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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
-
Op-ed addressing the question "why Wall Street didn't see it coming":
Why Did So Many People Delude Themselves About Trump?
-
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
@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.
-
Elon has been very quiet about the tariffs until the last few days.
-
@jon-nyc said in Trumpenomics:
Yeah. Very quiet.
But not so much the last two days. What happens as the split widens over tariffs?
-
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.
-
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.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
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…
The Brad
-
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…
@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.
-
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.
@Jolly said in Trumpenomics:
Don't buy the bullshit.
I don't think the damage done to the world economy by universal tariffs, is bullshit.
There is a case to be made that a more protectionist America is a more economically resilient America, so there is that, but the economic efficiency of tariff-free trading will be missed hugely, and everybody will feel it, if it goes.
-
@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.
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
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.
I'm a bit concerned there is a concern about trade deficits in the first place. They aren't inherently bad, and one could argue in the current environment, they're actually a good thing most of the time. We're also in a global economy...different countries produce different goods with respective efficiencies. Let USA focus on what we're good at, let China do what they're good at. Plus it promotes peace, to an extent, too.
-
The idea that trade deficits are inherently bad really is surprisingly stupid. Does Trump actually believe this?
I was only joking
