Political Catch-All Thread

[coogles]

No one was going to be happy with any metric they used. I'm not convinced this is as thrown together as newsweek suggests, but whatever...say it was. Seems like a good way to shut off the flow of product from a county that is undercutting american labor & production like vietnam, india, or china would be to take the trade deficit..and apply a tax that will literally increase the cost to a level where it at least equal to produce domestically?

I don't think we want to shut *off* the flow of products from one place to another. That's a good way to make everyone poor and inflation soar. Remember COVID when supply chains basically shut down? Yeah. That.

My thought here is that a trade system that will derive the most benefit for the US won't dramatically harm our allies. The US is not and cannot be 100% self-sufficient and still has to be a member of the global economy. If we shut off trade with Vietnam, Japan, and South Korea and drive them into the arms of China, we only fuck ourselves. Do we really give a shit if our Nike shoes come from Vietnam? If Nike has to invest in domestic production, it's a) going to take a couple years at least, and b) include far more automation than is currently used in Vietnam, creating comparatively few jobs domestically. The cost per job will be enormous. It will increase costs for everyone and concentrate the benefits to those few workers who are running the robots making shoes. Socialized costs and concentrated benefits - sounds a bit like the banking bailouts of 2008, eh?

Trade policies, starting with NAFTA and being hands off with China and the rest of Southeast Asia have decimated certain parts of our economy for decades. It's not all going to be unwound overnight with one announcement. Not only that, but the idea that businesses will change multi-year plans on the basis of a signature that could be undone the next day or by the next president is just crazy. Frankly I don't think the president should have tariff powers at all.

One other thing, the figures used don't take services into account. I can't find 2024 numbers, but in 2023 if you include services in the equation between the EU and the US, our trade deficit was only $48 billion on a combined $1.6 trillion in trade between the two. I'd say that's pretty decent. But yeah, fuck'em I guess. Go buy your oil from Russia again.

[golftdibrad1]

No one was going to be happy with any metric they used. I'm not convinced this is as thrown together as newsweek suggests, but whatever...say it was. Seems like a good way to shut off the flow of product from a county that is undercutting american labor & production like vietnam, india, or china would be to take the trade deficit..and apply a tax that will literally increase the cost to a level where it at least equal to produce domestically?

I don't think we want to shut *off* the flow of products from one place to another. That's a good way to make everyone poor and inflation soar. Remember COVID when supply chains basically shut down? Yeah. That.

My thought here is that a trade system that will derive the most benefit for the US won't dramatically harm our allies. The US is not and cannot be 100% self-sufficient and still has to be a member of the global economy. If we shut off trade with Vietnam, Japan, and South Korea and drive them into the arms of China, we only fuck ourselves. Do we really give a shit if our Nike shoes come from Vietnam? If Nike has to invest in domestic production, it's a) going to take a couple years at least, and b) include far more automation than is currently used in Vietnam, creating comparatively few jobs domestically. The cost per job will be enormous. It will increase costs for everyone and concentrate the benefits to those few workers who are running the robots making shoes. Socialized costs and concentrated benefits - sounds a bit like the banking bailouts of 2008, eh?

Trade policies, starting with NAFTA and being hands off with China and the rest of Southeast Asia have decimated certain parts of our economy for decades. It's not all going to be unwound overnight with one announcement. Not only that, but the idea that businesses will change multi-year plans on the basis of a signature that could be undone the next day or by the next president is just crazy. Frankly I don't think the president should have tariff powers at all.

One other thing, the figures used don't take services into account. I can't find 2024 numbers, but in 2023 if you include services in the equation between the EU and the US, our trade deficit was only $48 billion on a combined $1.6 trillion in trade between the two. I'd say that's pretty decent. But yeah, fuck'em I guess. Go buy your oil from Russia again.

eh, this is the opening round of negotiations. I suspect this all will evolve, and quickly. I put my money where my mouth is; I bought some SPY today

edit: also this county was almost fully funded by tariffs for almost 150 years. They DO and CAN work for us.

[coogles]

Oof.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/dodge-cha ... offs-begin

[golftdibrad1]

Oof.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/dodge-cha ... offs-begin

They have been on life support for a decade, so whatever.

