731–740 of 1001 posts
Announce a controversial decision. See if it sticks. If not, claim it was a joke and you never meant that. Drama, manipulation, and a US government tactic, all in one.
10% is still a lot. Counter tariffs will still happen.
10% only applies to countries that have not retaliated. I assume (dangerous in these times) that any retaliation will cause reinstatement of the previous rates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is pure manipulation. It was engineered to just that from the start. Since it's America, no investigation will be done to look into who profited here - possibly billions off regular people who had margin calls. 3rd world country.
> billions off regular people who had margin calls Thanks, Robinhood!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuinely wondering why so many people are still giving the Trump administration this much benefit of the doubt that their moves are strategically sound? We're really still doing the whole "3D chess" thing with this guy after he has shown over and over again that he mostly just acts on impulse and the primary qualification for his advisors is loyalty over any type of intelligence or expertise?
A lot of this stuff is on a YouTube education level, not even a degree. I would be shocked if the US does not have a bunch of economic advisors who tell them what problems there are and what should be done. They've probably mapped out all the next steps. Most US presidents are Harvard-level smart, but the White House has been around long enough to find a way to deliver reports to the simpler ones. There's a lot of ob…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't pass muster. If they had much interest in balancing the books, they wouldn't be ripping huge holes in revenue collection.
That's fair but I suggest that they are actually deficit hawks for the long term . In the short term, they've got financing troubles hence they care about the yield.
A flashing negative warning sign of this would be issue of new kinds of Treasury securities with new complex rules.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>From the beginning, I’ve believed the executive branch's real goal was to push down the yield on the 10-year Treasury You're making it seem that there's a plan ... but what if this is just regular incompetence coupled with capricious behavior from a chaos agent? I'm watching various officials give interviews and all of them are non-committal as it pertains to expectations. Why? Because none of them actually know!!!…
I'd like to expand out why I hold this belief. The political cohort behind the president is roughly in two halves. The first half are the original MAGA crowd (looking out for the working class, pro-liberty, anti-woke, etc.). The second half are the billionaire crowd. The second group are active on pod casts, on Twitter/X, and are partly represented in government (directly or as advisors). An easy way to follow up on…
When your rational explanation involves people shooting themselves in the head to cure a headache, something's off. There's nothing to explain here besides a weak and incompetent leader with a deep need for attention, surrounded by lots of enablers.
Is anyone sure this is not stock manipulation? Honest question.
A finance whiz could tell you that it wasn't the biggest day in the market's history, but maybe a cause for extra celebration among a more select few.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>From the beginning, I’ve believed the executive branch's real goal was to push down the yield on the 10-year Treasury You're making it seem that there's a plan ... but what if this is just regular incompetence coupled with capricious behavior from a chaos agent? I'm watching various officials give interviews and all of them are non-committal as it pertains to expectations. Why? Because none of them actually know!!!…
I'd like to expand out why I hold this belief. The political cohort behind the president is roughly in two halves. The first half are the original MAGA crowd (looking out for the working class, pro-liberty, anti-woke, etc.). The second half are the billionaire crowd. The second group are active on pod casts, on Twitter/X, and are partly represented in government (directly or as advisors). An easy way to follow up on…
Also, Trump has been obsessed with the idea of tariffs since the 1980s.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't pass muster. If they had much interest in balancing the books, they wouldn't be ripping huge holes in revenue collection.
These "here's the actual reason they're doing this!" things rarely hold up under any amount of scrutiny. Then again, they're tempting because the things they're doing are also really bad ways to accomplish Trump's stated goals.