I think Trump is concerned. Just not the way Rattner and business people and investors are hoping he'll be concerned.
Why is this article illustrated with an image of Trump atop a weather vane, with his hands outstretched to feel the wind blow, and moving from side to side? It doesn't reflect what Trump is doing. Is it a picture of the business people's hope?
I think Trump has chosen his solution to a problem — or set of problems — and he's locked in. If he could be shaken out of his resolve by cries of "havoc," virtually everything he's started he would have stopped.
Side trip: What does it mean to "cry havoc"? It doesn't mean to cry out "This is havoc!" It means: "Let's wreak havoc!"
పోస్ట్లు
91 కామెంట్లు:
A tweet by Bill Ackman and an article by Victor David Hanson do a better job of explaining this than Rattner does.
So many drama queens addicted to the status quo.
We’re only two days into it so let’s see how it shakes out - two days is just not enough time to assess.
Cry Haggis, Let slip teh Dau of Bore!
Rattner who paid 10 million dollar insurance settlement, when he was auto czar
" "'Few of Us Ever Imagined He Would Go This Far....'"
Oh, Yes ! The commentary on Trump has been so restrained, so muted and reasonable, up 'till now. An almost total absence of shrill hyperbole on 'what might happen', why since 2015, really when you thinkaboudit.
One can understand the shock, now. At least until one compares it to discussions on tariffs from a few years ago, from Progressive Democrats.
Trump has to present himself as really liking tariffs if he's going to use them as a bargaining chip. So that's what he's doing. Long term over short term advantage. The media are short term ratings only.
CNN reporter Caitlin Collins interviewed the treasury secretary very recently. He made the point that because the United States is in trade deficit, we have much more power to sustain a tariff contest. The secretary mentioned that Walmart has the power to force China to eat the tariff costs. I think the challenge will be to ramp up manufacturing and increase the number of well-paying jobs in the United States in order to be a political and economic counter to the potential inflation of imported goods.
follow through on his promises, thats crazy, now the other guy, forgot what his promises were,
Trump is doing what I expected him to do when I voted for him, except with fewer arrests.
The company who I have an investment account with sent out an email on tariffs and the market. It is the most clear eyed assessment I've seen. Some excerpts:
"The new trade rules will likely cause a supply shock, much like COVID did five years ago. It will probably be smaller in magnitude than during COVID but possibly longer in duration. As in the early phases of the pandemic, timing the movements of equity markets will prove difficult and is likely to end up being counterproductive for most who attempt it...."Our view is that the odds of a recession in the U.S. and other countries have materially increased. However, most economists are still saying there is less than a 50% chance of a U.S. recession in the next year, so such a development is not a foregone conclusion by any means. Many other countries are in more precarious positions and will likely see slowdowns.
"The U.S. debt level is at about 120% of GDP, and about a quarter of that debt is foreign owned. This is concerning. If you run a trade deficit, other countries use their surplus and invest it in your assets, most commonly (in this case) through the purchase of Treasuries. Eventually, it’s obviously not good to have too much debt..."
"While other countries may look to create their own trade deals, the multi-decade period of increasing globalization is probably over."
So not everyone is losing their minds over this. I'm thinking back to 2008. Did it suck? Yes. Did I recognize that the market needed to correct because it was built on a house of lies? Also yes. Same thing here.
A friend pointed out that when Trump started talking about tariffs the numbers were high and then the numbers went down, signaling a negotiation approach. Whereas in the past they started with low numbers and went up as time went on. Much more difficult to negotiate.
If you consider the Trump tariff rates to be an opening salvo intended to spur sequential negotiations, rather than permanent, it makes a certain amount of sense to simply increase the urgency of those negotiations from the standpoint of the other countries by linking the US tariff amount to the trade deficit percentage with each respective country.
The term havoc is noted.
But that's an interesting scene for a political climate when two (at least) legitimate attempts on assassinating Trump have taken place.
Dear lefties, Havoc and Dogs of War are not to be desired.
If Althousians want to hear excellent analysis of Trump’s policy I strongly urge you to watch Tucker Carlson’s interview of the Secretary of Treasury. Bessent is brilliant and he explains it quite clearly.
If you don’t want to spend one hour, listen to VDH for 6 minutes on the Daily Signal.
Vietnam and Argentina have already agreed to cut their tariffs to ZERO. I predict Japan will be next.
