ADVERTISEMENT

90 day pause in tariffs

I think context matters. We forget why we have this lunatic. So when we start with the cult shit from Hondo types there’s some selective memory involved as to how we got here and what’s waiting in the wings
The reason Trump is preferable is not because he doesn’t also have bad ideas, he of course does. It’s that he’s far less likely to follow the wrong path for too long after it becomes clear that path is wrong.

The Biden administration kept with climate zealotry, Covid nonsense and open borders even though they got continual feedback that people hated the actions they were taking.

They were zealots. Trump is not.
 
Inflation was high around the world and you know why. Gas spikes have little or nothing to do with politics. I had freedom to go wherever I wanted during Covid. You must live in a fascist area (that explains your Trump support, I guess). Since when do you guys care about other humans, let alone transgenders? That’s not a good look for you people.




200.gif
 
This administration has the confidence of a middle schooler doing Tik Tok dances. "This was the plan all along" has got to be one of the more incredible lies told since "about 6 inches." I'm a little sad that the credulous will believe it, but here we are.
Guess the conspiracy could be Trump tanked the market so his followers could buy low then sell high today
 
  • Love
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier

Last Wednesday, standing at a podium in the White House Rose Garden, the president of the United States threw the world’s economy into turmoil. Having declared that America’s trade deficit represented a bona fide “emergency,” President Trump revealed a completely rewritten federal tariff regime. The result of these alterations was an increase in protectionist barriers that exceeded even the infamous Smoot-Hawley law in its scope.

For two days, the stock market responded to this move by diving sharply downward. Monday morning, after a false report that the president was planning to endorse a 90-day pause in implementation, there was a brief rally, but this ended when the administration made clear that it intended to stay the course. At present, more than $10 trillion of investment has been wiped out, and every stockholder in the world is watching the Oval Office in the hope of discovering what to do next. Apparently, l’état, c’est moi is in reruns.

If it seems preposterous that a single person could enjoy this much power over the American economy — and, with it, the global economy — rest assured that it is. In Article I, the Constitution vests the “power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” in Congress, not in the president. As a result, the president has no power to impose tariffs that he has not been accorded by an act of the legislature. If it desires, Congress can choose to take back as much of that power as it sees fit. It ought to do so — and do so now.

That the Founders placed the power to tax, tariff, and legislate in the hands of the legislature, instead of the executive, was not an accident. On the contrary: This allocation sat at the very core of the system that they designed. Because legislatures play host to a diverse cast of characters — characters who have different views, are elected by different groups, and come from different regions — they are less prone to dogmatism, caprice, and flightiness than are monarchs, presidents, or emperors. Especially within the United States, where the Senate often checks the passions of the House, the procedural challenges that result from this tend to ensure that only those proposals that enjoy broad purchase among the citizenry’s representatives are able to become law. This arrangement has two chief benefits. First, it guarantees that the ideas under consideration will be subject to serious criticism and debate. Second, it makes it difficult to alter the status quo on a whim — which, in turn, makes it easier for the people to understand the laws under which they live.

This predictability is useful in all areas of civic life. But it is especially beneficial in the financial realm, where stability is imperative. Businesses, investors, workers, and families are all aided enormously by a reliable comprehension of what their tax rates, operating rules, regulatory liabilities, and tariff exposures are likely to be for the foreseeable future. When those variables are determined by Congress, the debates that inform them are transparent and the laws that result are built to endure. When those variables are determined by the president, the debates that inform them are opaque and the law is liable to change radically from day to day. In essence, the case for Congress fulfilling its responsibilities is the same as the case for written law per se: No free man wants to be at the mercy of a king.

The very fact that our system charges Congress with setting tariffs ought to be sufficient to get Congress to do its job. So, too, ought the president’s cynical conflation of his personal political preferences and the existence of an “emergency” that unlocks his absolute powers. But, if duty to their oaths does not move them, the raw chaos of the last five days should certainly substitute as motivation. What has happened since last Thursday is hard to fathom. Based on an ever-shifting series of rationales, characterized by an embarrassing methodology, and punctuated with an extraordinary arrogance toward the country’s constitutional order, the Trump administration has alienated our global allies, discombobulated our domestic businesses, decimated our capital markets, and increased the likelihood of serious recession. This should alarm the members of both political parties — and, in particular, it should worry the hundreds of Republican legislators who, in less than two years’ time, will be judged in large part on whether the president who shares their brand has done a good job.

