tariffs, is that they will make American products more competitive. The cost of materials doesn’t change. The cost of labor doesn’t change. The fact that the American retailer can increase prices is what makes it competitive.
Suppose you have a car dealer with 50 foreign cars and 50 American cars, and 100 customers who want to buy a car at the current price. Now suppose the government puts a tariff on the foreign cars that effectively blocks entry. The dealer now has 50 American cars and no foreign cars, and 100 customers who want to buy a car at the current price. The dealer will increase the price until 50 customers want to buy a car at the new price. That is not price gouging. That is basic economics. That is the demand side of supply and demand. You cannot get around supply and demand.

關(guān)稅得以合理化的理由之一是，它會(huì)讓美國(guó)產(chǎn)品更具競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。原材料成本不變，勞動(dòng)力成本也不變。美國(guó)零售商能夠提價(jià)，這才是其競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力所在。假設(shè)你有一個(gè)汽車經(jīng)銷商，有 50 輛外國(guó)車和 50 輛美國(guó)車，有 100 名顧客想以當(dāng)前價(jià)格買車?，F(xiàn)在假設(shè)政府對(duì)外國(guó)車征收關(guān)稅，實(shí)際上阻止了外國(guó)車的進(jìn)入。經(jīng)銷商現(xiàn)在有 50 輛美國(guó)車，沒(méi)有外國(guó)車，而 100 名顧客仍想以當(dāng)前價(jià)格買車。經(jīng)銷商會(huì)提價(jià)，直到 50 名顧客愿意以新價(jià)格買車。這并非哄抬物價(jià)，這是基本的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)原理。這是供求關(guān)系中的需求方。你無(wú)法繞過(guò)供求關(guān)系。

Some prices will go down. Products that are normally exported will lose foreign customers. They will have to lower prices to sell everything they produce to the smaller market inside the US. Some of them will fail. Normally, with less product on the market, prices would go back up, but failing businesses leave unemployment in their wake. Prices will remain low as retailers are forced to sell to customers who have less money.
Boeing sells airplanes to customers all over the world. If retaliatory tariffs prevent the sale of aircraft outside the US, the shrunken market will force Boeing to reduce production, resulting in layoffs. People will have less money to buy cars, and televisions, and Christmas presents. Boeing will have less money for R&D, causing Boeing to fall behind Airbus in aircraft design. When the tariffs are lifted, Boeing will be at a disadvantage, both in production and design. Hopefully, Boeing will be able to catch up, but as someone much smarter than me once said, hope is not a plan.

一些商品的價(jià)格會(huì)下降。通常出口的產(chǎn)品會(huì)失去外國(guó)客戶。它們不得不降低價(jià)格，以便將生產(chǎn)的所有產(chǎn)品都銷售給美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)這個(gè)規(guī)模更小的市場(chǎng)。其中一些企業(yè)將會(huì)倒閉。通常情況下，由于市場(chǎng)上產(chǎn)品減少，價(jià)格會(huì)回升，但倒閉的企業(yè)會(huì)留下失業(yè)問(wèn)題。由于零售商被迫向手頭更緊的顧客銷售商品，價(jià)格將保持低位。 波音公司向世界各地的客戶銷售飛機(jī)。如果報(bào)復(fù)性關(guān)稅阻止其向美國(guó)以外的地區(qū)銷售飛機(jī)，萎縮的市場(chǎng)將迫使波音公司減少產(chǎn)量，從而導(dǎo)致裁員。人們將有更少的錢購(gòu)買汽車、電視和圣誕禮物。波音公司將有更少的資金用于研發(fā)，這將導(dǎo)致波音公司在飛機(jī)設(shè)計(jì)方面落后于空客。當(dāng)關(guān)稅取消時(shí)，波音公司在生產(chǎn)和設(shè)計(jì)方面都將處于劣勢(shì)。希望波音公司能夠迎頭趕上，但正如一位比我聰明得多的人曾經(jīng)說(shuō)過(guò)的那樣，希望不是計(jì)劃。

This is what Trump gave us the last time he was in charge.
Is that what you want for the US economy?
We had a choice between a prosecutor and a criminal, and Republicans chose the criminal.
Democrats warned us about Trump. It could take decades to recover from Trump. Even then, recovery will only happen if the dumbest half of the US population doesn’t force another disaster like Trump on us. Rather than voter ID, maybe what we need is a voter IQ test.

