Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

The four American soldiers who died in Lithuania will return to Dover AFB today.

Trump won't be there. He's got golf to play & Saudi ass to kiss.

[lineygoblue]

You know, I don't remember The Chairman making very many visits to Dover during his occupancy.

And he's from Delaware.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I think you're downplaying the possibility that Trump intends to keep the tariffs in place and isn't particularly interested in deals with most of the countries of the world. What is he hoping to gain from Lesotho and Cambodia?

And we do have one reaction. China has already retaliated by increasing tariffs on all US goods by 34%

Perhaps and I'll acknowledge that. In the short term (the last 72h) the signs that the Trump tariffs are not good for both the US and the global economy are there. It seems that Trump's goal is to tear down the current world order for free trade and build back an order that more strongly benefits the US. Misguided? There are plenty of economists that think that it is. History tells us that trade wars, the kind being ignited by Trump's tariffs, never turn out to be a good thing and yes, China has answered the bell - the fight is on. While I may be "downplaying" Trump's intent to keep his tariffs in place, there are also indications that some countries want to deal rather than impose tariffs in response. These countries realize that additional tariffs may do more damage to their economies than they serve a useful purpose. I want to see how this plays out and that is because several fundamental arguments for tariffs, driving onshore production of critical materials for national security purposes being one of them, reducing trade imbalances and indirectly reducing the federal deficit (see the video Crash linked) another.

[Dr. Strangelove]

You know, I don't remember The Chairman making very many visits to Dover during his occupancy.

And he's from Delaware.

Don't know how to defend Trump?

Bring up Biden instead. Act like he's still relevant.

Biden attends dignified transfer of US service members killed in drone attack - ABC News

[Dr. Strangelove]

Perhaps and I'll acknowledge that. In the short term (the last 72h) the signs that the Trump tariffs are not good for both the US and the global economy are there. It seems that Trump's goal is to tear down the current world order for free trade and build back an order that more strongly benefits the US. Misguided? There are plenty of economists that think that it is. History tells us that trade wars, the kind being ignited by Trump's tariffs, never turn out to be a good thing and yes, China has answered the bell - the fight is on. While I may be "downplaying" Trump's intent to keep his tariffs in place, there are also indications that some countries want to deal rather than impose tariffs in response. These countries realize that additional tariffs may do more damage to their economies than they serve a useful purpose. I want to see how this plays out and that is because several fundamental arguments for tariffs, driving onshore production of critical materials for national security purposes being one of them, reducing trade imbalances and indirectly reducing the federal deficit (see the video Crash linked) another.

I've said in the past that I'm okay with tariffs to protect critical industries like semiconductors or chips. You pay an economic price for doing that but some products have a legitimate national security importance. And countries occasionally cheat (I'm sure we have as well).

If you tell me our national security is under threat unless we manufacture ALL our underwear and jeans inside the United States then I find that ridiculous.

It's also very difficult to maintain credibility when you tell people for weeks that the tariffs will be based on a concept of reciprocity and it turns out you used a grade school-level formula based on trade imbalance instead.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I posted a few days ago comments to the Dallas Fed from Oil & Gas drillers. The industry is starting to get a bit nervous. There's chatter that the old break-even price of around $50/barrel no longer holds true after the tariffs because steel and piping both are significantly more expensive. It may be closer to $60 or even $70/barrel now.

Trump is pressuring them to "drill baby drill", there's a possibility a global recession is in the near future, and OPEC just opened the spigots.

This is from a few weeks ago.

American Oil Is Underhedged and Heavily Exposed | OilPrice.com

[froot loops]

I misstated that China makes most of the top level chips but the point as you make it above and that I made in my post still stands. The Trump Tariffs can be viewed as added benefits to CHIPS. Trump has decided to use his executive powers to impose these tariffs immediately rather than wait for Congress to beef up the CHIPS program through legislation. Makes sense to me in the kind of time sensitive circumstance Trump is working with. I think most economists weighing in on this would agree that the benefit of Trump's tariffs derive in the long game - potentially extending beyond Trump's current 4y term.

Something that bothers me in responsible debate is when one side points to an error that has no impact on the validity or fallacy of an argument presented by the other side to incorrectly render it as faulty. What you did there is just that ....... its the same weak sort of debate tactic that attacks the source not the argument itself.

Which leads to this: you post an X comment that alleges Trump spokesman have said, "this isn't a negotiation (negotiating tactic)." Despite that kind of feint, which I believe it is, I believe the Trump tariffs are intended to make use of their coercive impact. Before we jump to conclusions about this don't you think it would be smart to simply see how the leaders of foreign countries react over the next several weeks? I believe the analysis that "Trump has about two months" to obtain concessions and remove tariffs before permanent damage is made from them on global exchange markets is probably accurate.

What concessions do you think big brain Trump is trying to get from Madagascar with his 47 percent tariff on their goods?

[Dr. Strangelove]

What concessions do you think big brain Trump is trying to get from Madagascar with his 47 percent tariff?

Hey a fun fact I ran into yesterday. Around 70% of the world's supply of vanilla comes from Madagascar.

[froot loops]

Yeah and I believe Mexico is second.

[Dr. Strangelove]

[Dr. Strangelove]

Fed Chair Powell says tariffs are likely to cause inflation and slow growth. Right after Trump posted a demand for him to cut rates immediately because inflation was no longer a problem.

[lineygoblue]

Don't know how to defend Trump?

Bring up Biden instead. Act like he's still relevant.

Biden attends dignified transfer of US service members killed in drone attack - ABC News

You really don't read, do you?

[Dr. Strangelove]

A good article from Nate Silver who did a deep dive into what stocks were hit hardest yesterday (and today) and what that tells us about the economy.

Wall Street thinks Trump's tariffs will eat Main Street alive

[Dr. Strangelove]

This is the type of news that get normie apolitical folks to start paying attention

Nintendo Delays Switch 2 Pre-Order Date in the U.S. to Assess Impact of Trump's Tariffs - IGN

[Jeff Buchanan]

https://www.csis.org/analysis/liberation-day-tariffs-explained

This is a fairly balanced explanation of Trump's Economic policies and "Liberation Day" tariffs. The libs, and as DSL has pointed out, Regan Rs, are highly critical of the tariffs and primarily offer headline worthy immediate downsides for the US and Global economies. IMO, this view is short-sided and ignores, admittedly, a minority take, that re-shoring manufacturing (and services - now an enlarging portion of US GDP) has the potential for immense benefits.

The article at the link argues that US producers have for decades been pummeled by trade disadvantages and technical barriers due to the failure of the WTO to actually enforce provisions of their charter, i.e., disciplining industrial subsidies, forced technology transfer, and intellectual property theft, especially in the case of China. "Liberation Day" is ...... "at the center of the Trump administration’s trade doctrine. Therein lies a conviction that the U.S. trade deficit with each partner is not just a data point, but a ledger of national failure. It is a scarlet letter testifying to decades of asymmetric trade agreements, in which the United States bartered away its industrial birthright for mere corporate margins and cheaper imports" (edited for clarity).

The article linked above also provides a reasonable explanation of both the potential failure and likelihood of success of tariffs as a revenue generating mechanism to offset the tax cuts Trump wants to implement and to reduce an unsustainable federal deficit. Crash's link to the Brit commentator's video does this similarly. Both worthy of examination in the context of what we are debating here.