upworthy

Democracy

Small business owner Sofia Ramsay shares her tariff bill.

After the Trump administration raised tariffs on countries across the globe earlier this month, the bills are starting to come due, and we’re getting the first look at how this abrupt realignment to international trade will affect everyday working Americans. Interestingly, a poll in late January 2025 found that only 45% of Americans understand how tariffs work. Many incorrectly believe that the Chinese exporter pays the fee when the US imposes a tariff on China. However, in reality, when the U.S. imposes a tariff on Chinese goods, the American importer pays the tariff. The funds raised by the tariffs then go to the government, like a tax. Polls also show that those who understand how tariffs work are much less likely to support them than those who do not.

How do tariffs affect American business owners?

Sofia Ramsay, a mother who has owned a homemade jewelry business for the past 13 years, explained how the tariffs affect her small business, and it’s a practical explanation of how tariffs work. “I recently started doing a new program which is a subscription box that sends bead kits all about having a good time and celebrating friendships and bringing art into your life," she begins her video. “a lot of the materials that I provide for my subscription service are upcycled and reused just in order to keep up with trends and to keep up with supply and demand. Quite simply, I do need to import a lot of the materials.”

@sofiaramsay

The 🍊🤡 is still up there saying other countries will pay these bills. Tell me how this makes America great?

Ramsay adds that they have a great relationship with the factory she works with in China, but things started to become difficult a few weeks ago. It took over a month to get an expedited shipment of materials. Then she received a tariff bill from UPS. “It was a tariff bill on my import, now I'm happy to pay the price to do my business, but this is something I'm not prepared for as far as price increases,” she said. “I just don't think it's sustainable for my business to take on this level of expense.”

The cost of her tariff bill? $208 on $485 worth of goods.

That's a 43% increase in her cost of doing business, and the money went to the U.S. government. This was before the administration raised tariffs to 245%, which would have cost Ramsay $698.25.


Now that Ramsay's expenses have increased due to the tariff, does she pass it on to the customer? “I’m not willing to raise my prices, but I probably should raise them by 15-20% or so just to offset these fees,” she told Upworthy.

One of the goals of the tariff policy is to encourage Americans to source their products from U.S. companies. Or enable investors to increase manufacturing in the U.S. However, in a recent video, Ramsay explained why she can’t source her products from a U.S.-based company. The only company that does something similar is in New York City, and their products constantly change, so that she couldn’t deliver a consistent product to her customers. Further, the upcycled beads in New York originally come from overseas; they’ve just been handed around through separate transactions.

“I have to just be at the whims and fancies of whatever is available in this warehouse. It would be like if I had a fashion design company, if I was a clothing brand, and then I just switched to being a thrift store or vintage store or reseller, that would kinda pull the rug out from under my customer base,” she said.

Even though Ramsay is in a bind, being charged a hefty price for importing her products and without an option to source them from within the country, she’s optimistic that things may change. “I believe [the tariffs] are temporary and just posturing on the part of this administration. They have no plans to invest in domestic manufacturing,” she told Upworthy.

Epic video of Mister Rogers addressing congress for PBS resurfaces

PBS has been around for generations providing families with wholesome family entertainment, educational programming, and fair and balanced news. Many people rely on PBS for emergency alerts in rural areas as it can be one of the only broadcasting channels available in some places. But recently, Congress has brought up the idea of cutting critical funding to PBS and NPR, both of which are publicly funded as a means to keep people informed.

The services provided by PBS (Public Broadcasting Station) and NPR (National Public Radio) are public and partly funded by taxpayer dollars. Congress members are considering legislation that would essentially prohibit the federal government from allocating tax dollars to support public broadcasting. This proposal to gut funding led to the chief executives from PBS and NPR being questioned at length during a congressional hearing.

While some of the optics and questions from the hearing were amusing, the need to (once again) defend public broadcasting caused a decades old clip of Mister Rogers to circulate social media. In May 1969, Mister Rogers headed to Congress to stress the importance of funding for the newly formed Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which distributes the government funding to PBS and NPR. At the time, Congress was wanting to slash their $20 million in funding to just $10 million—which would've had significant consequences for shows like his.

Fred Rogers was up against a tough crowd, but the PBS executive that introduced him prepped the Congressional committee for his kind nature.

mr rogers, pbs, npr, funding, defensepbs digital studios GIF by PBSGiphy

"Mister Rogers is certainly one of the best things to ever happen to public television and his Peabody Award is testament to that fact. We in public television are proud of Fred Rogers and I'm proud to present Mister Rogers to you now," the executive says.