這就是特朗普上次執(zhí)政時(shí)給我們帶來(lái)的局面。這就是你們想要的美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)嗎？我們當(dāng)時(shí)面臨著檢察官和罪犯之間的選擇，而共和黨選擇了罪犯。民主黨曾警告過(guò)我們特朗普的危險(xiǎn)。從特朗普造成的破壞中恢復(fù)過(guò)來(lái)可能需要幾十年的時(shí)間。即便如此，只有當(dāng)美國(guó)最愚蠢的那半數(shù)人口不再把另一個(gè)像特朗普這樣的災(zāi)難強(qiáng)加給我們時(shí)，恢復(fù)才有可能實(shí)現(xiàn)。與其搞選民身份認(rèn)證，或許我們更需要的是選民智商測(cè)試。

Kevin Douglas
A tariff doesn’t do anything to make American-made goods cheaper. So even in the best case scenario, American goods will cost the same as they did before.
The best case scenario basically doesn’t exist, most companies depend on foreign made goods which means that a tariff increases their input costs. They have to raise prices in order to make a profit. So not only will American made goods not get cheaper, they will almost certainly get more expensive.
Competition pushes down prices. Tariffs artificially harm the competition. This means American businesses can and will raise prices a bit if the competition becomes less fierce as a result of tariffs.
But you don't have to believe me, just take a look at how the markets reacted to so-called Liberation Day. Trillions of dollars in market value wiped out with a simple announcement.
And these investors are not libs like me. They are people who solely care about making a sh*t ton of money. Many of them celebrated the return of Trump in January.
The overwhelming response of these investors to Liberation Day was panic. Because they realize what an incredibly foolish act of economic suicide this was and they're planning accordingly.

關(guān)稅并不能讓美國(guó)制造的商品變得更便宜。所以即使在最好的情況下，美國(guó)商品的價(jià)格也會(huì)和以前一樣。但這種最好的情況實(shí)際上并不存在，大多數(shù)公司都依賴外國(guó)制造的商品，這意味著關(guān)稅會(huì)增加它們的投入成本。它們不得不提高價(jià)格才能盈利。所以美國(guó)制造的商品不僅不會(huì)變得更便宜，幾乎肯定會(huì)變得更貴。
競(jìng)爭(zhēng)會(huì)壓低價(jià)格。關(guān)稅人為地?fù)p害競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。這意味著，如果關(guān)稅導(dǎo)致競(jìng)爭(zhēng)不那么激烈，美國(guó)企業(yè)就能夠而且將會(huì)稍微提高價(jià)格。但您不必相信我，只需看看市場(chǎng)對(duì)所謂的“解放日”的反應(yīng)就知道了。僅僅一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)單的聲明，就蒸發(fā)了數(shù)萬(wàn)億美元的市值。
而且這些投資者可不是像我這樣的左派。他們只關(guān)心賺大錢。他們當(dāng)中很多人在 1 月特朗普回歸時(shí)還歡呼雀躍。這些投資者對(duì)解放日的反應(yīng)幾乎是一片恐慌。因?yàn)樗麄円庾R(shí)到這是多么愚蠢的經(jīng)濟(jì)自殺行為，于是開(kāi)始相應(yīng)地做打算。

Claire Jordan
Imagine that item X costs $25, whether it’s locally made or imported.
Now put a 20% tariff on the imported version. Now the imported version costs $30 and the local version costs $25.
Why would the local manufacturer drop their price? On the contrary they’ll probably raise it to $28, because the fact that the imported version now costs so much more means that they can raise their prices and still be competitive.
In addition, many US-made products use materials and components which they import, and which will now be more expensive, pushing up the cost of production. If you’re in the US, virtually everything you buy is about to become a lot more expensive.

假設(shè)商品無(wú)論是本地生產(chǎn)還是進(jìn)口，售價(jià)均為 25 美元?，F(xiàn)在對(duì)進(jìn)口商品征收 20% 的關(guān)稅。這樣一來(lái)，進(jìn)口商品售價(jià)變?yōu)?30 美元，而本地商品仍為 25 美元。本地制造商為何要降低價(jià)格呢？相反，他們很可能會(huì)把價(jià)格提高到 28 美元，因?yàn)檫M(jìn)口商品現(xiàn)在價(jià)格大幅上漲，這意味著他們可以提高價(jià)格且仍具有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。此外，許多美國(guó)制造的產(chǎn)品使用進(jìn)口的材料和零部件，這些材料和零部件現(xiàn)在會(huì)更貴，從而推高生產(chǎn)成本。如果你在美國(guó)，幾乎你購(gòu)買的所有東西很快都會(huì)變得貴很多。

Gabor Vajay
Because American businesses see FREE MONEY! and can’t help themselves.
Imagine if you will you are competing with a foreign business making the exact same thing as you. The doo-dad you both make sells for $100 and costs you and him $75 to make, lets say.
Your foreign competitor pissed off the government (or, as has happened many times in the past already (think steel as just one example)) YOU lobbied the government for help and the nice government imposed tariffs on your foreign competitor of (lets say, to keep the arithmetic simple) $100 on the $100 doo-dad. You now have a huge advantage, you shark you, by getting your fine government to give you a pricing advantage on your foreign competitor of … $100 per doo-dad. After all it costs you $75 to make one and while it still costs your competitor $75 to make one, you can sell yours for $100 as usual, but his doo-dad costs his American customers $200 (because the government takes $100 too). Notice he still only makes the same $75, same as you.