VDH makes the point that if tariffs are so terrible, then why do our allies have such high tariffs.
The globalists on the Street and Dems are just ganging up on Trump. The Dems tried to jail and kill him. He’s going to see this through.
In this case, I think havoc means anxiety, whether real or imagined.
Keep in mind that every leading Democrat is on the record saying exactly what Trump has said about these tariffs. They are needed to keep America competitive in the world markets and to encourage companies to make things in America using American workers.
“China takes total advantage of the United States. They steal our intellectual property using cyber theft. They keep our good companies out of China, and say the only way you’re going to be able to sell your American products in China … is if you come to China, make them there, and give us the techniques and intellectual property.” - Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer
China is very smart about how to use tariffs to keep the Chinese populace employed.
Barack Obama instituted tariffs against Chinese goods when he was President for similar reasons.
“We’re not going to stand by while our workers and our businesses are put at an unfair disadvantage. That’s why we put in place measures to deal with a flood of tire imports from China—because we’ve got to make sure that when the playing field is tilted against us, we respond.” - Democrat President Barack Obama
So when you hear everyone in the media today saying tariff's are bad, just remember that the media is a bunch of lying scumbags who always lie to advance the Democrat position today, even if that position is 100% the opposite of whatever it was yesterday.
Trump gets compared to Hitler, Mussolini, Andrew Jackson and so on. But how about Chinese Emperor Xuando? Cuando issued the Edict of Haijin that closed China off from the rest of the world in 1434 (probably the worst decision in human history).
Buy now.
Isn’t Trump himself a businessman? Also, the close connection noted between ‘business people’ and ‘investors’ seems to be telling - investors don’t make anything, but I suppose they are portrayed as ‘investing in that business’ whereas the reality is that ‘investors’ take money to make more money.
Shouldn’t the tariffs create more opportunity for business growth and investment? Maybe not if you are more invested (sic) in foreign entities.
We have a $37 trillion dollar debt thanks to the Uniparty. DOGE is working on spending. As Bessent stated, with the tariff money we can cut US taxes and pay down our debt.
Bessent also pointed out that when Paul Volcker raised interest rates to kill inflation, it was very painful. But RWR won a 49 state landslide re-election. The pain worked.
As the saying goes; "The more things change, the more they stay the same."
Give Elon the Jesus role and people, once again choose the thieves, fraudsters and charlatans, over the master craftsman Musk.
For a minute I had Pilate and Ceasar mixed up. Still. People haven't changed much over millennia.
If Fox News and Fox Business were really fair and balanced they’d have Bessent on for an hour on Sunday night. And Brett Baier would do the interview; not Sean Hannity.
Is Trump’s red tie in that NYT animation depicted as getting intermittent erections?
Businesses need to step up. I remember the last time there was a crisis companies like this did:
All of us here at Schooner Tuna sympathize with all of you hit so hard by these trying economic times. In order to help you, we are reducing the price of Schooner Tuna by 50 cents a can. When this crisis is over, we will go back to our regular prices. Until then, remember, we're all in this together. Schooner Tuna. The tuna with a heart.
The tariffs havoc is Y2K Bug redux. Real havoc is unpredictable.
One thing I hate about the MSM-DNC is their crazy over-the-top language. "Putin's going to conquer the world!!", "Trump is wrecking Havoc", "OMG, its a Trade War!!", "J6 was an insurrection that almost toppled the Government!!".
Althouse was discussing the sick body analogy, well Im sick of the hysterical talk of trade/tarriffs being a war or wreaking havoc. Raising the tax on imported goods a few points, isn't a "War". The tarriffs aren't "wreaking havoc" on the economy.
Notice, like always, we never get a reasoned discussion of the pros and cons of an issue from the MSM. Everything is either twisted into an attack on Trump/Rightwing/Republicans or its presented in an hysterical one-sided way, with good and smart on "The right side" and nasty dumb people on "The wrong side".
The X-burts keep telling us that trade deficits are good. Well, Trump wants to get rid of them, and once he does, we'll find out how "Good" they really were.
BTW, the Senate Republican clowns are already making noises about cutting back on the POTUS over tarriffs. As usual, they want to reach accross the aisle and stab their voters in the back.
Dave Begley said...
We have a $37 trillion dollar debt thanks to the Uniparty. DOGE is working on spending. As Bessent stated, with the tariff money we can cut US taxes and pay down our debt.