If you've ever seen an episode of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood then you're aware of his kind, gentle nature, but Subcommittee chairman, Senator John Pastore (D-RI), didn't know anything about everyone's favorite neighbor. The senator was quite rude towards him and appeared to be overall annoyed with Mister Rogers' presence—but that didn't deter the children's show creator.

Rogers shares how his program went from a $30 budget to a $6,000 budget with the help of additional funding before dropping shocking information.

"But $6,000 pays for less than two minutes of cartoons. Two minutes of animated, what I sometimes say, bombardment. I'm very much concerned as I know you are about what's being delivered to our children in this country and I've worked in the field of child development for six years now, trying to understand the inner needs of children. We deal with such things as the inner drama of childhood," Roger tells the subcommittee.

Mister Rogers delivers his whole speech in that familiar comforting cadence which clearly impacts how his message is received. You can watch the congressman relax and become more engaged in real time while Rogers explains what he does with his thirty minute kids show.

mr rogers, mr rogers neighborhood, pbs, pbs funding, fred rogershappy pbs digital studios GIF by PBSGiphy

"We made a hundred programs for EEN, the Eastern Educational Network, and then when the money ran out, people in Boston, in Pittsburgh, and Chicago all came to the floor and said 'we've got to have more of this neighborhood expression of care' and this is what...this is what I give. I give an expression of care every day to each child to help him realize that he is unique," he says in part.

By the end of the meeting Mister Rogers had won over the senator. "I think it's wonderful. I think it's wonderful. Looks like you just earned yourself the $20 million," the senator says.

Watch Mister Rogers' full speech to Congress here:


There's no Mister Rogers this time to head to Congress and try to convince them not to cut vital public broadcasting funding, but it's important to remain hopeful. Communities still rely on the programming for news, alerts, and educational programs like Mister Rogers' Neighborhood, (reruns of which still air on the network today).

For now, the fate of federal funding for PBS and NPR is still in the air, but the recirculation of Mister Rogers' congressional visit is reminding us exactly why public broadcasting is so important.

Democracy

Trevor Noah implores U.S. journalists to ask themselves this one vital question

"Ask yourself that question every day, because you have one of the most important roles in the world."

Trevor Noah received high praise for his closing remarks at the 2022 White House Correspondents' Dinner.

Back in 2022, for the first time in six years, the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner (WHCD) was held with the president of the United States in attendance in Washington, D.C. The WHCD has been a tradition in Washington for more than a century and for the past several decades it has taken the form of a comedic roast of both the government and the press. The dinner on April 30, 2022 was hosted by comedian and former host of "The Daily Show" Trevor Noah, who's known for his smart, witty commentary on social and political issues.

The "let's invite a comedian to publicly and viciously make fun of us for a couple of hours" idea may be a bit odd, but these events have proven quite popular over the years, with many viral moments (including President Obama's infamous GIF-worthy mic drop) coming from them. The dinner opened with Noah joking about it being a superspreader event, earning some uncomfortable laughter as the COVID-19 pandemic was still fresh, and then the individual roasts commenced. Noah didn't hold back slamming people across the political and media spectrum—all in good fun, of course—including President Biden himself.

But it was Noah's closing remarks that earned the most attention. In his signature style, Noah managed to bring a serious and thoughtful element to a night of ribbing and laughter when he admonished the press to recognize both their freedom and their responsibility.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com


“If you ever begin to doubt your responsibilities, if you ever begin to doubt how meaningful it is, look no further than what’s happening in Ukraine," Noah told the reporters in the room. "Look at what’s happening there. Journalists are risking and even losing their lives to show the world what is happening. You realize how amazing that is?

“In America, you have the right to seek the truth and speak the truth, even if it makes people in power uncomfortable. Even if it makes your viewers or readers uncomfortable. You understand how amazing that is?" he reiterated.

Noah pointed out that he had just stood there and made fun of the president of the United States and he was going to be fine. Then he contrasted that with the reality Russian journalists are living under Vladimir Putin.

“Ask yourself this question," he said to the members of the media. "If Russian journalists who are losing their livelihoods … and their freedom for daring to report on what their own government is doing—If they had the freedom to write any words, to show any stories, or to ask any questions—if they had, basically, what you have—would they be using it in the same way that you do?

"Ask yourself that question every day," he said, "because you have one of the most important roles in the world."

