Trumpenomics
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
I've enjoyed Stossel's segments ever since his "give me a break" segments during 20/20 back in the 90's.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
I’ve been reading him at Reason for years.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by Copper
The importer doesn't like tariffs.
Wow.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
@Copper said in Trumpenomics:
The importer doesn't like tariffs.
Wow.
It's so typical that when you punch someone in the face, they'll just whine about how much it hurt. They have no idea how predictable and tedious that whining is. It happens almost every time someone gets punched in the face.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
@Copper said in Trumpenomics:
The importer doesn't like tariffs.
Wow.
Copper doesn't like it when people criticise President Trump.
Wow.
-
@Copper said in Trumpenomics:
The importer doesn't like tariffs.
Wow.
It's so typical that when you punch someone in the face, they'll just whine about how much it hurt. They have no idea how predictable and tedious that whining is. It happens almost every time someone gets punched in the face.
wrote 3 days ago last edited by Renauda@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
@Copper said in Trumpenomics:
The importer doesn't like tariffs.
Wow.
It's so typical that when you punch someone in the face, they'll just whine about how much it hurt. They have no idea how predictable and tedious that whining is. It happens almost every time someone gets punched in the face.
Then just throw him an elbow to the head and keep your eye on the play. Works for me.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by Copper
Better than Pete Rose, and still alive. (The rumor is that Mr. Trump got the ban lifted).
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by jon-nyc
One out of four of those is actually true.
Welcome home, Edan.
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
Edan should be thanking Copper. Profusely thanking Copper.
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
And the Indians and Pakistanis that are suffering from radiation burns from the nuclear conflict they experienced should thank him too. VP Shillbilly and Copper. Both of them.
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
OMG HE STOPPED FENTANYL!
HE WON THE WAR ON DRUGS.
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
No reason to be cautious, with all those factory jobs coming. I'd be spending like a drunken sailor. Like a drunken sailor who was about to get a sweet factory job.
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
I’ll admit to being a little surprised. It’s not obvious why they should have been retrenching in Q1. The fear of tariff-related inflation and job losses is more of a future concern. You’d also expect higher income people to be more clued in on the risks than the common man.
-
It's unprecedented! It's historical!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/05/14/trump-tariffs-china-trade/
Since the inauguration on Jan. 20, Trump administration officials have announced new or revised tariff policies more than 50 times, according to a tally by The Washington Post. (A separate tally by Reed Smith, a law firm, has found about 55 such actions.) Trump has issued more than a dozen tariff-related executive orders, or about one per week ..:
-
I’ll admit to being a little surprised. It’s not obvious why they should have been retrenching in Q1. The fear of tariff-related inflation and job losses is more of a future concern. You’d also expect higher income people to be more clued in on the risks than the common man.
@jon-nyc said in Trumpenomics:
I’ll admit to being a little surprised. It’s not obvious why they should have been retrenching in Q1. The fear of tariff-related inflation and job losses is more of a future concern. You’d also expect higher income people to be more clued in on the risks than the common man.
Common men fear for the future and tighten belts right away; higher income people say let's buy more and stock up before tariffs get real?
-
wrote about 8 hours ago last edited by
-
wrote about 3 hours ago last edited by jon-nyc
-
wrote 41 minutes ago last edited by
