Does it really have to end this way? Why all the hate and contempt?I don't say it can't happen, but wouldn't you expect another Civil War to go with this?
Upvote
0
Does it really have to end this way? Why all the hate and contempt?I don't say it can't happen, but wouldn't you expect another Civil War to go with this?
Does it really have to end this way? Why all the hate and contempt?
On the contrary, I succeeded in giving a ridiculous post the ridicule it necessitated.
Rational, reasonable posts engender replies in kind, and honest questions are always welcome…and answered as best I can. But I have no compunctions or remorse about calling out asinine posts, misinformation, and obvious trolling with the disdain such drivel deserves.
With the tariffs, there will still be a 10% tax imposed because of the country of origin, regardless of the path taken. Thus avoiding the tariff won't be possible but it may still be possible to get goods at a better price than MSRP.No. Grey markets exist because there is differential pricing in different countries, not tariffs. Canon, for example, has lower pre-tax prices in the Far East than in Europe or the USA and goods may be legally imported directly from those countries avoiding Canon USA or Canon EU. They are called “grey” because they are not through Canon and Canon does not provide its warranty.
That could be tricky, being an idiot and all.I suggest a counter challenge of not posting anything asinine until May first.
Somewhat off topic:
NEWSWEEK (in bias, often described as centrist) has an article, "Supreme Court halted Trump's Alien Enemies Act deportations, signaling potential judicial resistance despite conservative majority." Maybe they will approach the Tariffs this way, too.
It's difficult for me, too.That could be tricky, being an idiot and all.
You misunderstand. The key phrase for this thread is not about the specific decision, but "signaling potential judicial resistance despite conservative majority." Before, most people thought the Supreme Court would go with whatever Trump wants, but now we're beginning to see that's not completely true after all.Doesn't work like that. Humans have rights, goods don't.
The humans who pay the tariffs have rights, and it's the humans whose livelihoods and welfare are at stake are the subjects.Doesn't work like that. Humans have rights, goods don't.
The arguments before the various courts that are reasonably likely to reach the Supreme Court have nothing to do with the rights of humans or goods. Rather, they are about powers afforded to the Executive vs. the Legislative branches of government regarding the implementation of tariffs.Doesn't work like that. Humans have rights, goods don't.
Yes and no…. There has also been threats of retaliatory tariffs from Europe for for other country’s products. From where, which HTS and what % is the questionSeems this is the way it will play out. I've heard of multiple businesses raising prices globally to "protect the US market".
Here is one report, but there are more.
"Rather than simply increase prices there, it's possible the likes of PlayStation could increase pricing globally in an effort to protect, as best they can, the US market."![]()
Sony hikes PlayStation 5 prices by 25% in UK, Europe and Australia
Sony's decision to hike prices in other markets such as Europe and Australia could be an attempt to protect its key US market from price increases.www.euronews.com
Sounds more like corporate greed and subsidising the US market, than protection of market share.
Definitely check the fine print…. My home/contents instance only covers Australia and NZ ie isn’t global. Jewelry stays home but the camera gear goes to lots of places!Indeed. If it’s a hobby, your home/rental insurance provider should be able to add dedicated coverage. I have items >$1K on my schedule.
I believe that the biggest issue is of compliance to a court order. Especially after the partisan stacking of key roles. If it is ignored then the Marshals aren’t going to frogmarch trump out of the White House.Somewhat off topic:
NEWSWEEK (in bias, often described as centrist) has an article, "Supreme Court halted Trump's Alien Enemies Act deportations, signaling potential judicial resistance despite conservative majority." Maybe they will approach the Tariffs this way, too.
Good point! Mine is worldwide, but policies are all about the fine print. Personally, the bigger risk for me isn't travel because I typically only bring a small subset of my gear on trips and that subset usually includes the R8 and smaller lenses. The point of scheduling items separately is that most policies have limits on the value of content categories, so if you have lots of camera gear (or jewelry, fine art, etc.) and that exceeds the standard limits they won't be covered unless you let your insurance provider know.Definitely check the fine print…. My home/contents instance only covers Australia and NZ ie isn’t global. Jewelry stays home but the camera gear goes to lots of places!
>30kgs of gear joined me on my current Palau tripGood point! Mine is worldwide, but policies are all about the fine print. Personally, the bigger risk for me isn't travel because I typically only bring a small subset of my gear on trips and that subset usually includes the R8 and smaller lenses. The point of scheduling items separately is that most policies have limits on the value of content categories, so if you have lots of camera gear (or jewelry, fine art, etc.) and that exceeds the standard limits they won't be covered unless you let your insurance provider know.
I don't think insurance coverage is based on weight.>30kgs of gear joined me on my current Palau trip
Only 4 lenses though
It can be if you are obese (the health insurance part).I don't think insurance coverage is based on weight.
A typical trip for me in terms of camera gear where it's just me traveling would be the R8, RF 10-20/4L, RF 24-105/4L, RF 100-500, and TS-E 17/4L, about $10K worth of gear (a small fraction of my total kit).
DPR adds, “For example, consumers ordering camera gear from Sony or drones from DJI could face significant delays.” Seems like FUD to me, or typical DPR cluelessness.
Your "Turkey v2.0." is in no way inevitable because in the current political climate, an attempted coup d'état would be met with state secessions and possibly a second American Civil War (incidentally, besides the well-known disagreements regarding slavery famously involved, there was also the 1861 Morrill Tariff, which was also favored by Republicans and had a similar reception).I believe that the biggest issue is of compliance to a court order. Especially after the partisan stacking of key roles. If it is ignored then the Marshals aren’t going to frogmarch trump out of the White House.
Once the courts are irrelevant then another leap towards the inevitable conclusion… Turkey v2.0