People had high praise for Noah's entire evening of hosting, but especially for his closing remarks. Russia's war on Ukraine has put a spotlight on many things we tend to take for granted, including the freedom of the press.

Journalists play a vital role in society and it's one they must take seriously. To be fair, most journalists do feel the weight of their responsibility, but the corporatization of news media and a 24/7 news cycle has created a competitive landscape in which coverage is sometimes determined by what will drive traffic or viewers rather than on what's truly newsworthy or important. The demonization of news outlets by some has also created a hostile media environment, and news organizations have to resist the urge to kowtow to the loudest voices or inadvertently amplify the wrong things. Journalists often have to fight for the truth on multiple fronts, sometimes inside their own newsrooms.

As we see attacks on the media ramping up, both legitimate criticisms and blatant violations of the first amendment, the responsibility shouldered by journalists is weightier than ever. Speaking truth to and about power may not always be popular, and being careful to get the facts straight may not result in as many clicks as sensational or conspiratorial headlines do, but when you cut through the noise of social media and the political melee, what will endure—hopefully—is the real reporting of what's actually happening. In addition to the public need to be intelligently and accurately informed, future generations will depend on the historical record that real reporters and journalists help provide.

Thank you, Trevor Noah, for reminding reporters that the fight is worth it and for using this opportunity to remind the press of its primary purpose with such a simple yet profound question.

This article originally appeared three years ago.

When people move in and refuse to move out, what do you do?

Squatters' rights laws are some of the most bizarrely misused legal realities we have, and something no one seems to have a good answer for. Most of us have heard stories of someone moving into a vacant home and just living there, without anyone's permission and without paying rent, and somehow this is a legal question mark until the courts sort it out.

According to The National Desk, squatters' rights are a carryover from British property law and were created to ensure that abandoned property could be used and to protect occupants from being kicked out without proper notice. It should go without saying that squatter law isn't meant to allow someone to just take over someone else's property, but sometimes that's exactly what happens.

It's what happend to Flash Shelton's mother when she put her house up for rent after her husband passed away. A woman contacted her with interest in the property, only she wanted to do repairs and look after the home instead of paying rent. Before anyone knew it, she had furniture delivered (which she later said was accidental) and set up camp, despite Shelton's mom not agreeing to the arrangement.

But since the woman had expressed her intention and already moved in, the matter was out of police hands, as Shelton found out when he tried to contact the local sheriff.

“They said, ‘I’m sorry but we can’t enter the house, and it looks like they’re living there, so you need to go through the courts',” he shared in a YouTube video.

Shelton rightfully didn't want the expense of a court battle, so he took matters into his own hands—not with violence, but with logic. He had his mom lease the home to him, and then told the squatter that she had to move everything out because he was moving things in.

“If they can take a house, I can take a house," he said.

He was calm and clear about her having to get everything out within the day or he would have people come and take it, and thankfully, she didn't put up a big fight.

That experience made him realize how squatter law can be abused, but that there's a faster system for removing a squatter than to go through the court system. If a squatter can move in and force a homeowner to take them to court to prove they are living there illegally, then he could simply move in alongside the squatter, putting the squatter in the position of having to take the homeowner to court instead.

"The legal process is so slow, and at some point when they're in there, you're going to feel like they have more rights than you do and that's how you're going to be treated. So even though you it's your house and you're paying the mortgage or whatever, at some point squatters feel like they have more rights than you, so they don't have an incentive to leave until a judge tells them to, until they're actually ordered to, and that could take months."

After successfully removing the squatters in his mother's house, Shelton has been tackling similar squatter situations for other homeowners in California, earning him the nickname "The Squatter Hunter."

"All I'm doing is becoming a squatter and flipping this process on them," Shelton told CBS News. "I figured if they could take a house, I could take a house."

According to CBS, he's successfully removed a dozen squatters in the past year. ""I'm not going in and I'm not hurting anyone," he said. "I'm not kicking them out, I'm not throwing them out." He's literally just moving in himself, setting up cameras, and then creating small annoyances until the squatters get fed up enough to move out.

California isn't the only state that has seen issues with squatters. There are squatter stories from all over the U.S. of people moving into a property and refusing to leave without a court order, tying owners up in lengthy, expensive legal battles.

Shelton even has a Change.org petition to try to get squatter laws changed to "make squatting in residential maintained homes criminal." Making squatting illegal "will shift the burden of proof onto the squatter and make the crime punishable with restitution an option for damages," the the petition states.

Watch Shelton share his personal story:

This article originally appeared last year.