[dubshow]

Oof.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/dodge-cha ... offs-begin

They have been on life support for a decade, so whatever.

they have really been down bad over the last 3-4 years. They flourished in 20/21 because dealers were flush with inventory. now they are taking $20k off msrp again and 2-3 year old units are still sitting on lots across the US.

[golftdibrad1]

1/3 of the trade value in dollars of the tariffs have already been reversed due to other countries caving. This is by no means a pro tariff link either, dem just the

I do generally like the kitty's writings but I have to disagree with some of his assertions here, but it is a well written and thought out argument against them.

Why do I disagree? Well, a powerful military capable of defending its people needs to be able to make all the things to supply the same in house, even at a detrimental cost basis. The is, we do not have this ability; we need to regain it.

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/talking-tariffs

others will start to fall. it looks like mexico, viet nam, india, argentina, and israel already have and while the last 2 have immaterial trade with us, the others are significant. this is ~1/3 of all US imports moving to a “free trade no tariff system.”


it’s also about 28% of US exports so this is a win on both sides and should provide some benefits to US exporters.

[coogles]

1/3 of the trade value in dollars of the tariffs have already been reversed due to other countries caving. This is by no means a pro tariff link either, dem just the

I do generally like the kitty's writings but I have to disagree with some of his assertions here, but it is a well written and thought out argument against them.

Why do I disagree? Well, a powerful military capable of defending its people needs to be able to make all the things to supply the same in house, even at a detrimental cost basis. The is, we do not have this ability; we need to regain it.

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/talking-tariffs

others will start to fall. it looks like mexico, viet nam, india, argentina, and israel already have and while the last 2 have immaterial trade with us, the others are significant. this is ~1/3 of all US imports moving to a “free trade no tariff system.”


it’s also about 28% of US exports so this is a win on both sides and should provide some benefits to US exporters.

The bolded is, without a doubt, true. If we want to ensure our own security, and (debatably) the security of our allies and trading partners, we have to be able to supply the materials we need for the defense industry. How we do that is the crux of the matter, but whether it's raw materials like steel and aluminum, "rare" earth minerals, computer chips or electronics, all of those things we need to be able to produce domestically and at scale.

[golftdibrad1]

1/3 of the trade value in dollars of the tariffs have already been reversed due to other countries caving. This is by no means a pro tariff link either, dem just the

I do generally like the kitty's writings but I have to disagree with some of his assertions here, but it is a well written and thought out argument against them.

Why do I disagree? Well, a powerful military capable of defending its people needs to be able to make all the things to supply the same in house, even at a detrimental cost basis. The is, we do not have this ability; we need to regain it.

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/talking-tariffs

The bolded is, without a doubt, true. If we want to ensure our own security, and (debatably) the security of our allies and trading partners, we have to be able to supply the materials we need for the defense industry. How we do that is the crux of the matter, but whether it's raw materials like steel and aluminum, "rare" earth minerals, computer chips or electronics, all of those things we need to be able to produce domestically and at scale.

I personally think its needs to be the level of "dirt to an F-22". And yes, I know its out of production, but the f-35 sucks.

[golftdibrad1]

erreryone so mad about tariffs that this YUGE win was missed:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/04/08/ ... overreach/

Lets get Keystone XL spun back up baby!

[golftdibrad1]

more foods re:tarrifs to not crap up the ot

Since before his first term, progressives screeched that Trump was an orange-colored, fascistic cartoon billionaire oligarch, secretly selling out the working class to help his billionaire buddies get even richer.

But now he’s tanked the stock market on behalf of the working class.

Half of Americans don’t own stocks. All they have is debt. And Trump has shattered the siphon— the rigged system letting the elite laptop class extract wealth while feeding the bottom 80% of us stimulus crumbs and inflation.

And who’s shrieking loudest? The left. AOC, who bizarrely wore a thousand-dollar dress stamped with “Eat the Rich.” The “Occupy Wall Street” crowd, who once performatively prayed for a market crash.

[coogles]

Fun!

[golftdibrad1]

Fun!