因?yàn)槊绹?guó)企業(yè)看到“免費(fèi)的錢！”就管不住自己了。想象一下，你和一家外國(guó)企業(yè)生產(chǎn)完全一樣的東西。你們生產(chǎn)的這個(gè)小玩意售價(jià) 100 美元，成本都是 75 美元。假設(shè)你的外國(guó)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手惹惱了政府（或者像過(guò)去多次發(fā)生的情況那樣，比如鋼鐵行業(yè)），你游說(shuō)政府幫忙，政府就對(duì)你的外國(guó)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手征收關(guān)稅，比如說(shuō)，對(duì) 100 美元的小玩意征收 100 美元的關(guān)稅。這樣一來(lái)，你就獲得了巨大的優(yōu)勢(shì)，你這個(gè)精明鬼，通過(guò)讓政府給你提供價(jià)格優(yōu)勢(shì)，每件小玩意比你的外國(guó)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手多賺 100 美元。畢竟你生產(chǎn)一件的成本還是 75 美元，而你的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手生產(chǎn)一件的成本也還是 75 美元，但你可以像往常一樣以 100 美元出售，而他的小玩意賣給美國(guó)客戶就要 200 美元（因?yàn)檎€要收 100 美元）。注意，他賺的還是 75 美元，和你一樣。

You should have no trouble cornering the doo-dad market since you can sell yours for $100, right? But that is not what happens, because, well, because business, greed and sadly, human nature. You go, “Wow, I can charge $200 per doo-dad too and make $125 profit!” And so you do because you are a genius business person. And you say, “Come get your Made in America doo-dads, same price as that foreign brand, $200!” BUY AMERICAN!
And if you think it wouldn’t happen, well it does, and it did. The American steel industry lobbied for tariffs and when they got them they raised their prices for the free money, and went out of business anyway.
If someone’s competitor gets an artificial disadvantage, that someone, 99 times out of 100 will raise prices to match, rather than just keep taking the fair profit that was perfectly acceptable just yesterday.

既然你能以 100 美元的價(jià)格出售你的小玩意兒，那你就應(yīng)該能輕松壟斷這個(gè)市場(chǎng)，對(duì)吧？但事實(shí)并非如此，因?yàn)樯?、貪婪，還有可悲的人性。你會(huì)想：“哇，我也可以把每個(gè)小玩意兒賣到 200 美元，賺 125 美元的利潤(rùn)！”于是你就這么做了，因?yàn)槟闶莻€(gè)天才商人。然后你會(huì)說(shuō)：“快來(lái)買美國(guó)制造的小玩意兒吧，跟那個(gè)外國(guó)品牌一樣，只要 200 美元！”買美國(guó)貨！ 如果你認(rèn)為這種情況不會(huì)發(fā)生，那你就錯(cuò)了，這種情況確實(shí)會(huì)發(fā)生，而且已經(jīng)發(fā)生過(guò)。美國(guó)鋼鐵業(yè)游說(shuō)政府征收關(guān)稅，當(dāng)他們?nèi)缭敢詢敽?，卻為了多賺點(diǎn)錢而提高價(jià)格，結(jié)果還是倒閉了。如果某人的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手獲得了不公平的優(yōu)勢(shì)，那么這個(gè)人 100次中有99次會(huì)提高價(jià)格以保持平衡，而不是繼續(xù)賺取昨天還覺(jué)得完全合理的利潤(rùn)。

Another example, that fine excuse for a human Martin Skreli raised drug prices 5,000% just because he could. His costs of production had nothing to do with it. Insulin went from “free” (Banting and Best (Canada) gave it away to the world), then America got hold of it and marked it up to the moon, because why not.

