Trumpenomics
-
I listened to Navarro and Bessent interviews today. They seem perfectly fine with "wall street" taking a hit, because now it's "main street's turn". They do not leave any room for hope that the tariffs might get negotiated away. I know that could just be the talking points in a 4D negotiation tactic, but somehow, I think they're committed to these tariffs.
I am impressed by the fact that these top level cabinet members at the heart of economic decisions, are going on all these shows. They were on mainstream, opposition media, like Meet the Press. But their answers, where they provide any beyond question avoidance, leave very little room for optimism that a crashing market matters to them. It seems almost part of the plan. One of them started to describe it as a "wealth redistribution", but caught himself and adjusted his wording.
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
I listened to Navarro and Bessent interviews today. They seem perfectly fine with "wall street" taking a hit, because now it's "main street's turn". They do not leave any room for hope that the tariffs might get negotiated away. I know that could just be the talking points in a 4D negotiation tactic, but somehow, I think they're committed to these tariffs.
I am impressed by the fact that these top level cabinet members at the heart of economic decisions, are going on all these shows. They were on mainstream, opposition media, like Meet the Press. But their answers, where they provide any beyond question avoidance, leave very little room for optimism that a crashing market matters to them. It seems almost part of the plan. One of them started to describe it as a "wealth redistribution", but caught himself and adjusted his wording.
Do they think maybe that their core voters don't have 401K's?
I wonder how long it can last before mainstream Republicans rebel.
-
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
I listened to Navarro and Bessent interviews today. They seem perfectly fine with "wall street" taking a hit, because now it's "main street's turn". They do not leave any room for hope that the tariffs might get negotiated away. I know that could just be the talking points in a 4D negotiation tactic, but somehow, I think they're committed to these tariffs.
I am impressed by the fact that these top level cabinet members at the heart of economic decisions, are going on all these shows. They were on mainstream, opposition media, like Meet the Press. But their answers, where they provide any beyond question avoidance, leave very little room for optimism that a crashing market matters to them. It seems almost part of the plan. One of them started to describe it as a "wealth redistribution", but caught himself and adjusted his wording.
Do they think maybe that their core voters don't have 401K's?
I wonder how long it can last before mainstream Republicans rebel.
@Doctor-Phibes I think they are sane enough to know that whatever they are doing, has to be palatable to the stock market by mid-terms. Otherwise they hand the Democrats the easiest slam-dunk campaign talking point imaginable, which is that they'll immediately pass legislation to end the tariffs. There's no doubt in my mind that the GOP will lose elections over this, unless they can reverse the damage. Manufacturing jobs just aren't as viscerally important to people as their retirement nest eggs are. Not that there will be any new manufacturing jobs in any politically viable time frame anyway.
Actually I think it may be Trump's bad luck that he did this while the market teetered on extremely high valuations. Any nudge might have toppled the house of cards. But this toppling is indelibly linked to the tariffs, and I'm glad for that, because tariffs suck, and America needs to learn that.
-
@Doctor-Phibes I think they are sane enough to know that whatever they are doing, has to be palatable to the stock market by mid-terms. Otherwise they hand the Democrats the easiest slam-dunk campaign talking point imaginable, which is that they'll immediately pass legislation to end the tariffs. There's no doubt in my mind that the GOP will lose elections over this, unless they can reverse the damage. Manufacturing jobs just aren't as viscerally important to people as their retirement nest eggs are. Not that there will be any new manufacturing jobs in any politically viable time frame anyway.
Actually I think it may be Trump's bad luck that he did this while the market teetered on extremely high valuations. Any nudge might have toppled the house of cards. But this toppling is indelibly linked to the tariffs, and I'm glad for that, because tariffs suck, and America needs to learn that.
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
tariffs suck, and America needs to learn that
Government intervention in the name of protectionism is totally counter to traditional conservative values. I think large numbers of Republicans must still believe this. Maybe they're actually hoping that MAGA burns on the lighthouse rocks of mixed-metaphor, and think this might be the best way to get rid of the goblins who are in the process of taking over the castle.
I was only joking
-
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
tariffs suck, and America needs to learn that
Government intervention in the name of protectionism is totally counter to traditional conservative values. I think large numbers of Republicans must still believe this. Maybe they're actually hoping that MAGA burns on the lighthouse rocks of mixed-metaphor, and think this might be the best way to get rid of the goblins who are in the process of taking over the castle.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Trumpenomics:
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
tariffs suck, and America needs to learn that
Government intervention in the name of protectionism is totally counter to traditional conservative values. I think large numbers of Republicans must still believe this. Maybe they're actually hoping that MAGA burns on the lighthouse rocks of mixed-metaphor, and think this might be the best way to get rid of the goblins who are in the process of taking over the castle.
I guess it's a good thing in the long term, if this lesson can be very well learned.
In fairness, it was already pretty well learned, and there is no way Trump would have won if people had believed he'd do these sorts of tariffs. He'd have still gotten plenty of votes, but this single issue would easily have swayed enough people to overcome his 1 or 2% victory margins in swing states. People care deeply about their money, that they've sacrificed through their lives to accumulate. Not to state the obvious.
I know he's talked about how much he loves tariffs his whole life, but Trump 1.0 still didn't attempt anything like this.