He keeps saying inflation:




he's just fear mongering. A reduction in imports by DEFINITION can't cause hyperinflation; that can only happen when the gov fires up the printing press to ease any real or perceived pain and devalues currency.

This is just some anti trump lib arm chair keynesian economist hack.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Zeihan

"A common critique is that Zeihan’s scenarios assume inevitability, disregarding the unpredictability of global events and technological innovation.[19] This perspective bears similarities to Malthusian and Neo-Malthusian theories,"

So great, hes also anti human.

[golftdibrad1]

I like this guy but break a little with him on the tariff thing:

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/the- ... s-industry

my comment for my other 2 readers in this thread:
This is all 100% true but leaves out a crucial fact: China is on a 200 year plan, and they are making the money printer go burrrrrrr at astounding rates. One of the reasons is to subsidize industries (rare earths is an outstanding example) and de facto monopolize them with little regard to environment and safety- essentially the polar opposite of the US where we have OVER prioritized these things as you point out. Tariffs are only one part of an equation to re-level the playing field. The administration is doing what they can to deregulate as well, but you are 100% correct that congress needs to get on board to make these changes durable so the investments can be made. No corporation will make these kind of investments without high levels of certainty least we end up with another West Valley Demonstration Project or Keystone XL where billions of investment are wiped away with the swipe of some guy's new autopen.

[coogles]

He keeps saying inflation:

he's just fear mongering. A reduction in imports by DEFINITION can't cause hyperinflation; that can only happen when the gov fires up the printing press to ease any real or perceived pain and devalues currency.

This is just some anti trump lib arm chair keynesian economist hack.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Zeihan

"A common critique is that Zeihan’s scenarios assume inevitability, disregarding the unpredictability of global events and technological innovation.[19] This perspective bears similarities to Malthusian and Neo-Malthusian theories,"

So great, hes also anti human.

Yes yes, inflation is at all times a monetary phenomenon. My problem with that idea is that we don't live in a world where only the US money supply matters.

If we tariff one particular good, whoever chooses to buy that good will have less money to spend on other things. Inflation will be zero. But if we massively tariff a whole basket of goods (15% of what we import) and add 10% to the cost of everything else, we aren't the sole purchaser in the world. Prices are set on the world market and aren't likely to fall just because we added a 10% tariff to everything we import. Prices on a masssive percentage of things we buy will increase as a result, not just a few items here and there that consumers can find substitutions for.

Who knows? He'll probably decide to do something entirely new in 48 hours anyway.

I've never heard the Zeihan talk about Malthusian ideas. If anything, he's always talking about demographic cliffs for certain countries, Russia and China in particular.

[golftdibrad1]

He keeps saying inflation:

he's just fear mongering. A reduction in imports by DEFINITION can't cause hyperinflation; that can only happen when the gov fires up the printing press to ease any real or perceived pain and devalues currency.

This is just some anti trump lib arm chair keynesian economist hack.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Zeihan

"A common critique is that Zeihan’s scenarios assume inevitability, disregarding the unpredictability of global events and technological innovation.[19] This perspective bears similarities to Malthusian and Neo-Malthusian theories,"

So great, hes also anti human.

Yes yes, inflation is at all times a monetary phenomenon. My problem with that idea is that we don't live in a world where only the US money supply matters.

If we tariff one particular good, whoever chooses to buy that good will have less money to spend on other things. Inflation will be zero. But if we massively tariff a whole basket of goods (15% of what we import) and add 10% to the cost of everything else, we aren't the sole purchaser in the world. Prices are set on the world market and aren't likely to fall just because we added a 10% tariff to everything we import. Prices on a masssive percentage of things we buy will increase as a result, not just a few items here and there that consumers can find substitutions for.

Who knows? He'll probably decide to do something entirely new in 48 hours anyway.

I've never heard the Zeihan talk about Malthusian ideas. If anything, he's always talking about demographic cliffs for certain countries, Russia and China in particular.

re: bold, its not an IDEA, its a fundamental principle of macroeconomics.

However to address your point, i have many times conceded that yes, domestic tariffs, especially high ones, will for a fact lead to a short term increase in the price of many goods. It will lead to a long term price increase for other goods (electronics).