Bessent also pointed out that when Paul Volcker raised interest rates to kill inflation, it was very painful. But RWR won a 49 state landslide re-election. The pain worked.
4/5/25, 8:38 AM
1. The key driver of the growth of the national debt is entitlement spending. If you are not discussion how to reform the financing of entitlements you are not serious about tackling the debt. Trump has declared that entitlement financing reform is off the table.
2. Are the tariffs in place to reindustrialze America or pay down the debt?You can only pick one.
I've been trying to figure out just where trump thinks the US is going under his program. All i've got so far is lower or no taxes at the top.
I can't really see global supply chains can be cut willy nilly without hamstringing our ability to make things. Is there going to be a central planning board fine tuning the tariffs on intermediate goods to keep thing going during the "transition"?
It's all a big gamble on some as yet named savant's idea that tariff revenue will balance the budget. Like Arthur Laffer all over again: as those of us who actually there in the mid 80s know, it was defense spending in silicon valley that made the economy go.
As usual, though, i agree with rusty: buy, though i'm waiting a few weeks until a few more shoes drop (and betting on a virtual coup to correct this stupidity.)
RCOCEAN II:
“ Notice, like always, we never get a reasoned discussion of the pros and cons of an issue from the MSM. Everything is either twisted into an attack . . . . .”
In the same post:
“ BTW, the Senate Republican clowns are already making noises about cutting back on the POTUS over tarriffs. As usual, they want to reach accross the aisle and stab their voters in the back.”
Pot, kettle, black
Did it ever occur to you that the Senators might be concerned an about the potential for the tariffs causing a depression.
Also, shouldn’t we have a serious conversation about the appropriateness of the President enacting a significant reordering of the economy on a whim with zero Congressional input?
We had a revolution over issues like this.
“Taxation without representation”
There is too much gratification going on out there. There's a new tariff in town. (paraphrasing Hollings)
Trump is going to win the Cold War with China like Reagan won the Cold War with the USSR.
Trump will break the Chinese economy and the Commies will be deposed.
Smoot Hawley was passed AFTER Wall Street crashed and caused a depression.
Why should we listen to the fuckups on the Street who gave us MBS’s and CDO’s that crashed the economy in ‘07?
Trump's best argument here is just success. The only way to be right is to win. I think he knows that and is all in, betting on that.
Smoot-Hawley did not cause the Depression, it did help turn a recession into a depression.
"1. The key driver of the growth of the national debt is entitlement spending. If you are not discussion how to reform the financing of entitlements you are not serious about tackling the debt. Trump has declared that entitlement financing reform is off the table."
You cannot address entitlement spending unless you take care of water, fraud and abuse in general spending first. If I were running into financial issues, I wouldn't sell my car first, I'd stop eating out, buy cheaper meat. It's the same principle. The American people are not going to be ok with restructuring Social Security unless the obvious stuff is done first.
Ann Althouse said...
Trump's best argument here is just success. The only way to be right is to win. I think he knows that and is all in, betting on that.
4/5/25, 9:13 AM
———————————
There are two problems with this!
1. One should not trust a betting man who bankrupted casinos.
2. Trump’s motivation for this is based on complete and total ignorance. BMW America buying components from BMW Germany does not constitute an American subsidy of Germany.
Trade imbalances are not good, nor bad, especially when it is denominated in dollars.
Jim Cramer yesterday suggested two things. First, that Trump needs to do something this weekend to mitigate the stock market chaos he has created, perhaps by announcing that some tariffs will be postponed due to ongoing negotiations, or stocks will very likely drop more on Monday. Second, that everyone wait until Monday to buy any stocks, because if Trump does nothing this weekend their prices may be a whole lot lower by close of day Monday.
Trump went golfing this weekend, according to reports.
Is this still just him being an entertainer? Just clowning around, putting on a good show? Think he'll start promoting bleach as a cure-all again? That was hilarious, right? Or posting "ONLY THE WEAK WILL FAIL"? He doesn't mean that, does he? He's a completely normal, well-balanced individual who can be trusted with the enormous power that he has, and anyone who says differently is just being mean to him. Everyone would understand if they would all just read donkeyfucker1776148869's blog. It's geometric logic.
Birches said...
