Trump's Tariff Formula Makes No Economic Sense. It's Also Based on an Error

Post by ttyprintk » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 1:05 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #89

seydor wrote: post #85

I believe the idea was "Very High Tarrifs" and the formula was some kid in MS Excel . They are definitely not reciprocal. They don't need to be, since the plan was to use the high tarrifs as negotiating tool to somehow reduce the US national debt

I think that is just sane washing. Original idea was that tariffs are good and America is being ripped off whenever it buy stuff. The rest are mutually exclusive rationalizations by Trump loyalists trying to make it sound reasonable. There are multiple of these explanations and none od them is consistent with actual decisions.

Post by ttyprintk » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 1:18 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #113

wraaath wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

calls for 3 months out only make sense once the stock price is decimated, and there's no certainty that prices will recover given the bumbling antics of this administration.

If they give the Federal Reserve the DOGE treatment next week, negative interest rates could always save stock prices.

Post by nprateem » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 1:21 PM UTC

hayst4ck wrote: post #125

nprateem wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. His policies are all aimed at fighting China. - He wants to choke them with tariffs (and now has leverage to get the rest of the world to join in). - They want Greenland to defend the North - He wants to onshore manufacturing as a strategic wartime capability Once you understand this, his policies make sense. And the whole business of putting tariffs on everywhere is so countries can't export from them to evade t…

So why the tariff on Taiwan, and why alienate Canada? Is European support not strategically useful? Who buys American weaponry to fund American military industry when countries don't trust us? Why would he create the grounds for civil unrest here, which would make decisive military action much harder? How can we have leverage when other countries are dealing with an O(1) problem while we are dealing with O(N) harm to…

Post by danaris » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 1:37 PM UTC

foxglacier wrote: post #80

Can anyone explain the reversal of positions on free trade between left and right since the 2000s? Back then, the biggest bogeyman of leftists was globalization and they would protest against free trade agreements and wanted to boycott imports from poor countries because it was exploiting workers there and taking jobs from poor people in rich countries. At the same time rightists loved free trade because it was good…

Post by ttyprintk » Sat, Apr 05, 2025, 2:08 PM UTC

Paradigma11 wrote: post #100

hayst4ck wrote: post #70

Trump is only confusing if you think his policies are meant to benefit America. If you don't believe that, then his policies are terrifyingly not confusing. If you believe his policies are primarily meant to benefit American oligarchs or Russia, his policies are even less confusing. Withdrawing support for Ukraine and not putting tariffs on Russia, despite putting tariffs on uninhabited "Heard Island and McDonald Isl…

I disagree on Russia. If that tariff madness goes on for more than a few months Russia is dead. Russia's economy is already completely unsustainable and on the brink. Brent is currently traded at 66USD and if oil prices fall a bit more and stay there that's it for Russia. It will be fascinating to see what is going to happen with that purely mercenary army recruited from the poor when the money is worth nothing any m…