I read it that they think Bessent isn't for tariffs so they hope he speaks up about it.
But it's possible this is the first time I've been wrong.
Are Trump's beautiful tariffs
- Thread starter snarlcakes
- Start date
But it's possible this is the first time I've been wrong.
As I posted , my opinion is that the markets are being managed/manipulated to reduce the indices to protect the broad short positions.
Bond market has all of the smart people clutching their pearls...
It's also an infrequent purchase. The ones people are worried about being affected the most by tariffs arent buying new cars.
I don't think so "market is being managed/manipulated to deflate the indices to ease the blow of the failing shorts.."
Why would it be a blow when the market is going down?
Had the market not fallen, the short sellers would have been in trouble as deals became due.
The fall of the indices lessens their jeopardy, or depending upon prices, makes them profitable.
As I've explained ad nauseum to the bed wetters, we all have a choice whether to buy an imported product or not.
And guess what happens when people stop buying cars if they're too expensive? The prices magically drop! It's a damn miracle!!!
These bozos think someone is going to hold a gun to their head to buy cavier and French wines.
Oh, OK, I get it.
But surely they weren't manipulating it to be down 20%? I can see some manipulation, but that's a pretty big drop.
I think it's just panic.
Bessent is a smart guy and seems to actually give a shit about the average person.
October 19, 1987. People today would be jumping off buildings.
If Trump throws us into a long recession/depression, his name is going to go down in history.
You miss the point. Trump lied about it. Just like he lied today about Warren Buffett being in support of his plan.
Do you tolerate being lied to in a daily basis on important matters? Would you tolerate it from your doctor, lawyer, or banker?
I'm actually not all that confident. I'll lock in some gains but average back in slowly.
I ended up not buying back in today as far as the money I moved in late February.
Shutting down the entire global economy didn't cause a depression, this won't either. They'll just print their way out of it, if they needed to.
I said "if."
I have no idea what is going to happen. But the uncertainty is a cost, worldwide.
I was sort of just thinking out loud. I should have probably kept it to myself🤣 I think they could always print enough money to get enough people to work to avoid one. The inflation and the decreasing purchasing power would suck, but who knows.
Cramer says 1) he isn't a free trader and 2) he was a sucker for believing Trump
As predicted:
A conservative legal group is challenging President Donald Trump's tariffs on China, calling them "an unlawful attempt" to make Americans pay higher taxes on Chinese imports.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) filed an initial complaint in Florida district court Thursday, challenging Trump's "unlawful use of emergency power to impose a tariff on all imports from China."
"By invoking emergency power to impose an across-the-board tariff on imports from China that the statute does not authorize, President Trump has misused that power, usurped Congress’s right to control tariffs, and upset the Constitution’s separation of powers," Andrew Morris, senior litigation counsel at NCLA, said in a statement released.
Trump’s China tariffs face legal challenge from conservative group calling them ‘unlawful'
New Civil Liberties Alliance sued the Trump administration in Florida federal court Thursday over the president's executive orders imposing tariffs on Chinese imports.
www.foxnews.com
A conservative legal group is challenging President Donald Trump's tariffs on China, calling them "an unlawful attempt" to make Americans pay higher taxes on Chinese imports.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) filed an initial complaint in Florida district court Thursday, challenging Trump's "unlawful use of emergency power to impose a tariff on all imports from China."
"By invoking emergency power to impose an across-the-board tariff on imports from China that the statute does not authorize, President Trump has misused that power, usurped Congress’s right to control tariffs, and upset the Constitution’s separation of powers," Andrew Morris, senior litigation counsel at NCLA, said in a statement released.
Definitely not play money as I worked hard to save and invest this money. I don't trade in my 401k often, but in late February my gut was screaming at me to take some of the gains of the last couple years off the table.
The more build up there was on Trump's tariff plans, the more uncomfortable I became. Trump has been so unpredictable on this and I'm afraid each country is going to have to cut deals 1-1. That will take time.
Biggest risk is some countries may call his bluff. I'm am 52 and a few years to retire. I also work for a company that still has a pension as does my wife.
I honestly invest now to leave as much as I can to my kids. I know some people disagree with doing that, but that is really my main motivation.
Oh I do. Live on a few acres in central Illinois. Lot of deer and other wildlife. Travel a bit. Honestly, things like state parks give me the greatest joy. Probably why I'll retire to Bloomington, Indiana. With the parks in that area, I could hit a different trail every day for the rest of my life.
Sorry about your dad. Too young for the both of you.
The US actually has a trade surplus with Singapore. And yet Singapore has been slapped with reciprocal tariffs of 10%
When they have such a slapstick approach/execution to such serious matters, it makes them come across as unserious people.
US stocks shed $5.4tn in two days as Trump’s tariffs stoke recession fears
China’s retaliation against Washington’s levies adds to sense of gloom across global markets
I’m sure Mark can find a link to get around the paywall.
Good read
“While some in his cabinet advised doing nothing, Reagan negotiated an import quota with Japan, sharply constricting the flow of vehicles into the United States. This was not a subtle or fine-tuned policy; it simply prohibited imports from rising above the 1979 level.”
I agree with these comments and others that don’t conclude tariffs are a certain disaster. My reasoning is something like the following-
1) Outsourcing manufacturing results in a weakness that can be exploited by strategic opponents.
2) There are in fact strategic adversaries that seek to displace the US and will happily use any and all advantages in this pursuit. Globalization is in fact but not in spirit.
3) Tariffs have built the great economies of the world by protecting local industries. Corporations have no national interests and so are not principally concerned with employing US workers nor US manufacturing but other countries do have tariffs on US goods to protect their local industries and corporations rationally take advantage of this.
4) Tariffs will serve to level the playing field and support US industry.
5) The status quo supports the long term trend of outsourcing to strategic opponents and so further strengthens strategic adversaries.
6) Changing the status quo is difficult but necessary to support the long term strategic interests of the US.
7) imposition of tariffs is more in tune with the strategic interests of the US than the status quo
8) Economists like Friedman were incorrect that increased international trade would result in globalization in spirit rather than just in fact. His idea that all the parts for helicopters would be sourced outside the country with only final assembly in the US is flawed for several reasons.
9) There are strategic opponents that will gladly screw you and the horse you rode in on and pretending that isn’t so will result in a far worse day of reckoning.
One of the repeated MAGA arguments I keep seeing is that “you don’t need that ___”. First, that certainly does not show that these tariffs are beneficial in any way.
But more to the point, it’s telling people to lower their standard of living. It’s a loser argument. It’s anti progress. It’s PETA nuts telling you not to eat a ribeye. It’s climate change pushers telling you not to drive that big truck. But it’s actually worse. At least in those examples the lowering of your standard of living has some connection to the cause. Here, telling someone they don’t need a new iPhone or TV has no relation to these stupid blanket tariffs. There is not cause for anti consumerism. In fact, if that is the cause, it will undoubtedly destroy our economy. So again, why are we telling people to lower their standard of living? What do we get out of the deal?
But more to the point, it’s telling people to lower their standard of living. It’s a loser argument. It’s anti progress. It’s PETA nuts telling you not to eat a ribeye. It’s climate change pushers telling you not to drive that big truck. But it’s actually worse. At least in those examples the lowering of your standard of living has some connection to the cause. Here, telling someone they don’t need a new iPhone or TV has no relation to these stupid blanket tariffs. There is not cause for anti consumerism. In fact, if that is the cause, it will undoubtedly destroy our economy. So again, why are we telling people to lower their standard of living? What do we get out of the deal?
There are individual cases to be made for tariffs. Great points were made here in advance about pharma and DIB. Yes, if countries have unfair laws restricting America we have an obligation to respond.
That is not close to what happened. We put restrictions on islands with no humans and no trade. We have restrictions on Bangladesh, a country far too poor to buy much from America. We have restrictions on countries we have surpluses with
A 9/11 comparison. Bush could have that afternoon said, "we do not know who did this and I do not want to be bothered finding out, so we declare war on all other nations, territories, uninhabited islands, and planets."
That is basically what Trump did because actually thinking something through is far too hard.
We had to destroy the village to save it.
Similar threads