"1. The key driver of the growth of the national debt is entitlement spending. If you are not discussion how to reform the financing of entitlements you are not serious about tackling the debt. Trump has declared that entitlement financing reform is off the table."
You cannot address entitlement spending unless you take care of water, fraud and abuse in general spending first. If I were running into financial issues, I wouldn't sell my car first, I'd stop eating out, buy cheaper meat. It's the same principle. The American people are not going to be ok with restructuring Social Security unless the obvious stuff is done first.
4/5/25, 9:19 AM
——————————-
Is waste, fraud, and abuse a problem? Yes, and thank God for DOGE, though I believe if its only accomplishment is to root out the use of public funds to subsidize left wing groups it will be a job well done; but waste, fraud, and abuse is not THE problem.
Take Social Security, for example. A system that was designed to have 7 payers for every recipient with an average life span of around 62 years old is now contending with 3 payers for every recipient and an average life span of 76 years old.
It is a math problem.
Of course it is. If my financial problems are such that I will need to sell my house, I will sell it. But I won't do that until I do the little stuff first. The American people won't stand for the status quo for everyone else but them.
Once the excess is cut, entitlements will be on the table. But that's not a job for Donald Trump. He can say that fairly easily since he'll be done in 28.
I concur with Dave Begley on listening to those who are working this, not the talking heads from other administrations and those so deeply invested in keeping things they way they've always been, such as Mr. Rattner.
Listen to Scott Bessent, in his own words. Tucker has an interview. Also, a handful of GREAT interviews on the All-In podcast (listen to them or better yet- watch them on YouTube).
>One with Scott Bessent.
>One with Howard Lutnick.
>The latest released podcast (yesterday) featuring Antonio Gracias who was asked by Elon Musk to join DOGE for a bit to oversee their work with social security. What he has uncovered is massive- not only fraud in dollars, but in elections. FYI- Mr. Gracias is a lifelong Democrat, a major Dem donor, who is there simply to follow the truth wherever it goes. And it does go wildly off into bad places.
The main point is that there is a plan in place. This is only the first part of it. And it's not a 2 day plan, so people need to quit freaking out. It took us years to mess this thing up. Let's give these guys a few weeks at least. Really, I'm thinking a year from now people will be singing very different songs. But...you can save this post and shove it back in my face if I'm wrong.
It’s called Creative Destruction. Look it up.
Ultimately, tariffs penalize the consumer. They make goods more expensive. There are two types/purposes of tariffs: 1) raise revenue or 2) protect domestic producers. If the tariff is low and doesn't make the imported good more expensive than the domestic version, then it is merely a tax that raises government revenue at the expense of the consumer. If the tariff makes the imported good higher than that of the domestic version, then it protects the domestic consumer. It does not raise any revenue unless domestic supply cannot meet demand.
The use of reciprocal tariffs is used to even the playing field or as a negotiating position. Ultimately, it raises the cost of goods in both countries. The problem with the Trump specifics is that, as Ackman notes, they are not reciprocal. As a matter of fact, there are now tariffs on goods coming from countries that have no tariffs on American imports. The tariffs were based on trade imbalances, not on tariff imbalances, which is ridiculously stupid. If you dig deep you see some oddball countries on the list, and when you get the actual formula of how they came up with the number it is equally puzzling.
I wonder who the architect of the numbers is, because there is something really wrong with the specifics. Perhaps it will get worked out in negotiations, but why start from a position of stupidity?
Many Boulder Leftists are curled in a ball of rage and sadness- refusing to do any business locally - hurting other liberals in the process. Some are so rage filled - they are harassing local Tesla owners and their children. Again - not even bothering to know that perhaps these are democrats.
The left is a sewer.
I heard somewhere that there are $7 trillion in bonds that are coming up for renewal, and that this little stunt is saving trillions in finance costs for our national debt. Don't know, don't care. We were living on credit cards, we borrowed $4 trillion last year, it's getting to the point where paying the interest might become problematic. Something had to be done. I am giving Trump the benefit of the doubt.
There's no turning the MAGA-tanic around after it's already hit the iceberg.
Trump faces a simple political problem: tariffs will bring immediate economic pain, while the benefits—long-term economic restructuring—will take years. Trump bets voters will endure the hardship, but Americans aren’t known for patience and may vote them out instead.
The key question for republicans — will voters see enough economic gains—manufacturing restructuring, on-shoring, new plants—before the midterms?
