Trump's Tariffs and Possible Trade War

[selmaborntidefan]

I don't think Trump himself even believes his tariff myths any more, but he's going to find it impossible to gaslight the entire country as the COL rises. I think the GOP is heading for a midterm bloodbath, thus the desperation to pass the "big, beautiful bill"...

I don't think he "believes" anything at all.

I think he feels like the most powerful man on earth and in a sense he is. This is about "see, I'm in control, and you can't do anything about it! And you won't anyway without 67 Democratic senators, which is never going to happen!"

I've had family members like this that quite frankly I wanted to murder. In control of XYZ, making colossally stupid decisions, and sneering at the fact nobody could do anything to prevent it without going to jail as an outcome. Quite frankly, my ex-wife was exactly like this.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Here's another thing: once the higher price "because tariffs" locks in, they ain't coming back down. Or when they do, it won't be anything close to what it started. It's like when they got us all used to paying $3.32/gallon in 2008 - when it fell to $1.99, we psychologically thought we'd won the lottery, but we were paying a helluva lot more than 2 years earlier, too.

 

[UAH]

I don't think he "believes" anything at all.

I think he feels like the most powerful man on earth and in a sense he is. This is about "see, I'm in control, and you can't do anything about it! And you won't anyway without 67 Democratic senators, which is never going to happen!"

I've had family members like this that quite frankly I wanted to murder. In control of XYZ, making colossally stupid decisions, and sneering at the fact nobody could do anything to prevent it without going to jail as an outcome. Quite frankly, my ex-wife was exactly like this.

I have become somewhat of a China watcher and have come to believe that any thought of protecting the Philippines or Taiwan would end in absolute disaster for the US Military. That may well include Iran also to a much lesser degree. Obviously a lot to evaluate on this topic.

 

[2003TIDE]

Here's another thing: once the higher price "because tariffs" locks in, they ain't coming back down. Or when they do, it won't be anything close to what it started. It's like when they got us all used to paying $3.32/gallon in 2008 - when it fell to $1.99, we psychologically thought we'd won the lottery, but we were paying a helluva lot more than 2 years earlier, too.

Well you don't even have to go back that far. What was it 2 years after the covid supply chain increases they showed that half of "inflation" was due to increased corporate profits?

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I don't think he "believes" anything at all.

I think he feels like the most powerful man on earth and in a sense he is. This is about "see, I'm in control, and you can't do anything about it! And you won't anyway without 67 Democratic senators, which is never going to happen!"

I've had family members like this that quite frankly I wanted to murder. In control of XYZ, making colossally stupid decisions, and sneering at the fact nobody could do anything to prevent it without going to jail as an outcome. Quite frankly, my ex-wife was exactly like this.

I agree on his total lack of convictions, other than self-aggrandizement. However, after being pumped up to emperor status by Stephen Miller, I think he's now aware, dimly, that there are real judicial limitations on his powers. Next year will be interesting, as his popularity sinks. I look for Republicans in swing districts to abandon him like rats from a sinking ship, as it becomes obvious that he and his policies have become a sea anchor, dragging on re-election chances. He will get to experience lame duckhood...

 

[JDCrimson]

I hope so...

I agree on his total lack of convictions, other than self-aggrandizement. However, after being pumped up to emperor status by Stephen Miller, I think he's now aware, dimly, that there are real judicial limitations on his powers. Next year will be interesting, as his popularity sinks. I look for Republicans in swing districts to abandon him like rats from a sinking ship, as it becomes obvious that he and his policies have become a sea anchor, dragging on re-election chances. He will get to experience lame duckhood...

 

[TIDE-HSV]

This is tangential to the trade issue, but it involves China and the China market. Lately, trying to get away from politics, I've watched a lot of YouTube and a lot of it on China. It really is a fascinating place with variety I had never dreamed of. Anyone interested should check out "Little Chinese Almost Everywhere." She does great documentaries. Back to topic, Google's algorithms fastened onto that and started bombarding me with China videos, some on population. The theme seems to be that they've been lying through their teeth for years. Last night, I finally settled down to one long one by a researcher. To say he'd covered all of the bases would be an understatement. He even drilled down to things like salt and other imported foodstuff consumption. By the end, I had to concede a lot of credibility to his stats. His conclusion? China's true population, around 400-450 million, not 1.4 billion. The shrinkage, other than the Covid losses, was almost totally owing to misguided social practices enforced by the central government. Now the other videos had reached similar conclusions, but none were as exhaustive as his. I harked back to the travelogues by the young Chinese girl and the endless stretches of abandoned Chinese villages. The more I've thought about the possibility that China is far smaller than claimed, and with a population skewed male and old, the more things are explained and the murkier their future appears...

 

[JDCrimson]

If true, slightly larger than the US but far worse off demographically than us. Their manufacturing output will suffer simply because they wont have the people able to work. They already have a deflation problem because aging societies dont consume as much.

