Trumpenomics
-
wrote 5 days ago last edited by
-
Futures tomorrow look grim. Has anyone given thought to the real reason he’s doing this? He simply needs to be the center of attention to feed the narcissim. And the whole purpose of the tarriffs are to get nations to come entreat witu the Donald and bend the knee and do it all in front of cameras so the world can see how important the king of America is. And he will most certainly deal. That’s what he does. He is not so dense that he is not bombarded with econmic 101 lessons by his people. He has to understand the trade imbalances that exist are just like what was mentioned earlier here. No country’s gouging the USA.. But i wouldnt blame them if they tried as we are sitting on the biggest pot of money and global power the world has ever known. We are the bull
n the China shop and Trump wants to hop on and ride it for 8 seconds if he can. Look 
at me, i’m Sandra Dee is what this all is.
I have never personally met Someone whose personality is so overtly poisoned.wrote 5 days ago last edited by@NobodySock said in Trumpenomics:
Futures tomorrow look grim. Has anyone given thought to the real reason he’s doing this? He simply needs to be the center of attention to feed the narcissim. And the whole purpose of the tarriffs are to get nations to come entreat witu the Donald and bend the knee and do it all in front of cameras so the world can see how important the king of America is. And he will most certainly deal. That’s what he does. He is not so dense that he is not bombarded with econmic 101 lessons by his people. He has to understand the trade imbalances that exist are just like what was mentioned earlier here. No country’s gouging the USA.. But i wouldnt blame them if they tried as we are sitting on the biggest pot of money and global power the world has ever known. We are the bull
n the China shop and Trump wants to hop on and ride it for 8 seconds if he can. Look at me, i’m Sandra Dee is what this all is.
I have never personally met Someone whose personality is so overtly poisoned.Ha! I knew it before they did.
Link to video -
wrote 5 days ago last edited by
The best attempt I've seen to have a reasonable pro-tariff discussion: (Megyn Kelly and VDH)
Link to video
It's not really worth muddling through the whole thing, as they can't provide the essential piece to the argument where they connect dots between these tariffs, and helping poor people. They just assume the stated intent, will be the outcome.
They accept a drop in the stock market as the price to be paid to help poor people. Which is fine. Same justification could be used for a higher corporate tax, for instance, which might fund manufacturing industry subsidies, or other programs to help elevate people economically.
For the other side of the argument, I thought this was good. Clear explanations of job losses and economic damage in small businesses and the lower class. I hope to see more of this guy in financial interviews, he's good.
Link to video -
wrote 5 days ago last edited by
Bessent seems to be pushing him toward negotiations, Miller and Navarro for permanence.
Today the White House retweeted and then deleted a tweet from Navarro saying they were here to stay.
Seems like a battle is going on.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/07/trump-bessent-trade-deals-tariff-endgame-messaging-00277395
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
I think the 10% universal tariff sticks until jobs numbers or inflation numbers push him off of it. The negotiations are to reduce >10% to 10%. That's my prediction anyway.
-
I think the 10% universal tariff sticks until jobs numbers or inflation numbers push him off of it. The negotiations are to reduce >10% to 10%. That's my prediction anyway.
wrote 4 days ago last edited by xenon 4 Jul 2025, 23:51@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
I think the 10% universal tariff sticks until jobs numbers or inflation numbers push him off of it. The negotiations are to reduce >10% to 10%. That's my prediction anyway.
Optimistic take. In the sense that anyone will be forced to admit that lower growth is attributable to tariffs.
Tariffs are also a huge compliance burden and corruption surface. I haven't seen any clarity on how these things are going to be levied. Will it be on Bill-of-materials? (e.g., what the thing being imported is worth) - which is easier. Or is it based on value-add (what did the last country add vs. all the countries before it?) - which is more accurate.
It becomes important - e.g., China contributes about 25% of the value in an iphone, but the trade deficit takes into account the full BOM (chips sourced from Japan, Taiwan, etc.).
You don't have to do any of this work before you introduce tariffs - and then you have to do it by every product in the economy. And then we rail against regulations.
-
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
I think the 10% universal tariff sticks until jobs numbers or inflation numbers push him off of it. The negotiations are to reduce >10% to 10%. That's my prediction anyway.
Optimistic take. In the sense that anyone will be forced to admit that lower growth is attributable to tariffs.
Tariffs are also a huge compliance burden and corruption surface. I haven't seen any clarity on how these things are going to be levied. Will it be on Bill-of-materials? (e.g., what the thing being imported is worth) - which is easier. Or is it based on value-add (what did the last country add vs. all the countries before it?) - which is more accurate.
It becomes important - e.g., China contributes about 25% of the value in an iphone, but the trade deficit takes into account the full BOM (chips sourced from Japan, Taiwan, etc.).
You don't have to do any of this work before you introduce tariffs - and then you have to do it by every product in the economy. And then we rail against regulations.
wrote 4 days ago last edited by Horace 4 Aug 2025, 00:45@xenon said in Trumpenomics:
Optimistic take. In the sense that anyone will be forced to admit that lower growth is attributable to tariffs.
I don't know anybody will ever admit that. They can always find a reason to claim victory and reduce them, after they've made America great again.
Tariffs are also a huge compliance burden and corruption surface. I haven't seen any clarity on how these things are going to be levied. Will it be on Bill-of-materials? (e.g., what the thing being imported is worth) - which is easier. Or is it based on value-add (what did the last country add vs. all the countries before it?) - which is more accurate.
It becomes important - e.g., China contributes about 25% of the value in an iphone, but the trade deficit takes into account the full BOM (chips sourced from Japan, Taiwan, etc.).