As a reminder, Congress has the power to repeal all these tariffs at any time and reclaim the full authority over tariffs and trade granted to it by the Constitution. Every member of Congress who does not vote to do so is effectively choosing to support this significant tax on U.S. consumers.
@ WK 4/5/25, 8:46 AM
RIP Teri Garr
Capitulation Day is coming up. Monday or Tuesday there will be a truly horrendous loss. Maybe things will eventually work out, but a stock market crash is not an occasion to celebrate....The press takes the view that deporting a gang banger is some kind of constitutional crisis. You can imagine the fun they'll have with a stock market crash.....I don't know how this will work out, and neither do the experts. My one prediction--and there's a considerable body of evidence to support this opinion--is that things will work out in unexpected ways.
Maybe the key question is are we better off dealing with the inevitable crash, you know, the one that we were sailing into by running up a crazy debt, spending trillions on untried economic theories and technologies, trillions that have not paid dividends, BTW, and hundreds of billions on wars on the other side of the planet, while the interest on our debt becomes our largest expense.
Is that sustainable? Does the good politician simply work to put off that day, but change nothing, because the slightest rock to the boat would brink the inevitable crash?
I think that, by and large, Trump would be fine with tariff-free trade, and this is him using our better leverage to get it. Most countries have trade surplusses with the US and really need access to our markets, while most US-made goods are sold within the country, in part because of existing foreign tariffs, so while these new tariffs will hurt us, they will hurt other countries much more.
Of course, Trump can't come out and say that, forr maximum leverage he must act like he is resolute onthe issue. I would note that at least one country, Vietnam, has signaled a willingness to remove all tariffs on US goods, so it appears to be working.
Jaq nails the key question: do you want to deal with the debt in a controlled upheaval or an uncontrolled crash and burn. Trump is the first president with the balls to confront the unsustainable debt. Everyone talks about it. Trump acts.
"Take Social Security, for example. A system that was designed to have 7 payers for every recipient with an average life span of around 62 years old is now contending with 3 payers for every recipient and an average life span of 76 years old."
Yes. And I would like to thank you for your contribution. You need to work harder. I need a new boat.
Panicking the herd is how the Democrat Party motivates their voters.
Today is another Democrat Day of RAGE! with the nutters and cultists and destruction-pros on the corner -
I'm totally moved when I see a Musk is Oligarch Hitler sign.
Once again, regardless of whether Trump wins the trade war, he gets the Democratic Party to show the world their true colors: they don't give a shit about the working class or Main Street America. Ross Perot was right, but now the Giant Sucking Sound you hear is the Democratic Party circling the drain.
Althouse wrote: “Trump's best argument here is just success. The only way to be right is to win. I think he knows that and is all in, betting on that.”
Trump and his advisors have said, in almost this many words, ‘if there's a recession, so be it. We're shooting and we're playing the long game here. We're going to do a little short-term pain for a little long-term game.’
I buy that there's going to be short-term pain, and it's probably not going to be that short-term. If they're going where I think they're going, this is a once-in-a-generation shift in how we run the global economy. Everyone else needs to rebalance. And that's the one advantage the US has. It can cause the pain to go elsewhere.
And lots of things will break, and it's really difficult to execute this type of turn, but they do seem to be serious about this as the direction of travel. Nobody has said, hey, I've got a great idea. Why don't we take stuff that's been working reasonably well for the rest of the world and for us for the past 30 years, and let's just trash it all in a two-year period and rebuild the 19th century balance of power with us behind McKinley Tariffs?
If that's what's going on, it's a really, really big challenge.
Remember when many, maybe most, prominent Democrats have called for increased tariffs in the past. I do. That’s not to say Trump is right, but it suggests that naysayers don’t know how it will turn out. Nobody does. It’s all bullshit for now.
Ratner is a liberal mouthpiece and nothing more. Taking up the slack for Krugman he is…
When Tariffs don't work, will the maga people admit they were wrong and re-embrace conservatism?
I understand what it is that people want back out of the economy. There is a nostalgic view of the past, dad worked and mom stayed home and they had a nice life - why don't we have that anymore? But it's not because we've become poorer or that factory jobs were better than service industries.
I think the causes are not things that can be undone - Many people would not be satisfied with that kind of lifestyle due to the other amenities offered by modern life (internet, cable TV, smartphones are all expensive); women working has doubled the effective income of all households and forced women who don't want to work to work anyway in order to produce a household income sufficient to match the status of their neighbors; the technological nature of the world has made many kinds of work require a technical education that is out of reach for many people.
Tariffs will not do anything about any of that. This is all for nothing.
This is what I do so I can’t and don’t wade into the deep end of these online arguments but one observation I think is worth noting: compare Trump and his tariff talk with say the economically illiterate Democrats on the Senate finance committee. Every one of them will claim to two decimal places how much revenue such and such tax will raise. Such bluster is far down the list for Trump and his tariffs, almost like he doesn’t expect them be permanent or something..:
Jim Cramer yesterday suggested two things.
Do the opposite.
Dogs of war
War cry
Cry havoc
Well, GWB's commerce secretary had a slightly different take:
https://youtu.be/USnzfav1KyI?si=Ga6eCUpEhg9i8lcs
Economics is such an interesting 'science'. Reality is no one knows exactly what will happen, because what is happening isn't really Tariffs.
Trump negotiates from chaos. He creates fluid situations, and then watches the monkeys dance.
Like Ann says, he is all in on this. But is he really? The point is no one knows for sure. He can rescind some actions, or add more.
That is the point. Apparently many on the left prefer the old reliable way of fucking over American taxpayers and workers. The old safe, sane and reliable way of building a 30+ trillion dollar debt.
No one on the left, including this blog, have come up with ANYTHING that will change our economic situation.
Reading thru the current assortment of leftist blathering, especially on this blog is easy. Just assume that Trump is insulted, demeaned, and that his detractors are intellectually, and MORALLY superior to us MAGA rubes, rednecks etc.
Trump set out to roll that mythical rock up, and over the top. It will be a mess, until it either works or doesn't.
Doing business the old way is over, at least for Trump. And so many rice bowls are being broken that the left and the right can't howl loud enough.
"Trump is doing what I expected him to do when I voted for him, except with fewer arrests."
I agree, and would be happier with many many more arrests.
The tarriffs are a bargianing tool. It's unfortunate that we will have to put up with some short term economic pain for long term economic benefit.
Plus, the longer you put stuff like this off, the more painful the intital pain will be when you use the tariffs to correct the trade imbalances. Trump is hoping that these tariffs will cause other countries to change the way the way that they do business so that it's more in our favor. (And he's also hoping to bring some manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. After all, when AI guts all the office jobs, manual labor jobs will be very important.)
It's like going to the dentist.
I want to ask those who vigorously oppose everything Trump does: "Is it moral to leave our kids and grandkids with 38 Trillion in debt?"
When all is said and done, that is the sole issue.
When Tariffs don't work, will the maga people admit they were wrong and re-embrace conservatism?
And if they do work, will you admit the same?
I entered Juche into Grok. Who knew that Trump and his cultists were taking inspiration from Kim Il-Sung:
Juche is the official state ideology of North Korea, often translated as "self-reliance." It was developed by Kim Il-sung, the country's founder, and later expanded by his son, Kim Jong-il. At its core, Juche emphasizes independence in politics, economics, and military affairs, asserting that the Korean people are the masters of their own destiny. It blends Marxist-Leninist ideas with a strong nationalist bent, prioritizing the nation and its leader over external influences or traditional communist internationalism.
The ideology emerged in the mid-20th century, with Kim Il-sung first referencing it in a 1955 speech, though it was more fully articulated in the 1960s and 1970s. It’s rooted in the idea that "man is the master of everything and decides everything," placing human will—guided by a supreme leader—above material conditions. Over time, it evolved into a quasi-religious framework, with the Kim family at its center, demanding loyalty and framing North Korea as a uniquely sovereign entity amid a hostile world. Kim Jong-il’s 1982 work, *On the Juche Idea*, is considered its definitive text.
In practice, Juche has shaped North Korea’s policies—like its pursuit of nuclear weapons and rejection of foreign aid dependency—though critics argue it’s more a tool for regime survival and propaganda than a coherent economic or political system. Its flexibility lets the leadership adapt it to whatever challenges arise, from famine to sanctions. Some see it as a break from Marxism, others as a Korean twist on it. Either way, it’s inseparable from the cult of personality around the Kims. Anything else you want to dig into about it?
Jim at said...
When Tariffs don't work, will the maga people admit they were wrong and re-embrace conservatism?
And if they do work, will you admit the same?
4/5/25, 5:09 PM
——————————
How do you define success for the tariffs?
Working-man hero
Thank god that egg crisis is over.
"Thank god that egg crisis is over."
Heh!
Trump wants to bring jobs back to America. He remembers a time when high school dropouts could get a factory job and actually support a family.
Here in SF bay area there was a steel mill (maybe 2), a naval shipyard, a Ford and G.M. factory. All gone long ago.
Un-educated people started entry level fast food and learned how to show up on time, do what was required, and most unpleasantly, how income taxes affected your paycheck.
Most fathers in my neighborhood worked at those places. Moms stayed home, some had a job.
In northern California,100 year old lumber mills that supported entire small towns were shut down.
Same thing happened throughout the country when we started importing more, and exporting less.
Many people born after the factories shut down cannot
imagine low tech providing a middle class income, and are genuinely afraid that terrible things are on the horizon. Most provocateurs have only self interest in mind, and have no legitimate concern about day to day prices rising. It will not affect them.
There is not a single commenter on Althouse who has to worry about the price of food or gasoline. Many here use a cash back credit card to purchase groceries and do not pay any attention to the prices. Something as dramatic as eggs tripleing in price will get attention, but bananas going up a dime will not be noticed.
I believe there is a significant and enduring geopolitical cost to this situation. It stems from the numerous deals Trump has abandoned, starting with his declarations targeting Canada and Mexico during his first term. You may recall how he strong-armed them, against their will, into renegotiating NAFTA, transforming it into what is now known as the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement. This was Trump’s deal, one he touted as a triumph at the time. Yet now, he describes it as a terrible agreement. If the deals he negotiated and once celebrated cannot be trusted, why would anyone invest resources and diplomatic effort into negotiating other agreements with him—whether they pertain to trade, arms, or any other subject?
Great game, FLA is in.
they will cry haddock!!!
let loose tubs of tartar sauce
gorton guy laid off
Iman: [haddock haiku]
That is funny, mate.
JSM
“Also, shouldn’t we have a serious conversation about the appropriateness of the President enacting a significant reordering of the economy on a whim with zero Congressional input”.
A whim this retard says. Just shootin from the hip. What the hell does the Wharton graduate know about economics? He’s no AMDG, that’s for sure.
The tariff play may be the biggest misdirection in history.Ten year treasuries are now below 3.95%. $12 trillion in debt has to be refinanced soon. If the refinancing can be brought off at lower rates, that will be a huge win. I don't think Trump cares about the level of the stock market in the near future.
"Is it moral to leave our kids and grandkids with 38 Trillion in debt?"
Is it moral to take a bet on an unproven theory that could make this significantly worse? You fail to account for the fact it might not work and that this disruption leaves us even worse off.
Predicting only rosy results is either naive or delusional.
What unproven theory is that, Mark? The one that every American taxpayer has to subsidize every other country's economy?
1donald said...
“Also, shouldn’t we have a serious conversation about the appropriateness of the President enacting a significant reordering of the economy on a whim with zero Congressional input”.
A whim this retard says. Just shootin from the hip. What the hell does the Wharton graduate know about economics? He’s no AMDG, that’s for sure.
4/5/25, 8:32 PM
—————————————
1. He is shooting from the hip.
2. If somebody thinks buying a product from an entity is subsidizing them then that is where the retardation lies.
3. Your ignoring of the question of Congress’ role is telling.
"What unproven theory is that, Mark?"
Show me where another country in our position in recent history had massive economic success when implementing policies like these.
If Trump's theory is not unproven, you would have multiple examples of tarriffs at this scale to provide.
I will wait.
I've lost a lot of money on stocks. So have a lot of other people. Now there's going to be inflation, which by definition also costs me money. Please explain how this is good or necessary without saying I deserve it, because then I'll just say f*ck off and vote Democrat forever.
Well, Mark, there's never been an economy as large and diverse as ours so we're on new territory here. And , as others have pointed out, this is a bargaining tool. A tool which seems to be working.
Just think about how much more prosperous we would be if we didn't have to support the economies of other countrys.
Steven,
"re-embrace conservatism"
Are you referring to bow tie conservatism, the one that couldn't even conserve women's bathrooms?
Not just no, not just hell no, but rather hell f'ing no.
కామెంట్ను పోస్ట్ చేయండి
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.