另一個(gè)例子，那個(gè)所謂的“人”馬丁·斯克雷利僅僅因?yàn)樗苓@么做就把藥價(jià)提高了 5000%。生產(chǎn)成本跟他毫無(wú)關(guān)系。胰島素從“免費(fèi)”（加拿大人班廷和貝斯特將其免費(fèi)贈(zèng)予全世界）到美國(guó)接手后價(jià)格飆升至天價(jià)，因?yàn)槟苓@樣干為什么不去干呢。

Jason Thomson
Because the usa can't produce everything it needs without foreign parts. There's not a single car made in the usa that is 100% American. The usa is a net import country and relies on many other countries for its raw materials, so while you may purchase American made then over the coming months you will see prices rise due to the tariffs. The 200% alcohol tariff will hit hard as there's alcoholic drinks the usa just cannot make such as champagne, irish whiskey, scotch whisky and Guinness. At current average price this could make a pint of Guinness $30!
Another thing to consider about who is ripping off the usa- Canada invented insulin which has saved millions if not billions of lives. Canada fave the world insulin for free. Most countries sell it at cost price, in many countries it is free for the patient. In the usa the average cost is EIGHTY DOLLARS! Americans have been ripped off from withing for decades.

因?yàn)槊绹?guó)無(wú)法在沒(méi)有外國(guó)零部件的情況下生產(chǎn)出其所需的一切。美國(guó)制造的汽車沒(méi)有一款是百分之百美國(guó)貨。美國(guó)是一個(gè)凈進(jìn)口國(guó)，依賴許多其他國(guó)家提供原材料，所以盡管你可能在接下來(lái)的幾個(gè)月里購(gòu)買到美國(guó)制造的產(chǎn)品，但你會(huì)看到由于關(guān)稅的原因價(jià)格會(huì)上漲。200%的酒精關(guān)稅將對(duì)美國(guó)造成沉重打擊，因?yàn)槊绹?guó)無(wú)法生產(chǎn)諸如香檳、愛(ài)爾蘭威士忌、蘇格蘭威士忌和健力士黑啤等酒類。按照目前的平均價(jià)格，這可能會(huì)使一杯健力士黑啤的價(jià)格達(dá)到 30 美元！ 另一個(gè)需要考慮的問(wèn)題是，誰(shuí)在坑害美國(guó)——胰島素是由加拿大發(fā)明的，拯救了數(shù)百萬(wàn)甚至數(shù)十億人的生命。加拿大免費(fèi)向世界提供了胰島素。大多數(shù)國(guó)家以成本價(jià)出售，許多國(guó)家對(duì)患者免費(fèi)。而在美國(guó)，平均價(jià)格是 80 美元！幾十年來(lái)，美國(guó)人一直被本國(guó)企業(yè)坑害。

Angela Birch
Because American made goods essentially have costs to consider in the pricing. First a lot of American made goods are assembled using imported goods which are tariffed, next the costs in the US are greater. Costs are everything from building the factory to electrical power to run it the costs of equipment ( often tariffed) and the cost of maintaining then and the wages and benefits are massively higher. Things made in the US are priced higher because the costs are higher. Workers are not going to show up to work if their wages go from $10 an hour to $4.95 a day. The electric company is not going to drop their rates for a US manufacturing company because they also have fixed costs. A repair company for equipment isn’t going to cut their charges by 80%. Manufacturing moved over seas because the costs are so much less. A lot of companies operating in the US have cut their prices to the bone in an attempt to compete and their prices have no more room to be cut.
There is also another consideration if they can’t compete on price because the fixed costs are higher why would they drop their prices when the competition vanishes or becomes more expensive. They will RAISE their prices to just slightly below that of the tariffed goods.

因?yàn)槊绹?guó)制造的商品在定價(jià)時(shí)要考慮成本。首先，很多美國(guó)制造的商品是用進(jìn)口零部件組裝的，而這些零部件要交關(guān)稅；其次，美國(guó)的成本更高。成本包括從建廠到供電，再到設(shè)備（往往要交關(guān)稅）的費(fèi)用，以及設(shè)備的維護(hù)費(fèi)用，還有工資和福利，這些都高得多。美國(guó)制造的東西價(jià)格更高是因?yàn)槌杀靖?。如果工人的工資從每小時(shí) 10 美元降到每天 4.95 美元，他們就不會(huì)來(lái)上班了。電力公司也不會(huì)因?yàn)橐患颐绹?guó)制造企業(yè)而降低電價(jià)，因?yàn)樗麄円灿泄潭ǔ杀?。設(shè)備維修公司也不會(huì)把費(fèi)用降低 80%。制造業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移到海外是因?yàn)槌杀镜偷枚?。很多在美?guó)經(jīng)營(yíng)的公司已經(jīng)把價(jià)格壓到最低來(lái)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，價(jià)格已經(jīng)沒(méi)有再降的空間了。如果他們無(wú)法在價(jià)格上競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，因?yàn)楣潭ǔ杀靖?，那么?dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)消失或變得更昂貴時(shí)，他們?yōu)槭裁匆档蛢r(jià)格呢？他們會(huì)把價(jià)格提高到略低于加征關(guān)稅的商品的價(jià)格。