We are of the view that many of the delegations of authority that Congress has granted to the executive are unconstitutional, and that they should be struck down as such by the Supreme Court. At some point, we hope that a majority of the justices are persuaded to agree. For now, though, it falls to the current members of Congress to do what, for decades, they have proven steadfastly unwilling to do: their jobs.
 
Today was a great day, but at least for my 401k accounts, less than 33% of the losses since Trump took office were reversed.

I'm not going to cheer on someone who sets fire to my house, brags about it for awhile, then puts the fire out, and then wants credit for putting it out.
 
We are of the view that many of the delegations of authority that Congress has granted to the executive are unconstitutional, and that they should be struck down as such by the Supreme Court. At some point, we hope that a majority of the justices are persuaded to agree. For now, though, it falls to the current members of Congress to do what, for decades, they have proven steadfastly unwilling to do: their jobs.

The Supremes had no problem doing that when Biden was in office.
 
How can this be I was told trump totally caved. What is canada thinking!!

 
All we can do is love them, teach them, and try to liberate them.
They literally refuse to admit things like inflation were exacerbated by Biden’s arp. The fed reserve. All say it. Wtf. Any excuse they’re all in. Purely coincidence. Gas. Inflation. The border. Murders. You name it. And you provide the data and in the face of same they say no. Trump hate rotted a lot of brains.
They don’t believe those things and wonder why Dems lost everything 🤔
We have the reps we deserve
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1 and snarlcakes

Last Wednesday, standing at a podium in the White House Rose Garden, the president of the United States threw the world’s economy into turmoil. Having declared that America’s trade deficit represented a bona fide “emergency,” President Trump revealed a completely rewritten federal tariff regime. The result of these alterations was an increase in protectionist barriers that exceeded even the infamous Smoot-Hawley law in its scope.

For two days, the stock market responded to this move by diving sharply downward. Monday morning, after a false report that the president was planning to endorse a 90-day pause in implementation, there was a brief rally, but this ended when the administration made clear that it intended to stay the course. At present, more than $10 trillion of investment has been wiped out, and every stockholder in the world is watching the Oval Office in the hope of discovering what to do next. Apparently, l’état, c’est moi is in reruns.

If it seems preposterous that a single person could enjoy this much power over the American economy — and, with it, the global economy — rest assured that it is. In Article I, the Constitution vests the “power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” in Congress, not in the president. As a result, the president has no power to impose tariffs that he has not been accorded by an act of the legislature. If it desires, Congress can choose to take back as much of that power as it sees fit. It ought to do so — and do so now.

That the Founders placed the power to tax, tariff, and legislate in the hands of the legislature, instead of the executive, was not an accident. On the contrary: This allocation sat at the very core of the system that they designed. Because legislatures play host to a diverse cast of characters — characters who have different views, are elected by different groups, and come from different regions — they are less prone to dogmatism, caprice, and flightiness than are monarchs, presidents, or emperors. Especially within the United States, where the Senate often checks the passions of the House, the procedural challenges that result from this tend to ensure that only those proposals that enjoy broad purchase among the citizenry’s representatives are able to become law. This arrangement has two chief benefits. First, it guarantees that the ideas under consideration will be subject to serious criticism and debate. Second, it makes it difficult to alter the status quo on a whim — which, in turn, makes it easier for the people to understand the laws under which they live.

This predictability is useful in all areas of civic life. But it is especially beneficial in the financial realm, where stability is imperative. Businesses, investors, workers, and families are all aided enormously by a reliable comprehension of what their tax rates, operating rules, regulatory liabilities, and tariff exposures are likely to be for the foreseeable future. When those variables are determined by Congress, the debates that inform them are transparent and the laws that result are built to endure. When those variables are determined by the president, the debates that inform them are opaque and the law is liable to change radically from day to day. In essence, the case for Congress fulfilling its responsibilities is the same as the case for written law per se: No free man wants to be at the mercy of a king.

The very fact that our system charges Congress with setting tariffs ought to be sufficient to get Congress to do its job. So, too, ought the president’s cynical conflation of his personal political preferences and the existence of an “emergency” that unlocks his absolute powers. But, if duty to their oaths does not move them, the raw chaos of the last five days should certainly substitute as motivation. What has happened since last Thursday is hard to fathom. Based on an ever-shifting series of rationales, characterized by an embarrassing methodology, and punctuated with an extraordinary arrogance toward the country’s constitutional order, the Trump administration has alienated our global allies, discombobulated our domestic businesses, decimated our capital markets, and increased the likelihood of serious recession. This should alarm the members of both political parties — and, in particular, it should worry the hundreds of Republican legislators who, in less than two years’ time, will be judged in large part on whether the president who shares their brand has done a good job.

