Trumpenomics
-
wrote 30 days ago last edited by Copper
Better than Pete Rose, and still alive. (The rumor is that Mr. Trump got the ban lifted).
-
wrote 30 days ago last edited by jon-nyc
One out of four of those is actually true.
Welcome home, Edan.
-
wrote 29 days ago last edited by
Edan should be thanking Copper. Profusely thanking Copper.
-
wrote 29 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 29 days ago last edited by
OMG HE STOPPED FENTANYL!
HE WON THE WAR ON DRUGS.
-
wrote 29 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 29 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 29 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.
-
wrote 29 days ago last edited by
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.
wrote 29 days ago last edited by@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 29 days ago last edited by jon-nyc
Sure, but that assumes the common man and the higher income folks both have similar intuitions that tariffs are going to harm them economically in the immediate future.
-
wrote 27 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 27 days ago last edited by jon-nyc
-
wrote 27 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 26 days ago last edited by
Corporate greed strikes again.
-
wrote 26 days ago last edited by
Yeah, cause margins don’t exist. Remember when the Republicans were yelling at Biden for blaming inflation on greedy Jewish grocers?
-
wrote 26 days ago last edited by
You either die a tariff hawk, or live long enough to embrace greedflation.
-
wrote 26 days ago last edited by
Has Bernie responded?
-
wrote 26 days ago last edited by jon-nyc
I’m sure he’ll be hypocritical too.
-
wrote 26 days ago last edited by
Cliff Asness comments:
I may have mentioned this but we have two economically left-wing parties now that only differ in their preferred pronouns.