Christian Winter
Because there is no incentive to lower prices when your competition has their prices artificially increased. To the contrary, actually. Depending on how much the competition’s prices are increased, there might still be room to increase your own prices as long as you stay cheaper than them.
Lowering your own prices under such circumstances would only reduce your profits, provided you couldn’t counter that with higher sales. If you could do that however you would do it independently from your competition’s prices being increased.
Just face it: tariffs will not make your life cheaper. It will make it more expensive and the money will go to someone else, the very same someone by the way who will pocket the surplus generated with the tariffs in form of tax cuts. So basically the tariffs are just a double tax you pay to the Trumps and Musks. Congratulations, you double-screwed yourself.
Original question: Why don't American-made products become cheaper when tariffs are placed on foreign goods?

因?yàn)楫?dāng)你的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手的價(jià)格被人為抬高時(shí)，你就沒(méi)有降價(jià)的動(dòng)力。實(shí)際上，恰恰相反。只要你的價(jià)格比他們低，即便他們的價(jià)格被抬高很多，你仍有可能提高自己的價(jià)格。在這種情況下，除非你能通過(guò)增加銷量來(lái)彌補(bǔ)，否則降價(jià)只會(huì)減少你的利潤(rùn)。而且，即便你能做到這一點(diǎn)，也與競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手的價(jià)格上漲無(wú)關(guān)。所以，面對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)吧：關(guān)稅不會(huì)讓你的生活成本降低。它只會(huì)讓你的生活成本增加，而多出來(lái)的錢會(huì)落入別人腰包，順便說(shuō)一句，這些人還會(huì)以減稅的形式把關(guān)稅帶來(lái)的盈余收入囊中。所以，關(guān)稅實(shí)際上就是你向特朗普和馬斯克們繳納的雙重稅。恭喜你，你把自己坑了兩回。

Ty Doyle
A tariff is a tax on imported goods and services. As an example, let’s say that Company X makes a $1000 cell phone in China. If the US slaps a 20% tariff on such goods, that’s $200 that Company X will have to pay on every unit; X will presumably attempt to pass this on to consumers by pricing the phone as close to $1200 as a competitive market will allow. Thus, tariffs make imported products more expensive.
It might follow that relative to imports, a domestically-made product might be cheaper; if the same phone could be made in the US for $1100 but not carry a tariff, perhaps Company X will seek to make the phone domestically. However, imports becoming more expensive does not, standing alone, cause domestic products to be cheaper. In other words, the fact that the phone is $200 more expensive if imported doesn’t do anything to change the costs necessary to manufacture it in the US. It might be the case, for example, that due to higher labor/material costs, the phone cannot be made for less than $1500 - tariffs cannot change this reality to the extent it exists.

關(guān)稅是對(duì)進(jìn)口商品和服務(wù)征收的一種稅。舉個(gè)例子，假設(shè)X公司在中國(guó)生產(chǎn)一部?jī)r(jià)值 1000 美元的手機(jī)。如果美國(guó)對(duì)這類商品征收 20% 的關(guān)稅，那么X公司每生產(chǎn)一部手機(jī)就要多支付 200 美元；X公司可能會(huì)試圖通過(guò)將手機(jī)定價(jià)盡可能接近 1200 美元來(lái)將這部分成本轉(zhuǎn)嫁給消費(fèi)者，以適應(yīng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)激烈的市場(chǎng)。因此，關(guān)稅會(huì)使進(jìn)口商品的價(jià)格上漲。由此可能得出結(jié)論，相對(duì)于進(jìn)口商品，國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)的商品可能會(huì)更便宜；如果同樣的手機(jī)在美國(guó)生產(chǎn)成本為 1100 美元且無(wú)需繳納關(guān)稅，那么X公司可能會(huì)考慮在國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)。然而，進(jìn)口商品價(jià)格上漲本身并不會(huì)導(dǎo)致國(guó)內(nèi)商品價(jià)格下降。換句話說(shuō)，進(jìn)口手機(jī)貴 200 美元這一事實(shí)并不會(huì)改變?cè)诿绹?guó)生產(chǎn)這部手機(jī)所需的成本。例如，由于勞動(dòng)力和材料成本較高，在美國(guó)生產(chǎn)這部手機(jī)的成本可能無(wú)法低于 1500 美元——關(guān)稅無(wú)法改變這一現(xiàn)實(shí)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Sven Dirks
Because there are hardly any US-American made products any more.
More than 80% of what is on the shelves of Walmart comes from Asia. Can you name a US company that makes brooms, household items, plastic buckets, toy dolls, thread, fabrics, everyday clothes, nails, screws, hammers, plates, cutlery, pans, pots, knives or vacuum cleaners and so forth? Can you name one that would be able to ramp up production to sufficient quantities?
How many car parts do you think are actually manufactured in the US? Pro tip: Less than 30%. Even less if you count the parts needed to make the parts.
Anything electronic, even when “manufactured” in the US, is 90% import. The US cannot produce chips, screens, boards, devices etc. There is neither the workforce willing and able to work for a pittance, nor is there any of the required raw materials, expertise, manufacturing capacity or machinery. So production becomes a lot more expensive when imports are hit with tariffs.

