Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 777 posts

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#621

Post by sorcerer-mar »

sebmellen wrote: post #488
getnormality wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More competitive US manufacturing wouldn't lead to more affordable basics, would it?

Arguably it would. Not my argument, but just listen to any of Bessent’s thinking on the topic.

His argument is pretty circular, which is e.g. not that Americans would work for Vietnamese wages but that we'd produce automation that can do the same work. But in that case: why aren't we doing that today?

The answer is that it's still more advantageous to pay Vietnam to make our clothes.

It's basically just no free lunch theorem: we can afford the CapEx of doing such a thing today precisely because we have better alternatives. If there were no better alternatives and we had to produce our own garments, we wouldn't be able to afford the CapEx to do it in a dramatically more labor-efficient manner.

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#623

Post by p3rls »

photonthug wrote: post #550
cycomanic wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was bringing this up with a guy yesterday who was genuinely supporting the policies and somebody chimed in that they were not worried at all, because everyone wants to trade with the big boy in town. Trust is not important if they are afraid of you (I'm paraphrasing). Quite a different perspective, but it is consistent with an observation I made about a lot of US comments, people are quite happy for their country/g…

> Trust is not important if they are afraid of you .. Europeans seem to be much more susceptible to an "if you don't want it to be done to you don't do it to others" argument. I've noticed this also, having spent a lot of time in both places. Some would say this is part of the American national character, and it's the darker side of hard-nosed individualistic cowboys, etc. The famous opening speech of Patton comes to…

[flagged]

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#624

Post by heigh »

senorrib wrote: post #42
csense wrote: post #12

So honest question: A bunch of people who currently own stock are deciding they'd rather have cash instead -- that much is obvious. But what exactly are they doing with the cash? Don't want to hold onto it, everyone says devaluation and inflation is coming. Bitcoin and gold are kinda flat. I expected them to shoot up as uncertainty hedges. What gives?

Real estate, bonds, foreign stocks, oil. There's a billion options out there. Or they can just sit and wait. Losing for a bit of inflation is better than losing 20-30% in a recession.

Gold is going off the charts

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#625

Post by heigh »

lazide wrote: post #100
kristopolous wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump just said "fuck you" to 95% of the planet. These stocks have a long way to fall. It sure would be nice to have a competent, organized opposition that does more than finger wag and tsk tsk in a scornful tone

Trump has consistently avoided consequences from breaking the rules. You can’t fight someone like that within the rules, and right now the left will throw anyone who starts breaking the rules in jail while consistently being unable to hold the opposition accountable. It’s enforced self destruction.

Not sure what your position is here. “The left is trying to hold people to account, but that makes them less popular.”?

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#626

Post by ttyprintk »

trentlott wrote: post #518
ttyprintk wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump only owns one stock: a major portion of the parent company of Truth social. Nothing he’s done has caused that stock to rise or steady.

Yeah, the random memecoins he issued and the NFC trading cards were meaningless to him. He's only invested in Truth Social and The Constitution. That's why he's in such competition with the owner of Twitter and would never undercut his social media platform.

What I was trying to point out: his wealth is in real estate and one huge chunk of DJT. No blue chips, no managed funds; nothing that mainstream America and Barack Obama would choose. I contend he attacks the mainstream because of all that.

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#627

Post by mcv »

someNameIG wrote: post #611
mcv wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And supporting a whole family on a single income well was a very narrow window of time, and it required the US to have no real economic competitors. But then how were other countries able to have this while having economic competitors?

Some places relied on other ways to make money (here in Australia it was comodoties). A lot is just social change to two income households, and it's main contributor to living costs was housings. Two people bringing in money ,means that households can pay more for a mortgage or rent, driving up costs.

That's what drove up housing costs after we switched from single to double income households. But before that, but before that, people in lots of countries could afford a house and a family on a single income, despite competition from other countries.

It's not that this situation was unsustainable or only attainable for the US; this situation should have been the norm, with the additional income just providing extra luxury or time off, but instead we got screwed through artificial scarcity and more money going to the very rich instead of the working and middle class.

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#628

Post by franktankbank »

sorcerer-mar wrote: post #621
sebmellen wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguably it would. Not my argument, but just listen to any of Bessent’s thinking on the topic.

His argument is pretty circular, which is e.g. not that Americans would work for Vietnamese wages but that we'd produce automation that can do the same work. But in that case: why aren't we doing that today? The answer is that it's still more advantageous to pay Vietnam to make our clothes. It's basically just no free lunch theorem: we can afford the CapEx of doing such a thing today precisely because we have better…

You can't automate something that you can't already do manually (IMO/IME).

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#629

Post by gls2ro »

kaycebasques wrote: post #346

A simple but profound idea that has stuck with me from the days when I religiously listened to The Macro Tourist's podcast: who's on the other side of the trade? In order for AAPL to drop 7% today, someone of course had to agree to sell their shares at a price that is 7% lower than yesterday's. But perhaps more interesting, someone else agreed to buy the shares at that price. Who's buying here and who's selling? Who'…

Asking just for me to learn:

Does it really need someone on the other side to buy or can it be like other markets (consumer goods lets say) where you can set the price lower and not necessary have a buyer. You just announce it that you are willing to sell 10k of this type of share at 200 or lower up to 190. Then someone else seeing this says we are also willing to sell 20k at 190 or 180 ? And so even if no one bought these shares now their “average” price is not 200 but 190ish?

Sorry if the scenario sounds stupid and it is far away how the shares market works.

Re: Trump's Tariffs Wipe Out over $6T on Wall Street in Epic Two-Day Rout

#630

Post by mathfailure »

outer_web wrote: post #452
mathfailure wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Furthermore, Russia has no plans to invade any NATO country. It just won't let NATO invade^W expand to Ukraine. And no, this war is not how you describe it: said 'much smaller country' was 2nd biggest (in terms of military strength) in Europe after Russia itself. And it's not a 1x1 war of big Russia vs small Ukraine: Ukraine got help from all over Europe, G.B., U.S. and Canada. Help in arms, in intel, in training, in…

> Furthermore, Russia has no plans to invade any NATO country. Not only are you attempting to prove a negative with "trust me bro" but it's especially laughable given recent history. Please tell me how many days before the Ukraine invasion Russia had "no plans to invade". > this war is not how you describe it: said 'much smaller country' Personally I consider 1/3 the population "much smaller" but you do you. > it's n…

I think it's the opposite: with US remaining in NATO, Europe will feel cocky enough to get dragged in a war, Russia will of course retaliate and further escalation (especially if Russia starts losing) highly likely will lead to the nukes.

Now look at the news: Germany sends troops (for permanent stationing) to Eastern Europe. GB, France and Germany discuss deployment of their troops to Ukraine.

Seems like I'm rather right, than wrong.

Post reply on HN