-
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
tariffs suck, and America needs to learn that
Government intervention in the name of protectionism is totally counter to traditional conservative values. I think large numbers of Republicans must still believe this. Maybe they're actually hoping that MAGA burns on the lighthouse rocks of mixed-metaphor, and think this might be the best way to get rid of the goblins who are in the process of taking over the castle.
Government intervention in the name of protectionism is totally counter to traditional conservative values. I think large numbers of Republicans must still believe this.
That train left the station years ago. Hence my pejorative description pseudo-con. Started years ago going back to the moral majority fringe, Pat Buchanan and tea bag populists. Lee Atwater was one of its early proponent tacticians and prophets.
-
The economy is complicated and we might be on the cusp of learning something we did not know before. That's all to say - nothing is certain.
But what we do know is there is no way for many businesses to sell what they're selling today without a massive price increase. A price increase which may kill their demand.
I also can't imagine any business leader wanting to seriously invest against an executive order. I also think no large company wants to be the first to complain - so these things may hang around until the pain is quite severe.
I guess - I'm responding to @LuFins-Dad, I don't see how this is similar to the covid panic. We have a pretty clear line of sight to the first order effects. I also don't think the stock market aspect is the really important one - it's just where the impact shows up first.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Trumpenomics:
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
tariffs suck, and America needs to learn that
Government intervention in the name of protectionism is totally counter to traditional conservative values. I think large numbers of Republicans must still believe this. Maybe they're actually hoping that MAGA burns on the lighthouse rocks of mixed-metaphor, and think this might be the best way to get rid of the goblins who are in the process of taking over the castle.
I guess it's a good thing in the long term, if this lesson can be very well learned.
In fairness, it was already pretty well learned, and there is no way Trump would have won if people had believed he'd do these sorts of tariffs. He'd have still gotten plenty of votes, but this single issue would easily have swayed enough people to overcome his 1 or 2% victory margins in swing states. People care deeply about their money, that they've sacrificed through their lives to accumulate. Not to state the obvious.
I know he's talked about how much he loves tariffs his whole life, but Trump 1.0 still didn't attempt anything like this.
-
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
I know he's talked about how much he loves tariffs his whole life, but Trump 1.0 still didn't attempt anything like this.
I think it's becoming pretty clear that1.0 was heavily restrained.
@xenon said in Trumpenomics:
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
I know he's talked about how much he loves tariffs his whole life, but Trump 1.0 still didn't attempt anything like this.
I think it's becoming pretty clear that1.0 was heavily restrained.
Yeah, but nobody could have stopped him from doing this last time. He was self-restrained. Unless anybody thinks he was talked out of anything last time.
Or maybe it took him time to formulate this tariff plan. Maybe it hadn't occurred to him yet by 2020.
Or the most sinister version, he knew he'd be unelectable after doing it, so he had to wait for term 2. I doubt that one. I guess he thinks this'll work, and make him popular. So far, it seems the economic destruction is being enjoyed as spectator sport. So, it's working in that regard.
-
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. -
I wonder how folk here will cope with the forthcoming price increases, from coffee to pensions, with increasing unemployment and market uncertainty?
We're hardly wealthy baby boomers, owning for example two 10 year old cars; however we can absorb price inceases having annuities guaranteed for life, and full state pensions in a few years.
But what of our children who are relatively new to the job & housing markets, of our friends who are coming up to retirement, and people worldwide in places like Vietnam, Cambodia with manufactufing jobs etc.?
Promised US domestic manufacturing jobs will take years to create if they ever materialise. I reckon there must be significant buyer regret among Trump(CF) voters, who didn't realise the difference between his promises and reality.
What about the international rule of law built up after the chaos of WW2, now reduced to Might makes right.
America appears little better than Russia. Veto the UN, disregard ICC, threaten weaker countries. No consequences. Two totalitarian states facing off?@Jolly "I'm just sitting back, enjoying the show"
World ends Monday.
Women and children to suffer most.
I still like ol' Larry. And I still think you're an opportunistic pissant.The world is a far worse place because of Trump(CF), and yes, women and children will suffer more.
It's a shitshow, so just what the hell are you enjoying about it?
-
What happens to long-term supply contracts of imported goods with pre-negotiated prices?
The buyer points at the contract and says "I am not paying a penny more than what's written in the contract." The seller still has to pay 10%~99% more for tariffs as a matter of cost. What's the usual mechanisms to deal with something like this? Is there insurance that hedge for "sudden cost increases caused by government policies"?
-
So here’s the question you have to ask. Is Bessent (a Yale grad that went on to run Soros’ London office and ultimately became a partner before starting his own highly successful firm focused on global trading and macroeconomics) an absolute idiot and lucked his way into the wealth and positions he was in? Or is there something more at play?
The Brad
-
So here’s the question you have to ask. Is Bessent (a Yale grad that went on to run Soros’ London office and ultimately became a partner before starting his own highly successful firm focused on global trading and macroeconomics) an absolute idiot and lucked his way into the wealth and positions he was in? Or is there something more at play?
@LuFins-Dad said in Trumpenomics:
So here’s the question you have to ask. Is Bessent (a Yale grad that went on to run Soros’ London office and ultimately became a partner before starting his own highly successful firm focused on global trading and macroeconomics) an absolute idiot and lucked his way into the wealth and positions he was in? Or is there something more at play?
Well, if he disagrees with Trump he loses his job, so there's that.