因?yàn)槊绹?guó)本土制造的產(chǎn)品已經(jīng)所剩無(wú)幾。沃爾瑪貨架上超過(guò) 80%的商品都來(lái)自亞洲。你能說(shuō)出一家生產(chǎn)掃帚、家居用品、塑料桶、玩具娃娃、線、布料、日常服裝、釘子、螺絲、錘子、盤子、餐具、鍋、刀具或吸塵器等產(chǎn)品的美國(guó)公司嗎？你能說(shuō)出一家能夠大幅提高產(chǎn)量以滿足需求的公司嗎？你認(rèn)為有多少汽車零部件是在美國(guó)制造的？提示：不到 30%。如果算上制造零部件所需的零部件，這個(gè)比例就更低了。任何電子產(chǎn)品，即使是在美國(guó)“制造”的，也有 90%是進(jìn)口的。美國(guó)無(wú)法生產(chǎn)芯片、屏幕、電路板、設(shè)備等。既沒(méi)有愿意且能夠接受微薄工資的勞動(dòng)力，也沒(méi)有所需的原材料、專業(yè)知識(shí)、制造能力和機(jī)器設(shè)備。所以，當(dāng)進(jìn)口商品被征收關(guān)稅時(shí)，生產(chǎn)成本就會(huì)大幅提高。

The US does not have anywhere near the sufficient supply of potash, aluminium, steel or crude oil. The stuff is simply not there, so it needs to be imported. Guess what happens when stuff needs to get imported while the stable genius is in the White House? Correct - tariffs.
So even if there are some US-American-made products, they will become a lot more expensive. The stuff they are made out of will have to be imported → tariffs. The owner of the production facility will also raise prices, if the market allows it, so on top of the higher production cost, there will be price gauging, since the competition is hit with tariffs.
There is only one thing more stupid than tariffs - higher tariffs.

美國(guó)根本沒(méi)有足夠的鉀鹽、鋁、鋼鐵或原油供應(yīng)。這些東西根本就不存在，所以必須進(jìn)口。猜猜看，當(dāng)需要進(jìn)口東西時(shí)，而“天才”又在白宮里，會(huì)發(fā)生什么？沒(méi)錯(cuò)——關(guān)稅。所以，即便有一些美國(guó)制造的產(chǎn)品，它們也會(huì)變得貴得多。因?yàn)橹圃焖鼈兯璧脑牧媳仨氝M(jìn)口——關(guān)稅。如果市場(chǎng)允許，生產(chǎn)設(shè)施的所有者也會(huì)提高價(jià)格，因此除了生產(chǎn)成本上升之外，還會(huì)出現(xiàn)價(jià)格哄抬，因?yàn)楦?jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手都受到了關(guān)稅的影響。只有一件事比關(guān)稅更愚蠢——更高的關(guān)稅。

Dan Hamlish
Are they?
That’s a serious question I’m asking, are they?
Maybe they’re made aith Australian steel or with Korean chips etc.
Just because something was made by an American made company doesn’t mean it was made in America, at least not fully.
Check the bottom/back of the machine you’re reading this on. What does it say there?
The one I’m typing this on was designed in California but built in China.
This is honestly one of the paradoxes of capitolism. Bosses like to make the best product for the smallest price, and sometimes that mean working with com...sts. Or prisoners. or blackmailing foreigners, or some other answer to the question “OK, Lincoln banned slavery, so what do we do instead?”

是嗎？我問(wèn)的可是個(gè)嚴(yán)肅的問(wèn)題，也許它們是用澳大利亞的鋼材或者韓國(guó)的芯片等制造的。僅僅因?yàn)槟硺訓(xùn)|西是由一家美國(guó)公司制造的，并不意味著它就是在美國(guó)制造的，至少不是完全在美國(guó)制造的?？纯茨阏陂喿x的這臺(tái)機(jī)器的底部或背面。上面寫著什么？我正在用的這臺(tái)就是在美國(guó)加利福尼亞設(shè)計(jì)的，但在中國(guó)制造的。這確實(shí)是資本主義的一個(gè)悖論。老板們喜歡以最低的價(jià)格制造出最好的產(chǎn)品，有時(shí)這就意味著要與GCZY者合作?；蛘呃们舴?。或者敲詐外國(guó)人，或者以其他方式來(lái)回答“好吧，林肯廢除了奴隸制，那我們接下來(lái)怎么辦？”這個(gè)問(wèn)題。

Steve Taylor
Because there’s often no American-made alternatives to buy.
As far as I know, coffee beans don’t grow anywhere in the U.S., at least not anywhere close to the number of beans needed to satisfy demand. It’s just not the right climate and never will be. Yet the American consumer is about to start paying a 30-40% tax on all countries that grow coffee beans. The consumer pays this. Your $10 bag of beans — invariably an import — is about to go up to $13, despite there being no alternative produced in the U.S.
Ditto tea. Unless you want sassafras tea or nettle tea foraged in the woods, not much alternative…
Ditto a lot of shrimp. The U.S. can’t possibly produce enough domestic shrimp to satisfy demand. But hey, tariff it, anyway.
Ditto a lot of seafood in general. We’d be overfished. The industry would collapse. Salmon populations in the PNW are already destroyed by dams. We get Chilean and Norwegian salmon partly because we don’t want to destroy every salmon off the coast of Alaska.

因?yàn)橥ǔ](méi)有美國(guó)制造的替代品可買。據(jù)我所知，咖啡豆在美國(guó)任何地方都不生長(zhǎng)，至少?zèng)]有達(dá)到滿足需求的數(shù)量。這里氣候條件不合適，以后也不會(huì)合適。然而，美國(guó)消費(fèi)者即將對(duì)所有種植咖啡豆的國(guó)家征收 30% 至 40% 的關(guān)稅。這筆費(fèi)用由消費(fèi)者承擔(dān)。您那 10 美元一袋的咖啡豆——肯定是進(jìn)口的——即將漲到 13 美元，盡管美國(guó)根本沒(méi)有替代品生產(chǎn)。茶也一樣。除非您想喝在樹(shù)林里采摘的柳蘭茶或蕁麻茶，否則幾乎沒(méi)有替代品……很多蝦也一樣。美國(guó)根本不可能生產(chǎn)出足夠的國(guó)內(nèi)蝦來(lái)滿足需求。但不管怎樣，還是要加征關(guān)稅。很多海鮮也一樣。我們會(huì)過(guò)度捕撈。這個(gè)行業(yè)會(huì)崩潰。太平洋西北部的三文魚(yú)種群已經(jīng)因水壩而遭到破壞。我們之所以進(jìn)口智利和挪威的三文魚(yú)，部分原因是我們不想把阿拉斯加沿海的所有三文魚(yú)都捕撈殆盡。

Ditto bananas. A few grow in south Florida and Hawaii, but no way this will ever fill the U.S. demand for bananas. The president just raised the price of bananas, anyway, despite no realistic alternative to importing them from Guatemala and Belize.
The U.S. has a huge trade surplus with Ireland. The only Irish products I see are Guinness, Jameson and Kerrygold butter, and a little specialty Irish oatmeal. Yet Ireland got slapped with tariffs, anyway. There’s plenty of American beer, whiskey and butter to buy instead, and I think it’s crazy that butter and oats get shipped across the Atlantic anyway… but Ireland imports more American goods than we do from them, yet Trump didn’t spare them, either. Because he doesn’t have any idea what he’s doing. It’s just grandstanding.

香蕉也是如此。佛羅里達(dá)州南部和夏威夷有少量香蕉生長(zhǎng)，但根本無(wú)法滿足美國(guó)對(duì)香蕉的需求?？偨y(tǒng)還是提高了香蕉的價(jià)格，盡管從危地馬拉和伯利茲進(jìn)口香蕉是唯一現(xiàn)實(shí)的選擇。
美國(guó)對(duì)愛(ài)爾蘭存在巨額貿(mào)易順差。我所見(jiàn)到的愛(ài)爾蘭產(chǎn)品只有健力士黑啤、尊美醇威士忌和凱瑞黃金黃油，還有一點(diǎn)愛(ài)爾蘭特色燕麥片。然而，愛(ài)爾蘭還是被加征了關(guān)稅。美國(guó)的啤酒、威士忌和黃油多的是，可以買這些替代品，我覺(jué)得把黃油和燕麥運(yùn)過(guò)大西洋實(shí)在荒唐……但愛(ài)爾蘭從美國(guó)進(jìn)口的商品比美國(guó)從愛(ài)爾蘭進(jìn)口的多，特朗普卻也沒(méi)放過(guò)他們。因?yàn)樗静恢雷约涸谧鍪裁?。這純粹是作秀。