We are of the view that many of the delegations of authority that Congress has granted to the executive are unconstitutional, and that they should be struck down as such by the Supreme Court. At some point, we hope that a majority of the justices are persuaded to agree. For now, though, it falls to the current members of Congress to do what, for decades, they have proven steadfastly unwilling to do: their jobs.

Really hope the tariff case you mentioned last week (or another similar one) makes it to the SCOTUS so we can once and for all see who are the actual originalists and who are just partisans.
 
Really hope the tariff case you mentioned last week (or another similar one) makes it to the SCOTUS so we can once and for all see who are the actual originalists and who are just partisans.
There are plenty of non-originalist arguments against this, too. I don't know that the originalist arguments all go one way.
 
Really hope the tariff case you mentioned last week (or another similar one) makes it to the SCOTUS so we can once and for all see who are the actual originalists and who are just partisans.
Ever notice how the butch-cut redneck hippie haters of the 60s had long hair a couple decades later? These social changes spread from liberals to conservatives through time. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are now trans. Transoriginalists.
 
Really hope the tariff case you mentioned last week (or another similar one) makes it to the SCOTUS so we can once and for all see who are the actual originalists and who are just partisans.

There are plenty of non-originalist arguments against this, too. I don't know that the originalist arguments all go one way.

The tariffs case will tell us if the new Major Questions rule they pulled out of thin air applies across the board or not.
 
Acting President Musk blasts Navarro and the stupid tariffs. 24 hrs later, puppetboy Donald caves. NIIIIIICE...
Good. He was responsive. That’s a good thing. Did a dumb thing. Saw what happened. And changed course

Been nice for the defund crowd to adopt such behavior. Lives would have been saved
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mike41703
Art of the deal son. Art of the deal son.
Exactly. How many times have you said “this my best offer” knowing that it wasn’t? How many times have you heard from others “this is my best offer” and knew it wasn’t?

The word “ caved” with regard to negotiating is for rubes. Negotiating always means you are using head fakes, misdirection, and even trying to be the better liar than the other dude.
 
Exactly. How many times have you said “this my best offer” knowing that it wasn’t? How many times have you heard from others “this is my best offer” and knew it wasn’t?

The word “ caved” with regard to negotiating is for rubes. Negotiating always means you are using head fakes, misdirection, and even trying to be the better liar than the other dude.
We’re in amateur hour here coh. I don’t mind volunteering my time but it’s possible these people can’t learn
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
Exactly. How many times have you said “this my best offer” knowing that it wasn’t? How many times have you heard from others “this is my best offer” and knew it wasn’t?

The word “ caved” with regard to negotiating is for rubes. Negotiating always means you are using head fakes, misdirection, and even trying to be the better liar than the other dude.
I’m embarrassed for you.
 
Exactly. How many times have you said “this my best offer” knowing that it wasn’t? How many times have you heard from others “this is my best offer” and knew it wasn’t?

The word “ caved” with regard to negotiating is for rubes. Negotiating always means you are using head fakes, misdirection, and even trying to be the better liar than the other dude.
Most liberals don't have the stomach for Art of the Deal, Prof. They're soft as butter.
 
Exactly. How many times have you said “this my best offer” knowing that it wasn’t? How many times have you heard from others “this is my best offer” and knew it wasn’t?

The word “ caved” with regard to negotiating is for rubes. Negotiating always means you are using head fakes, misdirection, and even trying to be the better liar than the other dude.
Trump only has one card in his hand. Happens to be an ace called America. The rest of the world leaders know he’s an immature, ignorant, and vindictive juvenile but because of his ace in his hole, they do their best to remain composed and respond maturely, because this is real life and they represent real people.

That’s what you were trying to say, right?

By the way, I’ve heard there are two amazing specialities in Colorado and I’m curious how you like them:

Rocky Mountain Oysters
Pretzel Tongue in Ass
 
Good. He was responsive. That’s a good thing. Did a dumb thing. Saw what happened. And changed course

Been nice for the defund crowd to adopt such behavior. Lives would have been saved
Yep, the one thing you can say about Trump, despite all his faults: he's a lifelong learner, a man who relishes being proven wrong and correcting course.
 
I’d actually believe that this was an Art of the Deal thing if they were able to provide ANY extrinsic evidence that this was indeed the plan all along.

Until then, I’ll remain firmly convinced that the pause was a direct result of poorly received policy.

The thing is, no matter what, he will declare victory. That’s the true Trump MO. Just act like a success, image is the most important thing.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT