ADVERTISEMENT

More winning

It’s all so unnecessary. Just dumb
When they were targeted, I thought they were stupid, but I kind of understood it as a negotiating ploy. Then it became apparent that he was off his rocker with them, especially coupled with all of the 51st state talk and imposing them across the board.

His bluff has been called and we're all gonna end up forced to take a bite out of this giant shit sandwich.
 
Guess Ray hasn't read the MIT study.

But if one looks at ONLY tariffs, then I would agree with him. Luckily we have or hope to have declining oil/energy prices, deregulation, tax cuts, and reduced govt spending to offset the tariffs.

If tariff revenue is used to cut other taxes, that is even more inflationary then just tarrifs on their own.
 
Can you explain the mindset of the people twisting themselves to explain why this is all good?
The mindset is hickoryhurryinghoosiers tribalism. Dumb. The rationale Brad set out from something he copied the other day. Not that he subscribed to just shared. It’s sound if it wasn’t illusory. Tariffs on specific industries goods calculated etc makes sense. This is just haphazard and mindless
 
Difference being none of them were the result of intentional policy dumbassery. Hard to have confidence in a recovery when your still being led by the morons who crashed the shit in the first place.

And another thing. It's much easier to manage portfolios and distributions when equities and fixed income perform in a traditional manner. 2022 was challenging with spx down 18% and agg down 13%.
 
I disagree. Inflation is an overall measure of all goods and services. Nobody is giving me more money to pay the higher taxes. I will stop spending in other areas to pay the extra taxes for goods or services that increase in price.


On the flip side, if all of the tariff revenue is used for new tax cuts, that would be much more inflationary, since the demand side of the economy would be better supported.

In terms of monetary policy, tariff hikes without more tax cuts and uncertainty suppressing spending would call for more interest rate cuts compared with the baseline. But if the tariff shock is more inflationary, the Fed could be forced to put rate cuts on hold for an extended period.
 
And another thing. It's much easier to manage portfolios and distributions when equities and fixed income perform in a traditional manner. 2022 was challenging with spx down 18% and agg down 13%.

Yes totally agree with that. And why the inflation worry. There's no where to hide in a stagflation world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mike41703

On the flip side, if all of the tariff revenue is used for new tax cuts, that would be much more inflationary, since the demand side of the economy would be better supported.

In terms of monetary policy, tariff hikes without more tax cuts and uncertainty suppressing spending would call for more interest rate cuts compared with the baseline. But if the tariff shock is more inflationary, the Fed could be forced to put rate cuts on hold for an extended period.
I disagree. We will see. I will say if Trump doesn't stop with all his shit he will crash the economy and they'll likely print a shit of money, which will be inflationary and accomplish nothing besides getting killed at midterms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
Can you explain the mindset of the people twisting themselves to explain why this is all good?
The system has screwed them over and they're pissed off. The notion that we shut down the entire global economy and markets go up 25% 2 consecutive years is beyond f#cking stupid. There are trade offs for all the bullshit governments and central bankers do and it disproportionately falls on the bottom 3/4s of society. They're sick of it is the answer.
 


Forget Rubin, stop when he cuts off Sowell. This is a member of conservative economics Mt. Rushmore saying "Danger".
 


Forget Rubin, stop when he cuts off Sowell. This is a member of conservative economics Mt. Rushmore saying "Danger".
MAGA isn't conservative in that way. They're an outgrowth of the Tea Party, formed in the aftermath of the Great Recession, where a lot of people said "hey, these economists don't know shit." [rightly or wrongly]
 
MAGA isn't conservative in that way. They're an outgrowth of the Tea Party, formed in the aftermath of the Great Recession, where a lot of people said "hey, these economists don't know shit." [rightly or wrongly]

No I disagree with that. The Tea Party types... At least those elected to office... Were all pretty much libertarians. And would never support this type of policy.

MAGA is the Pat Buchanan platform raised from the dead.

Or Bernie Sanders. Trump probably to the left of Bernie at this point re: trade.
 