Clothing? There’s often no American-made clothing to buy. The mills are mostly gone because they were originally owned by American companies that didn’t want to pay their American employees enough. For Trump’s plan to work, those companies will have to spend millions if not billions of dollars rebuilding their factories in the U.S. This will take years, by which time Americans will have soured on Trumpflation and vote the GOP completely out of power, so the industries aren’t going to rebuild here. They’ll just wait. Those companies also suspect the tariffs will just be ditched when things start to look horrible for Trump (which is already.) They’re not going to make enormous investments in the United States knowing that the original catalyst, tariffs, could be called off at any minute. His own Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, doesn’t know whether the goal of the tariffs is to renegotiate free trade deals, deliberately weaken the dollar, get rid of the income tax, or attract industries back to the United States. When the Treasury Secretary doesn’t know this, no one does. So most companies aren’t going to risk it. They’ll just weather the storm, and consumers pay the tariff in the meantime.

服裝？通常根本買不到美國(guó)制造的服裝。因?yàn)槟切┕S大多已經(jīng)倒閉了，它們?cè)緦儆谝恍┟绹?guó)公司，這些公司不愿給美國(guó)員工支付足夠的薪酬。特朗普的計(jì)劃要想奏效，那些公司得投入數(shù)百萬(wàn)甚至數(shù)十億美元在美國(guó)重建工廠。這需要數(shù)年時(shí)間，而到那時(shí)，美國(guó)人對(duì)特朗普引發(fā)的通貨膨脹已經(jīng)感到厭倦，會(huì)把共和黨徹底趕下臺(tái)，所以這些行業(yè)不會(huì)在美國(guó)重建工廠。它們只會(huì)等待。這些公司還懷疑，一旦特朗普的處境變得糟糕（這已經(jīng)發(fā)生了），關(guān)稅就會(huì)被取消。它們不會(huì)在美國(guó)進(jìn)行巨額投資，因?yàn)楫?dāng)初促使它們這么做的關(guān)稅隨時(shí)可能被取消。就連特朗普自己的財(cái)政部長(zhǎng)斯科特·姆努欽都不知道，征收關(guān)稅的目的是重新談判自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定、故意讓美元貶值、廢除所得稅，還是吸引產(chǎn)業(yè)回流美國(guó)。連財(cái)政部長(zhǎng)都不知道，其他人就更不清楚了。所以大多數(shù)公司都不會(huì)冒險(xiǎn)。他們只會(huì)安然度過(guò)這場(chǎng)風(fēng)暴，而在此期間消費(fèi)者則要承擔(dān)關(guān)稅。

Fuck, a shirt made in Vietnam for 10 cents already costs $50 at an American mall, while paying low wages to the Vietnamese. That shirt isn’t going to be cheaper when a company has to spend 100 million dollars to relocate its factories, then pay American workers at least 15 bucks an hour.
Companies that do relocate to the U.S. will still face the fact that they’ll have to import a lot of the components of their products. The whole supply chain would have to be relocated to the United States if they want to completely avoid Trump’s tariffs. Even if this were done, it would take years to accomplish, cost a fortune in itself, and consumers will still pay for it.
The tariffs are set to be the largest tax increase on American consumers in our entire history.
They won’t last. The GOP will turn against them soon, whenever the GOP wakes up to American consumer rage. The Boomers, who helped Trump win, just lost 10% of their retirement funds with the stock market tumbling. The market will tumble more next week. Boomers don’t have 10 years for the market to recover.

該死，一件在越南生產(chǎn)成本僅 10 美分的襯衫，在美國(guó)商場(chǎng)里卻要賣 50 美元，而越南工人卻只能拿到微薄的工資。如果一家公司要花費(fèi) 1 億美元將工廠遷回美國(guó)，還要給美國(guó)工人每小時(shí)至少 15 美元的工資，那這件襯衫的價(jià)格肯定不會(huì)降低。即使有公司遷回美國(guó)，它們?nèi)詴?huì)面臨這樣一個(gè)事實(shí)，即它們的產(chǎn)品仍需大量進(jìn)口零部件。如果要完全避開(kāi)特朗普的關(guān)稅，整個(gè)供應(yīng)鏈都得遷回美國(guó)。即便如此，這也需要數(shù)年時(shí)間才能完成，而且本身就要花費(fèi)巨資，消費(fèi)者最終還是要為此買單。這些關(guān)稅將成為美國(guó)歷史上對(duì)消費(fèi)者征收的最大稅負(fù)。它們不會(huì)持久，共和黨很快就會(huì)反對(duì)這些關(guān)稅，