341–350 of 777 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the case of Trump, never attribute to ineptitude what can be explained by greed. He is tanking the US economy so he and his billionaire cohort can buy things (businesses, real estate, stocks, etc) at a low price. Thus amassing more control and capital. This is how the Russian oligarchy came into power.
Trump's businesses have repeatedly declared bankruptcy. Don't rule out ineptitude.
So where is the bottom? I don’t actually believe there is one, I’m just curious to hear what other people think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's the nuclear option, at least for China.
Aren't these kinds of services already largely banned in China?
Historically, China stole US IP and software, like Windows, en masse. Now they refuse to import our main export product — software — while we import their physical products and software like TikTok.
If we were allowed to export our services to China in exchange, this would be a very different geopolitical moment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. There is no reason why any country should trust us anymore if entire trade relations can be destroyed by a presidential whim. Even if Trump fell out of a window today and we got a pro-trade president tomorrow, we’re not fixing this damage for a very long time. We probably would have to amend the constitution to insulate foreign policy from the whims of a single person if we want any chance of fixing this in our…
Passing law that removes tariff authority from the president would be a good start to rebuilding trust.
You know the craziest thing about watching this as an outsider in Canada is that we as a nation are losing one reliable trading partner (and obviously losing an ally but that's another conversation). Germany - losing a trade partner. Japan? And so on. But the US has lost 180 reliable trading partners. You're already seeing in the first week burgeoning trade alliances between nations who wouldn't have cooperated befor…
4D chess is an absurd notion when you consider the actors involved. Only malice and incompetence are credible theories.
It takes two to make a market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The next president is going to be Trump. If people don't think that's at least a serious possibity they are extremely deluded about the situation the country is in right now.
We have repeatedly seen Trump say something that sounds ridiculous, and his supporters say "that won't actually happen, and if it does I won't support it", and then he does it and his supporters support it. He has recently said he may try for another term as president, and confirmed "No, no I'm not joking". If you don't take his threats seriously by now, and the willingness of the GOP to get behind whatever he wants,…
Any examples?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Trump is crashing the T-note yield to refinance $9T (which is how much US debt is going to mature in 2025) at a lower rate Even if this were intended (unlikely), destroying $6T of notional stock market value so far to save $270b/yr of interest (if 10-year yields drop by 3%, which hasn't happened yet ) is a bad trade.
National stock market is owned by people, but the national debt is owned (and has to be payed) by the government. Basically, the government is just milking the reach now to lower gov's national debt. Poorer people rather win from this (even if no manufacturers come to U.S. to avoid tariff barriers, which some manufacturers will and which will be another small benefit for the poorer (more jobs)).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm tempted to think (hope? dream?) that the markets and trade will rebound if all this chaos makes American politics swing back The pump'n'dump scheme against Ukraine will forever change how small countries see the US support for democracy, even if it changes back to the previous status-quo.
In the end, countries are nuanced enough to understand American political dynamics. They see Orbans, they see Le Pens, they see Trump, and they know what is behind it. I am quite sure that Ukraine did not expect anything else from the Trump faction of the Republican party. His victory was not unlikely and he is a simple creature. If different factions win, they will be eager to work with America again, with less trus…
The world will become more resilient, but this could easily be a lose-lose for USA and other democratic nations.
This is an inherently political subject, but I would appreciate a dispassionate argument explaining how this could be even remotely good for the U.S.'s economy in a way that is light on MAGA ideology and doesn't simply claim the overwhelming majority of economists are dumb. I'm simply not seeing even a glimmer of a possible upside right now. I see even less possibility of an upside for those of us North of the border…
To lay out my own biases - I voted for Trump but do not consider myself a strong supporter (I saw it much more of a vote for who you dislike less sort of situation) - I don't understand and am not supportive of the approach on Tariffs - I am an active participate in what most here would consider right wing politics although I don't find myself aligning on every topic (e.g. I am supportive of the abortion laws in Cali…
One thing I want to say in support:
The argument in favour of free trade is that it increases the pie, so that everyone can be better off (a Pareto improvement). However, given that trade does produce winners and losers, this argument is predicated on redistribution, namely (over)compensating the losers.
That second part of the argument in favour of free trade is often conveniently forgotten. So when that redistribution doesn’t happen, then opposing free trade is quite rational for some.