(1/2)
Not defending Orange Stalin in any way, just arguing the point, but ...

@joeinwynnewood
> Trump’s plan to lower grocery costs would reduce grocery options

Maybe. But like his tariffs on imports (which Biden kept and Kamala will too), it could reduce the country's net carbon emissions. It's only fair for the country receiving the goods to account for at least half the transport emissions. If not the whole lot.

(2/2)

Maybe *some* cross-border foodstuffs trade makes sense, mainly between border regions. But most of our food needs to grown (organically) within a car ride from where we live.

Increasing local food security and economic resilience. While reducing the massive transport energy costs, carbon emissions, and food waste inherent in the corporate-run industrial McFood system.

@joeinwynnewood

@strypey

There's a lot of foodstuffs that can't be grown here, lots more that's seasonal and, absent investments of many (many?) $billions in vertical greenhouses and all the energy they would need, cannot be grown here out of season.

Ocean shipping can be decarbonized, the technology exists and the maritime industry is already working on making the changes, we don't need to create a global trade war and turbocharge inflation to cut those emissions.

Thanks to the IRA, ...

@strypey

we are already fueling the world's ability to decarbonize every heavy industry.

Granted we do have a lot of work to do to decarbonize agriculture, but there is no reason why it cannot, and must not be done worldwide. Tariffs have very little to do with that.

(1/2)

@joeinwynnewood
> There's a lot of foodstuffs that can't be grown here, lots more that's seasonal

Will you die if you don't eat food you can't grow locally? If you eat out-of-season food in preserved forms, instead of importing it from huge distances away, with huge and totally avoidable energy costs?

> Tariffs have very little to do with that

In a hypothetical fully decarbonised future? Maybe. Right now and for the foreseeable, they tax carbon and encourage buying from local growers.

(2/2)

Which is why, despite the rhetoric, there's a bipartisan consensus in favour. The Biden administration hasn't undone them, and there's no sign it would do so under Harris.

It would be logical to focus the tariffs on fossil fuel use, rather than imports in general. To prompt decarbonisation.

But a general tax on imports is harder to evade, and easier to defend politically. I see no serious transition to post- carbon shipping. So largely the same outcome in the short-to-medium term.

@strypey

You and I both know that there is a huge difference between the targeted tariffs currently in place and what Trump is saying he would do.

As far as the food angle is concerned, sure if we stopped importing food and magically were able to grow everything we need here, seasonality set aside, maybe that would result in reduced carbon emissions, but then you'd have to take into account all the fertilizer that will be necessary that we do not have the capacity to manufacture ...

@strypey

here.
I guess we could outlaw beef and pork and repurpose animal feed producing land to grow for human consumption. I'm sure that legislation would just sell through Congress...

Translation, we don't have the magic wand to make that happen.

If Trump were elected, God forbid, and really did implement 20% across the board tariffs, I would be totally unsurprised if Congress quickly passed legislation to give itself the ability to override the president's tariffs.

(1/?)

@joeinwynnewood
> there is a huge difference between the targeted tariffs currently in place and what Trump is saying he would do

Maybe. But according to the link you shared in the OP, his plan to increase tariffs on fresh food imports. Assuming those imports are displaced by locally produced foods, that will reduce food transport, ergo reduced energy use and carbon emissions.

(2/?)

Will that raise food prices? In season food is mostly produced locally, so that would be unaffected. As would preserved and packaged food. It may increase the price of buying fresh produce out of season. Same with coffee. But so? These are luxuries, not necessities.

Also increased business costs does not automagically lead to increased prices. Because prices are determined by what businesses can get away with charging for things, not what they cost to produce. They're often far higher.

(3/?)

@joeinwynnewood
> magically were able to grow everything we need here

There's nothing magical about it. The only thing stopping local growers ramping up production is the downward pressure on demand due to imports, so the idea that reduced imports = less food = higher prices is simplistic, at best. Also see previous comments about what kinds of food would actually be affected.

(4/?)

> all the fertilizer that will be necessary that we do not have the capacity to manufacture

Not heard of composting? The idea that food production has to depend on artificial fertiliser is propaganda by the agrichemical and fossil fuel industries. Not only does the US have the capacity to produce all the soil fertility it needs, but every bioregion within the US has that capacity.

nature.com/articles/s41467-017…