This is tangential to the trade issue, but it involves China and the China market. Lately, trying to get away from politics, I've watched a lot of YouTube and a lot of it on China. It really is a fascinating place with variety I had never dreamed of. Anyone interested should check out "Little Chinese Almost Everywhere." She does great documentaries. Back to topic, Google's algorithms fastened onto that and started bombarding me with China videos, some on population. The theme seems to be that they've been lying through their teeth for years. Last night, I finally settled down to one long one by a researcher. To say he'd covered all of the bases would be an understatement. He even drilled down to things like salt and other imported foodstuff consumption. By the end, I had to concede a lot of credibility to his stats. His conclusion? China's true population, around 400-450 million, not 1.4 billion. The shrinkage, other than the Covid losses, was almost totally owing to misguided social practices enforced by the central government. Now the other videos had reached similar conclusions, but none were as exhaustive as his. I harked back to the travelogues by the young Chinese girl and the endless stretches of abandoned Chinese villages. The more I've thought about the possibility that China is far smaller than claimed, and with a population skewed male and old, the more things are explained and the murkier their future appears...

 

[TIDE-HSV]

If true, slightly larger than the US but far worse off demographically than us. Their manufacturing output will suffer simply because they wont have the people able to work. They already have a deflation problem because aging societies dont consume as much.

Just an afterthought, to illustrate how deep this guy dug - China claims it only lost 83,000 to Covid, and the same time they were spending billions on new funeral homes, built everywhere...

 

[bamacpa]

I agree on his total lack of convictions, other than self-aggrandizement. However, after being pumped up to emperor status by Stephen Miller, I think he's now aware, dimly, that there are real judicial limitations on his powers. Next year will be interesting, as his popularity sinks. I look for Republicans in swing districts to abandon him like rats from a sinking ship, as it becomes obvious that he and his policies have become a sea anchor, dragging on re-election chances. He will get to experience lame duckhood...

I'm afraid he and his followers have zero plans to leave DC ever.

 

[UAH]

I don't think he "believes" anything at all.

I think he feels like the most powerful man on earth and in a sense he is. This is about "see, I'm in control, and you can't do anything about it! And you won't anyway without 67 Democratic senators, which is never going to happen!"

I've had family members like this that quite frankly I wanted to murder. In control of XYZ, making colossally stupid decisions, and sneering at the fact nobody could do anything to prevent it without going to jail as an outcome. Quite frankly, my ex-wife was exactly like this.

Him believing that he is the most powerful man on earth is my greatest concern. From the standpoint of destroying the world with nuclear weapons he probably is. From the standpoint of a conventional war the US has some very real limitations that could create horrendous problems for the us in Iran or in the South China Sea and elsewhere. Then obviously from a financial and economic standpoint the US is highly vulnerable. His foolishness here is already in plain view of the world.

 

[UAH]

This is tangential to the trade issue, but it involves China and the China market. Lately, trying to get away from politics, I've watched a lot of YouTube and a lot of it on China. It really is a fascinating place with variety I had never dreamed of. Anyone interested should check out "Little Chinese Almost Everywhere." She does great documentaries. Back to topic, Google's algorithms fastened onto that and started bombarding me with China videos, some on population. The theme seems to be that they've been lying through their teeth for years. Last night, I finally settled down to one long one by a researcher. To say he'd covered all of the bases would be an understatement. He even drilled down to things like salt and other imported foodstuff consumption. By the end, I had to concede a lot of credibility to his stats. His conclusion? China's true population, around 400-450 million, not 1.4 billion. The shrinkage, other than the Covid losses, was almost totally owing to misguided social practices enforced by the central government. Now the other videos had reached similar conclusions, but none were as exhaustive as his. I harked back to the travelogues by the young Chinese girl and the endless stretches of abandoned Chinese villages. The more I've thought about the possibility that China is far smaller than claimed, and with a population skewed male and old, the more things are explained and the murkier their future appears...

Just a comment without watching the videos. I visited Beijing on business prior to Covid , spending around 10 days there over the Chinese New Years period. It is difficult to imagine the throngs of young adults touring Gugong (The Forbidden City) then passing through the portal onto Tiananmen Square . It was the same at all of the temples in the area. My main impressions of the young married couples I saw was the sense of happiness they exhibited. The other impression was of the Chinese Military presence around Mao's tomb, The National Congress Building and the other government buildings in the area. I came away believing that the US could not be successful in any ground engagement against China. Not much different than 1951 in Korea.

Not to be argumentative because I am no expert but we have been hearing about the Chinese population bomb and the beginning of a deflationary recession there for some time now. Over the same period that we have become much more dependent of Chinese manufacturing.

It just goes against some of the more qualitative information I have been watching from China and the fact that the US is heading toward a gigantic debt bomb that will ultimately push economic and military power eastward.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Not to be argumentative because I am no expert but we have been hearing about the Chinese population bomb and the beginning of a deflationary recession there for some time now. Over the same period that we have become much more dependent of Chinese manufacturing.

