Wednesday Morning Rant

One of the fascinating aspects of the new tariff environment is the handling of some of its immediate repercussions. Ace had an excellent post about this yesterday, and one aspect of that article is fate of the company Shein. So is this one, after a fashion.

Shein is a - perhaps the - "fast fashion" business that has thrived (and indeed depends) on the "de minimis" import exemption. Shein may not collapse because of the removal of that exemption (it has markets that are not the United States), but it may well be done here. It will be a similar story with other "fast fashion" and other small-ticket, high-volume, customer-direct China-based online retailers like Temu, wish.com and Ali Express.

That Shein will either collapse or be greatly reduced as a result of Trump removing the de minimis exemption is not without upsides. Shein is essentially a sweatshop network and is at the bottom of the barrel in terms of labor and environment practices. Even by Chinese standards, Shein is extremely exploitative. The entire business model is also grossly inefficient. The entire "fast fashion" and similar industries exist entirely because of the de minimis exemption, because it makes no sense otherwise. Small-volume sales from half a planet away is an insane business model. There is no way to make that pay when containerized shipping is so comparatively cheap other than a perverse incentive. The de minimis exemption was that perverse incentive.

It's also an exemption that was the enemy of many an environmental group back when it was safe for progressives to attack it. The "Fast fashion" industry is hard on the environment (though that's "over there" and environmental NIMBYism doesn't care about "over there") and borderline disastrous in terms of energy. The energy it takes to ship a Shein garment is significantly greater than it is for a garment delivered through bulk purchasing and distribution. The environmentalists have been talking about this for years now. Had Biden eliminated the de minimis exemption, they'd be cheering.

Yet most are not. Orange Man is still Orange Man. The dichotomy is on display in many outlets.

"Sustainability Magazine", January 2025:

Fast Fashion, ESG & GHG Emissions: Is SHEIN Greenwashing?
Fast fashion giant SHEIN is continually strengthening its ESG efforts with donations, innovations and programmes - but is it greenwashing?

Could Trump's Tariffs Spark a Global Climate Tech Trade War?
Trump's tariffs on Chinese imports and suspended duties on Canada and Mexico raise fears of a global trade war, with climate tech supply chains at risk

EuroNews, October 2022:

How are Shein hauls making our planet unlivable?
Workers are paid as little as 4 cents per item, a new investigation reveals. While Shein continues to be a sustainability nightmare.

How Trump’s tariffs are dampening hopes of a luxury sector revival
The global luxury sector, which has been facing slowing demand and an eroding customer base in the last several months, could be further hit by the escalating trade war between China and the US.
...
According to Bank of America, US consumers accounted for about 21% of worldwide luxury sector revenues in 2024, whereas Bain and Company estimated that China made up somewhere between 22% and 24% of global luxury consumption in 2023.

What did these people think? Did they think at all? The same people who advocate for total deindustrialization and the implementation of dystopian techno-feudalism are decrying a thing that may actually have a meaningful effect in reducing pointless emissions of the Dread Carbon. This will be a side effect rather than the point of the action, but it does have a strong chance of actually reducing emissions purely as a secondary effect.

Perhaps that is the point. Their recessions - really, permanent declines and reversals - are good because they're the "Right Thing To Do" (tm) whereas a recession - which hasn't happened yet, but likely will - caused by necessary realignments of global trade and politics is evil. They're getting some of what they want, but they hate it. The wrong guy did it for the wrong reasons. It matters not one iota that they will get something out of this. It only matters that the Orange Man did it, and it is therefore bad.

At best, these people want to have their cake and eat it, too. They want no industry but to live in the affordable comfort that industry provides. They want their dream of "decarbonization" without any costs. Those are the idiots. The more cynical simply want those costs externalized onto someone else. The rest are the machinators who never cared other than as a means to power and control.

To a man, they all wanted to have it both ways, whichever "both ways" is in question. Some want their hypothetical upside with none of the real downsides. Some want their power without any questioning of it. Some want their luxuries so long as somebody else pays. But all of them want something for nothing and will now learn that that there are no free lunches.

One upside of the recession that is likely coming is that it will disabuse a lot of people of the notion that they can have it both ways and that lunch is always free.

posted by Joe Mannix at 11:00 AM

| Access Comments