And yes, higher prices (or taxes via tariffs) are generally speaking a bad thing. HOWEVER, we have been living under a bad economic policy where offshoring production, un- and under-employment, and services are wildly out of balance for a healthy economy and a good domestic supply chain. Its time to take the medicine and live through 6-12 months of a slightly shittier economy in order to stabilize those things for a brighter future. I am seeing first hand the permitting and design of large capital projects being greenlit at an astonishing rate. No job shortages in my field for sure; construction workers and welders are about to rake in the money.

For the record, and you could prob go back and read my posts if interested, this is shit i've been saying since trump 1; I'm not fanboiing trump 2.0 here. As a matter of fact, you can probably find posts where I said I doubted he would carry out these actions even if he won even tho I wish he would. I'm glad I was wrong.

But, as you say, this could all change next week. I hope that whatever deal the man with the plan has in mind ends with a soft landing and gets some fucking power plants and factories built.

[coogles]

https://marketmonetarist.com/2023/07/24 ... henomenon/

What about supply shocks?
When economists and others discuss inflation, they frequently state that rising oil costs, for example, have caused inflation to rise. But what role does it play in the quantity equation?


Does Friedman (and other monetarists) genuinely believe that rising gas prices (as in 2022) have no effect on inflation? No they don’t, but again it is more complicated that most commentators make it out to be.

The explanation is that if the price of a production input (for example energy prices) rises, it will naturally have a negative effect on production, causing Y to fall.

And, recalling equation (4) above:

p = m + v – y

Then, logically, for a given m and v, if y goes negative, then p must increase. In other words, a negative supply shock that cuts output will cause the economy’s price level to rise, but only if the central bank lets it.


The central bank will always be able to cut m correspondingly, and therefore the price level (and consequently inflation) is always determined by the central bank – even if there are negative supply shocks.

However, reducing m if a negative supply shock causes y to fall is not necessarily a good monetary policy response, and Friedman would certainly not argue for it.

However, this does not change the fact that the central bank has complete control over the price level through managing the amount of money in the economy.

In other words, a reduction in supply, which is what tariffs will cause, will lead to inflation unless the central bank contracts the money supply.

This is exactly what we did during the Great Depression when the money supply contracted by a third.

Again, I'm not saying tariffs on certain goods or baskets of goods, or on certain countries aren't warranted. What I would say is that Trump and his advisers have no idea what the fuck they are doing.

[golftdibrad1]

https://marketmonetarist.com/2023/07/24 ... henomenon/

What about supply shocks?
When economists and others discuss inflation, they frequently state that rising oil costs, for example, have caused inflation to rise. But what role does it play in the quantity equation?


Does Friedman (and other monetarists) genuinely believe that rising gas prices (as in 2022) have no effect on inflation? No they don’t, but again it is more complicated that most commentators make it out to be.

The explanation is that if the price of a production input (for example energy prices) rises, it will naturally have a negative effect on production, causing Y to fall.

And, recalling equation (4) above:

p = m + v – y

Then, logically, for a given m and v, if y goes negative, then p must increase. In other words, a negative supply shock that cuts output will cause the economy’s price level to rise, but only if the central bank lets it.


The central bank will always be able to cut m correspondingly, and therefore the price level (and consequently inflation) is always determined by the central bank – even if there are negative supply shocks.

However, reducing m if a negative supply shock causes y to fall is not necessarily a good monetary policy response, and Friedman would certainly not argue for it.

However, this does not change the fact that the central bank has complete control over the price level through managing the amount of money in the economy.

In other words, a reduction in supply, which is what tariffs will cause, will lead to inflation unless the central bank contracts the money supply.

This is exactly what we did during the Great Depression when the money supply contracted by a third.

Again, I'm not saying tariffs on certain goods or baskets of goods, or on certain countries aren't warranted. What I would say is that Trump and his advisers have no idea what the fuck they are doing.

That's Keynesian shit. Keynes is wrong and the root of most of the monetary evil of the last century. Milton / Hayek /Austrian is right.

[golftdibrad1]

[golftdibrad1]

Tax day memes

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/tax-day-memepool

[golftdibrad1]

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/hypers ... il-17-2025