I'm so old, I remember when by the year 2000, Japan was going to own the US, too. That's not to say the situations are the same or anything, but I also know the doomsday scenarios for us have been projected many times.

Eventually - maybe now - one of them will happen.
And it is most likely to happen (based on world history) when debt blows us up (Spain, Britain, France).

 

[UAH]

I'm so old, I remember when by the year 2000, Japan was going to own the US, too. That's not to say the situations are the same or anything, but I also know the doomsday scenarios for us have been projected many times.

Eventually - maybe now - one of them will happen.
And it is most likely to happen (based on world history) when debt blows us up (Spain, Britain, France).

I was commenting this morning that we have never faced a time of having an administration so bent on antagonizing the entire world with tariffs and other threats such as annexing Canada and Greenland. This coming at a time of our debt being downgraded while we increase deficit spending. The only larger budget item than our trillion dollar defense budget is our debt service. From my perspective it would difficult to imagine how a President could do more harm to the future economic well being of the US than the current administration.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I'm so old, I remember when by the year 2000, Japan was going to own the US, too. That's not to say the situations are the same or anything, but I also know the doomsday scenarios for us have been projected many times.

Eventually - maybe now - one of them will happen.
And it is most likely to happen (based on world history) when debt blows us up (Spain, Britain, France).

If these researchers are right, China doesn't really possess the muscle to overtake us, no matter how clever they are. I agree about the debt. At least some Republican senators are making remarks now which border on sanity...

 

[UAH]

If these researchers are right, China doesn't really possess the muscle to overtake us, no matter how clever they are. I agree about the debt. At least some Republican senators are making remarks now which border on sanity...

If you look at the climb of Chinese Universities in world ranking, their unassailably low cost position in electric cars, buses and trucks, their leadership position in rare earth metals, domination of the global ship building industry, the emerging threat they represent to Boeing and AirBus for the commerical aircraft business.. We hear continuously of Apple resourcing their phones out of China but they cannot build a single phone without the rare earth magnets that China provides.

It hasn't been totally confirmed but it appears the the Chinese built aircraft and weapons systems flown by Pakistan dominated India's European built Rafale fighters in the recent flare up between the two countries.

There is much to discuss but I do believe that the balance of power in the world is shifting away from the US led world order.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

If you look at the climb of Chinese Universities in world ranking, their unassailably low cost position in electric cars, buses and trucks, their leadership position in rare earth metals, domination of the global ship building industry, the emerging threat they represent to Boeing and AirBus for the commerical aircraft business.. We hear continuously of Apple resourcing their phones out of China but they cannot build a single phone without the rare earth magnets that China provides.

It hasn't been totally confirmed but it appears the the Chinese built aircraft and weapons systems flown by Pakistan dominated India's European built Rafale fighters in the recent flare up between the two countries.

There is much to discuss but I do believe that the balance of power in the world is shifting away from the US led world order.

I agree with most, particularly the shift, which is being accelerated by having what we have in the White House. China has been very clever at leveraging what they have. In fact, they've been so effective that they've spurred the exploration and discovery of rare earths around the world, including in Australia and right here in the US. IOW, that's only a short-term advantage. I'm also not going to draw broad conclusions from proxy fighter battles. I agree there will have to be a shift, particularly with a president who views the entire world as a real estate deal. I'm just not convinced the eventual leader will be China...

 

[Huckleberry]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5320263-trump-tariff-trades-markets-rise/

What is the ‘TACO trade’ on Wall Street?

There’s a new trade on Wall Street: the TACO trade, standing for “Trump Always Chickens Out.”

The term was coined by Robert Armstrong, a writer for the Financial Times, and is intended to capture how markets have fallen on Trump’s vow to impose steep tariffs on imports to the United States and then jump back up when Trump announces pauses on those tariffs.

 

[jthomas666]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5320263-trump-tariff-trades-markets-rise/

What is the ‘TACO trade’ on Wall Street?

There’s a new trade on Wall Street: the TACO trade, standing for “Trump Always Chickens Out.”

The term was coined by Robert Armstrong, a writer for the Financial Times, and is intended to capture how markets have fallen on Trump’s vow to impose steep tariffs on imports to the United States and then jump back up when Trump announces pauses on those tariffs.

Making chicken salad out of chicken ...lips.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5320263-trump-tariff-trades-markets-rise/

What is the ‘TACO trade’ on Wall Street?

There’s a new trade on Wall Street: the TACO trade, standing for “Trump Always Chickens Out.”

The term was coined by Robert Armstrong, a writer for the Financial Times, and is intended to capture how markets have fallen on Trump’s vow to impose steep tariffs on imports to the United States and then jump back up when Trump announces pauses on those tariffs.

Trump is the bully at the bar with the .357 he keeps waving around but will never pull the trigger.

Eventually - the whole room figures out he isn't going to pull the trigger and destroys him.