You don't have to do any of this work before you introduce tariffs - and then you have to do it by every product in the economy. And then we rail against regulations.
Interesting, thanks for those details.
-
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
I think the 10% universal tariff sticks until jobs numbers or inflation numbers push him off of it. The negotiations are to reduce >10% to 10%. That's my prediction anyway.
Optimistic take. In the sense that anyone will be forced to admit that lower growth is attributable to tariffs.
Tariffs are also a huge compliance burden and corruption surface. I haven't seen any clarity on how these things are going to be levied. Will it be on Bill-of-materials? (e.g., what the thing being imported is worth) - which is easier. Or is it based on value-add (what did the last country add vs. all the countries before it?) - which is more accurate.
It becomes important - e.g., China contributes about 25% of the value in an iphone, but the trade deficit takes into account the full BOM (chips sourced from Japan, Taiwan, etc.).
You don't have to do any of this work before you introduce tariffs - and then you have to do it by every product in the economy. And then we rail against regulations.
wrote 4 days ago last edited by@xenon said in Trumpenomics:
Tariffs are also a huge compliance burden and corruption surface. I haven't seen any clarity on how these things are going to be levied. Will it be on Bill-of-materials? (e.g., what the thing being imported is worth) - which is easier. Or is it based on value-add (what did the last country add vs. all the countries before it?) - which is more accurate.
Isn't it fortunate that we've got Mr. Attention to Detail running the show.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
Op-ed addressing the question "why Wall Street didn't see it coming":
Why Did So Many People Delude Themselves About Trump?
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
Some wishful thinking, and some belief that it was just too crazy for even Trump to do.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
Art Laffer, former Reagan economist, loves Trump, and thinks his first term was the best economically in presidential history. He believes term two will be even better. Because he believes these tariffs are 100% negotiating tactic. Put him in the camp of "it's too crazy for Trump to do this".
That part is at 8:23.
Link to video -
Bessent seems to be pushing him toward negotiations, Miller and Navarro for permanence.
Today the White House retweeted and then deleted a tweet from Navarro saying they were here to stay.
Seems like a battle is going on.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/07/trump-bessent-trade-deals-tariff-endgame-messaging-00277395
wrote 4 days ago last edited by@jon-nyc said in Trumpenomics:
Bessent seems to be pushing him toward negotiations, Miller and Navarro for permanence.
Today the White House retweeted and then deleted a tweet from Navarro saying they were here to stay.
Seems like a battle is going on.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/07/trump-bessent-trade-deals-tariff-endgame-messaging-00277395
Elon and Navarro are going at it.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
Elon has been very quiet about the tariffs until the last few days.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
Yeah. Very quiet.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Trumpenomics:
Yeah. Very quiet.
But not so much the last two days. What happens as the split widens over tariffs?
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by Renauda 4 Sept 2025, 02:28
Musk has now called out Navarro as being “dumber than a sack of bricks”:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdrgx4ky1xxo
Sounds like the malice in wonderland theatrical hit of the first term may be on for an encore.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
Trump just posted about all of the "negotiations" he's doing with other countries. That is an easy off-ramp from the tariffs, if he chooses to take it.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by Jolly 4 Aug 2025, 16:41
Don't buy the bullshit.
Example: On supposedly Black Monday, CNN was running the stock tickers all day and telling us all how bad Trump had screwed up.
Today, the market is up a bit and a stock ticker is no longer scrolling across the bottom of the screen. The media is going to do everything it can to generate clicks through Trump doomporn.
I haven't been adding to my investments in awhile. I think today I start dollar averaging the Roth and will continue to do so for the next 18 months.
-
wrote 4 days ago last edited by
Okay, so moving beyond the outright tariff policies, there has been a lot of talk about non-tariff trade barriers including currency manipulation. Is that accurate? And what are the other trade barriers they are alluding to?
And as a side note, Netanyahu is now saying he planes on eliminating the trade deficit between Israel and the US. Please explain to me how a nation of 10M can possibly equal the economic consumption of a nation of 350M? Especially when much of that trade is based on precious jewels, which the US has little industry in mining…
-
Okay, so moving beyond the outright tariff policies, there has been a lot of talk about non-tariff trade barriers including currency manipulation. Is that accurate? And what are the other trade barriers they are alluding to?
And as a side note, Netanyahu is now saying he planes on eliminating the trade deficit between Israel and the US. Please explain to me how a nation of 10M can possibly equal the economic consumption of a nation of 350M? Especially when much of that trade is based on precious jewels, which the US has little industry in mining…
wrote 4 days ago last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in Trumpenomics:
Okay, so moving beyond the outright tariff policies, there has been a lot of talk about non-tariff trade barriers including currency manipulation. Is that accurate? And what are the other trade barriers they are alluding to?
I think they've pivoted to this because they can hand-wave "non-tariff barriers", but not tariffs, which are publicly known and unambiguous. The example of a non-tariff barrier I've heard them use is a VAT, or sales tax, in Europe, and I've heard that calling that a barrier is nonsense, because it applies to Europe's own domestic products too.
And as a side note, Netanyahu is now saying he planes on eliminating the trade deficit between Israel and the US. Please explain to me how a nation of 10M can possibly equal the economic consumption of a nation of 350M? Especially when much of that trade is based on precious jewels, which the US has little industry in mining…
I'm hoping "trade deficits" are computed per-capita. They still wouldn't be a bad thing per se, but at least they would be a reasonable thing to talk about.
Education is extremely important.
