351
submitted 1 month ago by Mee@reddthat.com to c/news@lemmy.world

“Price optimization” consultants are helping clients capitalize on Trump’s chaotic tariff rollout by using surveillance pricing tools, while Republican FTC chair Andrew Ferguson is reversing efforts to keep them in check.

all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Lexam@lemmy.world 79 points 1 month ago

We all knew this was going to happen.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Going to get another earful from some The Economist/WSJ Op-Ed about how this is totally awesome and signals economic resiliency and if you don't like paying $15 for eggs or $100 for a piece of plywood or $4000 for a used refrigerator then you're an uneducated goof who shouldn't be allowed to make decisions.

[-] arrow74@lemm.ee 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Truly, I think one of the big reasons that Harris' campaign failed was repeating the "best economy ever" line while so many were struggling under inflation.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Inflation, student debt, medical debt, skyrocketing rents, meager wages, and deteriorating public amenities. So many of these problems stretched back to the Bush/Obama Era, particularly in the wake of the Great Recession. They never got properly fixed and the wounds were ripped wide open again under COVID.

Dems don't seem to want to admit that there's anything wrong with the US economic status quo. And the real fear going into '26/'28 is - even setting aside whether we're going to have anything resembling normal elections again - what an incoming liberal congressional majority is going to do in opposition. Are they going to look at the trainwreck of policy Trump has implemented and try to roll it back? Are they going to trailblaze a new kind of egalitarian economic reforms through the rubble? Or are they just going to shrug, concede that this is the New Normal, and go back to insisting American Exceptionalism is whenever liberals are in charge?

[-] tal@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Both The Economist and the Wall Street Journal have been quite critical of the tariffs. Not only that, but those articles have been posted here.

[-] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 38 points 1 month ago
[-] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 28 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yup. Duh. Studies show that when tariffs cause foreign product prices to rise, rather than leaving their prices the same, US brands raise theirs to match because they don’t want their product to seem cheaply made. (But also price gouging)

I tried to find the video I watched about it, but I watched it pre-US Election. The internet is flooded with more recent tariff videos.

I think it was by Vox Media and it was specifically about tariffs or inflation, more generally.

[-] Revan343@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago

US brands raise theirs to match because ~~they don’t want their product to seem cheaply made. (But also~~ price gouging

[-] Gerudo@lemm.ee 18 points 1 month ago

What company needs to hire a consultant to tell them to raise prices? For $100 I'll tell you to raise your prices 10%.

[-] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

You should charge $200.

Now you owe me $500.

[-] Kolanaki@pawb.social 4 points 1 month ago

You should charge $1000.

After you pay the $2000 you owe me, that is.

[-] tunetardis@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 month ago

I guess if you look at the track record of how tariffs have played out in the past, there has tended not to be a lot of price relief in going with domestic producers.

Take something like aluminum. While the US does have a domestic industry, it couldn't possibly meet demand in the short term at least. So industries hoping to source aluminum may initially flock to the domestic product, causing a run on it that raises prices. At the end of the day, they'll wind up paying something close to what the imported aluminum costs. This is the new price of aluminum. Live with it.

In the long term, the domestic industry may grow to the point that it displaces the imports. Will that lead to price relief? Again, uncertain. There are reasons why certain parts of the world produce much of the world supply of X, and cost of production is one of them. Also, counter-tariffs may reduce the growth potential of a domestic industry, leading to less investment.

It's not just the US of course. Everyone everywhere will be paying more for everything. Tariffs just suck.

[-] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Don't discount good old fashion price gouging either. Even if you could keep up with demand and keep your prices way under the tariffed foreign goods, why would you? If you are the only domestic alternative, bump your prices to just under your competitors.

[-] Litebit@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Willing buyer willing seller, it is just business. It is not extortion, we have choice to not buy, we can plant and grow our own food.

[-] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

If it's a luxury, sure. If it's a necessity, it's extortion.

[-] arrow74@lemm.ee 6 points 1 month ago

Tariffs have a place in growing and protecting industry, but it has to be targeted. These sweeping country wide tariffs on all products are economical suicide

[-] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 1 points 1 month ago

In the long term, the domestic industry may grow to the point that it displaces the imports

That's there idea, but the on-again-off-again tariffs policy creates such an uncertainty and lack of customer demand nobody wants to invest.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It’s not just the US of course. Everyone everywhere will be paying more for everything. Tariffs just suck.

How exactly will somebody in, for example, the EU, pay more if the US are putting high tariffs on imported Aluminium?

Absolutelly, behind the tariff wall (i.e. inside the US), imported Aluminium will be more expensive (since there the imported stuff costs original price + tariff and the local stuff will tend to rise towards than value), but outside, people are still paying for it tariff free (so the original price with no extras). In fact, it's quite possible prices outside the US will go down for some things were, seeing reduced demand from the US for their product due to US Tariffs, Producers lower prices to try and attract more customers outside the US.

The only things that would go up for that example EU customer from US Tariffs would be US-made products and services hit by EU counter-Tariffs and those represent a small fraction of what people in the EU buy, whilst, because of the "against everybody" way Trump raised Tariffs, US consumers will see price rises on everything imported, not just stuff from a single country.

The main impact of US Tariffs outside the US is not making purchasers pay more for stuff (since those outside do not pay that tariff), it's making companies in areas where there was a lot of exporting to the US sell less because there is less demand from the US (which either hits them directly if they were exporting to the US or indirectly if their competitiors were and are now forced to try and sell more in other markets hence competing harder with them).

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago
[-] Trihilis@ani.social 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, I mean the government is a representation of the people. Not a real surprise there.

this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
351 points (98.6% liked)

News

30229 readers
1373 users here now

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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


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.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


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.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS