• blackbeans@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Let me play the devil’s advocate.

    The question is, how do you legally know that they passed all that cost on to the customers? After all, customers did not pay the import fees directly. It will be a hard case to make.

    Also, a majority of Americans voted to introduce tariffs. It was a big part of Trump’s campaign from the start. The reason Sony received this money in the first place was because of errors made by the American government, making the tariffs illegal. It was the US government that is responsible for this money, not Sony.

    • MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      All the prices went up.

      Also, 77m voted for Trump which is 32% of the voting age population.

      As a percentage of the overall population it is ~23%.

      That’s not a majority.

      • blackbeans@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        The prices went up, and customers accepted that price. Bargaining after the deal is made generally doesn’t give you a strong position.

        The American definition of a voting majority is not relevant here. What matters is that Americans put Trump in place, knowing he would impose tariffs, making foreign products more expensive. Just because millions didn’t vote for him, doesn’t exclude them from the consequences.

      • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Please stop using that logic. The people that voted is a representative sample of the population, done. Is you’d forced every one of voting she to vote then it probably would have been similar result. Because people that didn’t want to go both will have their vote split randomly to candidates.

        Honestly given these two choices, not voting means you’re ok with either.

        • Nate Cox@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          This completely ignores both jerrymandering and voter suppression, both things real and impactful in US voting outcomes.

      • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        People who can vote and do not could just as easily have been lazy Trump voters as anything else. They’re political dark matter. They don’t absolve a populace.

        “Of the people who didn’t bother to make a choice at all, maybe most of those didn’t want this” is not a compelling argument.

        • MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          The person above me said a majority voted for it and I corrected them. I’m not sure what relevance your comment has to our exchange.

          “Of the people who didn’t bother to make a choice at all, maybe most of those didn’t want this” is not a compelling argument.

          It’s just as well I didn’t make that argument then. I don’t appreciate being strawmanned.