80S America GIF
The irony of telling people to take their medicine and take in the ass so the president can play Dr Frankenstein, while being an anti-vaxxer, is delicious.

When this nightmare of a bullshit economic experiment (that no one has ever tried before), ends, let me know how much you love your American made strap a dil
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
No I disagree with that. The Tea Party types... At least those elected to office... Were all pretty much libertarians. And would never support this type of policy.

MAGA is the Pat Buchanan platform raised from the dead.

Or Bernie Sanders. Trump probably to the left of Bernie at this point re: trade.
Trump literally piggybacked on the script of the tea party in 2016. They gave rise to rebuke Obama. Gov spending etc. Todd akin locally won the pub prim as a tea party. Maga is very much the core sentiments of the tea party, culturally, and gov reduction etc
 
Trump literally piggybacked on the script of the tea party in 2016. They gave rise to rebuke Obama. Gov spending etc. Todd akin locally won the pub prim as a tea party. Maga is very much the core sentiments of the tea party, culturally, and gov reduction etc

No I'm talking about trade policy. Which is all the Sowell video was about.

That is a Pat Buchanan/Ross Perot platform from the 90s. The Reform Party... Which Trump actually ran for President under in 2000.
 
What I can’t understand is how the executive branch has the authority to impose tariffs on other countries. Where are the checks and balances?

Constitutionally the executive does not have that power. But Congress has delegated their power to tarriff to the executive for 'emergency' situations. Of course Trump has now basically claimed all world trade with the US is a national emergency.... Which is a ridiculous farce, obviously.

Congress is already starting to get up off the mat and trying to pull that power back in the last week.... Not that they're going to be willing to go override a veto
 
Constitutionally the executive does not have that power. But Congress has delegated their power to tarriff to the executive for 'emergency' situations. Of course Trump has now basically claimed all world trade with the US is a national emergency.... Which is a ridiculous farce, obviously.

Congress is already starting to get up off the mat and trying to pull that power back in the last week.... Not that they're going to be willing to go override a veto
Important lesson we are learning now: easiest way to avoid constitutional crises is for all but one party to just back the f*ck out and let whatever happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
No I disagree with that. The Tea Party types... At least those elected to office... Were all pretty much libertarians. And would never support this type of policy.

MAGA is the Pat Buchanan platform raised from the dead.

Or Bernie Sanders. Trump probably to the left of Bernie at this point re: trade.

 


I said those elected to office. There has always been the protectionist elements within the Republican party. Going back forever. But none ever gained office. Nor ever ran on it.




Informal surveys show that few tea party candidates for Congress ran against free trade. In fact, some high-profile tea party candidates embraced it as central to their message. In Illinois, for example, Bobby Schilling defeated Democratic incumbent Phil Hare with a campaign that emphasized, along with standard tea party themes, the benefits of free trade, especially for major regional employers such as Caterpillar and John Deere.
 
I said those elected to office. There has always been the protectionist elements within the Republican party. Going back forever. But none ever gained office. Nor ever ran on it.




Informal surveys show that few tea party candidates for Congress ran against free trade. In fact, some high-profile tea party candidates embraced it as central to their message. In Illinois, for example, Bobby Schilling defeated Democratic incumbent Phil Hare with a campaign that emphasized, along with standard tea party themes, the benefits of free trade, especially for major regional employers such as Caterpillar and John Deere.
Cool. I'm referring to the voters. The Tea Party were anti-trade, in favor of protectionism per the polls. And it's followed through to MAGA. Citing Sowell on this point won't help, I don't think, because I think a lot of these people saw the Great Recession as a repudiation of a lot of economics.
 
Cool. I'm referring to the voters. The Tea Party were anti-trade, in favor of protectionism per the polls. And it's followed through to MAGA. Citing Sowell on this point won't help, I don't think, because I think a lot of these people saw the Great Recession as a repudiation of a lot of economics.
The Tea Party originally didn't give a shit about trade one way or another. They were pissed about the bank bailouts and the takeover of GM with tax money while none of those responsible paid any kind of price.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT