What items are you buying that's made in India?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:India is literally an open sewer.

And all that makes its way to the other areas of a small planet earth?

[Anonymous]

Textiles (fabric, clothing, bedding/linens), spices, tea, leather (which is weird, I know), gemstones, pharmaceuticals, rice, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing.

No spices? No vitamins?
I’m surprised.

For myself, I was startled to realize how many of my purchases have actually been products from Canada. I wouldn’t have identified Canada or India as the sources of so many of the things that I buy vs, say, France, England, and Italy. So many of my vintage things — Levi’s, Coach bags, Frye boots — are now made in countries other than the US. Even books are often printed in China.

[Anonymous]

Its not realistic to think of what comes from India? It's like cars. Just because it's a US brand or made in US does not mean there's no other country in supply chain. Of course there's made straight from India. But there is a TON India-Canada stuff we get here. You really need to pay attention to how supply chain impacts your product. Trump is such a dumb ass because he's so one dimensional. He's not wrong in theory to want to equalize trade but in reality, everything and everyone are interconnected. Being a protectionist is such a foolish practice.

[Anonymous]

Too bad the administration didn’t put tariffs on call centers instead of everything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had to make a Walmart stop the other day and discovered I could buy dry garbanzos and lentils for much less than where I usually buy them so grabbed a few bags. I was curious where they were grown (thinking about tariffs and imports) and checked the package. I thought food products are supposed to show where they are packed or something. All it said was distributed by Walmart. No idea if they are US products or not. Google tells me India is the primary producer globally, and the third largest import source (after Canada and Mexico) to the US. (We also export garbanzos).

There's tons of information online about exports and imports of individual products. Found a calculator that says it gives you a real time duty calculation (companies have to keep a close eye on this stuff because it's been changing so much).

So, Canada is the major importer of garbanzos to US. Tariff is 35% right now. Mexico 24%. India 24%.

I make falafel regularly and we use a lot of hummus. Usually products like this mix sources and a global corporation will spread the cost increase across all its sources. So whether the garbanzos come from India or Canada or the US the price I pay is still going to reflect the tariff contribution across the board. Or there will just be more market pressure on the US product, end result the same.

This is interesting and I thank you for your research. I would say it's unthinkable that US packaging doesn't have the product's origin, but in this day and age we are lucky to get any information and potentially no arsenic but who knows any more.

[Anonymous]

India is like little China. Makes the same junk China makes. Same quality too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Modi is doubling down on India's alliance with Russia. It's baffling. Surely cheaper gas isn't worth all the sanctions and tariffs and restrictions on the purchase of western weapons systems going forward.

But India seems to look at the alliance between Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran - and they want in. India seems keen to align with the baddies, so I would expect Indian exports - such as they are - to be pretty much non-existent in western markets going forward.

Why should India align with a bully? If you give in to Trump, he just demands more. I applaud any country that defends its sovereignty and stands up to bullies.

By the way, India agreed to give up Russian oil and buy it from the US if the US offered the same price as Russia. If buying from Russia is so bad, why didn't the US agree to sell them oil at the Russian price?

Trump shut down USAID> Our official policy is not to be subsidizing other countries.

India hasn't figured out how to thrive economically yet, and it's a country that goes back over 5000 years -- one of the o oldest continuous civilizations in the world. Selling cheaper oil right now for a few years isn't going to fix it, if 5000 years hasn't.

India went from one of the wealthiest nations in the world to being poorer. This is due to colonialism—the British destroyed industries and exported a huge portion of the wealth.

Try cracking open a history book.

You think having most of the wealth of a country consolidated in the hands of the few means that the country is thriving economically? That's one caste being wealthy, not a thriving country. Try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Modi is doubling down on India's alliance with Russia. It's baffling. Surely cheaper gas isn't worth all the sanctions and tariffs and restrictions on the purchase of western weapons systems going forward.

But India seems to look at the alliance between Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran - and they want in. India seems keen to align with the baddies, so I would expect Indian exports - such as they are - to be pretty much non-existent in western markets going forward.

Why should India align with a bully? If you give in to Trump, he just demands more. I applaud any country that defends its sovereignty and stands up to bullies.

By the way, India agreed to give up Russian oil and buy it from the US if the US offered the same price as Russia. If buying from Russia is so bad, why didn't the US agree to sell them oil at the Russian price?

Trump shut down USAID> Our official policy is not to be subsidizing other countries.

India hasn't figured out how to thrive economically yet, and it's a country that goes back over 5000 years -- one of the o oldest continuous civilizations in the world. Selling cheaper oil right now for a few years isn't going to fix it, if 5000 years hasn't.

India went from one of the wealthiest nations in the world to being poorer. This is due to colonialism—the British destroyed industries and exported a huge portion of the wealth.

Try cracking open a history book.

When?

DP. Here ya go…curious why you doubt that India was once wealthy.

Mughal Era (1500–1700 CE):
Peak Wealth (16th–17th centuries): Under emperors like Akbar and Shah Jahan, the Mughal Empire was one of the world’s richest, contributing about 24% of global GDP by 1700. India’s economy thrived on textiles (cotton, silk), spices, and gems, exported to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Agra and Delhi were global commercial hubs, with the Mughal treasury amassing vast wealth (e.g., Shah Jahan’s Peacock Throne).

Colonial Decline (1700–1947):
India’s wealth declined under British colonial rule due to resource extraction, deindustrialization, and famines. By 1947, India’s global GDP share dropped to 4%. However, certain princely states and urban centers like Bombay retained localized wealth.

The Mughal empire certainly did not have a uniform distribution of wealth. This was a tribal/feudal system, where they took most of the wealth generated for themselves and their close families to live at the peak of ultra-rich, while the vast majority of the people who did the actual work were bled dry over time. In feudal societies, the majority lived at or below the poverty line. The sheer numbers of people in poverty made it possible to leverage inequality for the wealthy few.

That's not an economically thriving or stable country. That's just a very few people using force and social pressure to exploit and degrade most of the population for profit.

[Anonymous]

PS: Once again, this America that was born on the backs of Black slaves doesn't hold a moral high ground. Nonetheless, America hasn't even had 250 years to figure this out, and India has been around for over 20 times that long. Neither country is a moral paragon, but surely both can do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
PS: Once again, this America that was born on the backs of Black slaves doesn't hold a moral high ground. Nonetheless, America hasn't even had 250 years to figure this out, and India has been around for over 20 times that long. Neither country is a moral paragon, but surely both can do better.

Why does one poster keep harping about how long India has "been around"? It just got independence from the British less than 80 yrs ago and was not a unified country until then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing. I'm not really concerned.

Lmao.

Nearly all your generic drugs are made in India.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:India went from one of the wealthiest nations in the world to being poorer. This is due to colonialism—the British destroyed industries and exported a huge portion of the wealth.

Try cracking open a history book.

Anonymous wrote:Why does one poster keep harping about how long India has "been around"? It just got independence from the British less than 80 yrs ago and was not a unified country until then.

So which is it -- was it "one of the wealthiest nations in the world" before colonialization, or was it not even a nation?

[Anonymous]

The other day I bought frozen shrimp that was on sale at the grocery store. When I got home, I noticed that on the back of the bags of shrimp, it said "product of India".