As I said elsewhere, I would prefer to have someone else doing what Trump is doing - but no one else was offering to do anything but extend the status quo.
A weird Goldilocks Syndrome has broken out in DC: yes, I wanted that policy, but just not in that precise way!
The only person who could do any of this would have to be an anti-politician not beholden to any Party apparatus and not worried about what names the MSM called him.
How about that. What did everyone think would happen to someone who actually played all the face up cards that were on the table for decades that the rest admired and talked about, but never picked up.
Excellent point. Unfortunately, the problem exists in both parties. No one wants to focus on the issue, just want to focus on the him vs her. The D vs R. But both D and R are responsible for enabling the gutting of our economy.
Case in point: Matt writes that globalization needs some nihilism, and a bunch of our fellow commenters decide itтАЩs the time to attack Bernie or fucking Pelosi.
Bernie is a naive Socialist with Utopian views surpassed only by the ideological fantasies of young AOC.
Pelosi knows precisely what she's doing.
1) She feeds intel to her husband all the time on investments, which is why several years ago I invested in the ETF named NANC...which mirrors her stock trades. My momma didn't raise no dummies.
2) She ain't leaving DC. She's an addict to the power and knows what happens if she loses all her security protections Jeffries provides for her.
Imagine that. And he was turned into the definition of a-hole by those who got us where we are today and profit immensely from the way things are. Funny how that works.
Trump was an ass before he was President. He was also astute, seeing the clown-show that was the '16 Republican nominee-wannabes. He's also been smart enough to not repeat his mistakes for the most part from his first administration - that is better than I expected.
HIS mistakes?! He was a DC newbie, who got there without DC blessing, and who trusted advice given to him by DC, IтАЩll wager. DC screwed him at every turn. He may be a jerk, but no one offered to help, but in fact worked to тАФ- Resist!
Some of his "mistakes" were in not sticking to his instincts and instead being swayed (by those swamp-dwellers), at least that's my opinion. He doesn't appear to be doing that this time, which doesn't mean everything will be fine, but at least it won't be the same old shit.
I"m not a Trump fan at all..was a long time NeverTrumper...but came to realize that if we were ever going to restore the balance of power between those who govern and We the People they govern...we'd need someone with cajones the size of Texas to do it.
MAGA parade was already under way from 2010 on...Trump was savvy enough media-wise to jump in front of the parade and appoint himself Parade Marshall.
Truth is...he's a useful tool for us who've demanded these changes for 2-3 decades but never had the political tools to do it on our own.
Now we have what is..in essence.. a downfield blocker for us to get some first downs.
We're a long way from the endzone, but momentum is on our side.
Do you mean upend the rule of law by defying court orders? Or do you mean that you want someone else to tank global markets to the tune of trillions within days (the US hurts, too, when this happens, btw)? Or do you want someone else to...ah forget it. At the end of Trump's second term, just as at the end of Trump's first term, the status quo will be fully preserved and a lot of billionaires will be billions richer. That's what the Repugs do--make their clients richer. That's their raison d'etre. Of course, the same is true of the Dems.
Well Harry C, if youтАЩve watched politics for decades like I have, and like many Racket readers, name me one politician that could accomplish what Trump is doing. Just one. Get rid of waste, fraud & abuse through DOGE? тЬЕ Fire crooked grifter bureaucrats and defund CIA fronts like USAID?тЬЕ Deport gangsters running fentanyl into the country?тЬЕ stopping child trafficking from Mexico & South America?тЬЕ Establishing tariffs to make other countries pay & saving US taxpayers billions?тЬЕ Lots and lots more. Only Trump has even considered doing anything to help Main Street. And you think heтАЩs an asshole?
Those are nice green checkmarks there. Too bad not a single one of them has any basis in reality.
But just like some people can say "fiery but mostly peaceful" with a straight face, others will look at empty shelves and tripled prices for whatever's left and claim that they are "winning bigly."
Eggs had a very Soviet-looking "no more than 3 cartons per customer" signs on them. Toilet paper could be next. (Hmmm, where does a lot of raw materials for it come from?...)
Don't you have a bidet at home? Water's still local.
Yes there was a planned egg shortage manufactured by the previous administration who culled the egg producing chickens because of a bird flu plandemic, lol.
One problem with your analysis: other countries do not pay tariffs, Americans who use imported goods pay them, if businesses pass them on as part of the cost of acquiring the goods to process or sell, or American businesses pay them if they absorb them as a cost, rather than pass them on to consumers, and some goods must be imported (e.g. tropical crops we cannot grow in adequate supply to meet demand, like coffee, cacao, bananas, or rubber).
Americans have been paying for foreign tariffs for 80 years, since WW2. If countries donтАЩt want their market share to tank, they will absorb the cost of the tariffs. If they donтАЩt, they wonтАЩt sell product. Many companies (like my MILтАЩs in Mexico) will absorb some of the hit and the retailers will absorb some & buyers the rest. ItтАЩs time for a reset. Europe et al have been coasting on our money for decades. No more.
I've often heard the argument that other countries don't pay tariffs; we do. At one level, I agree with that analysis, but on another I wonder why it should matter then to the countries being tariffed?
Just this morning I was on a UK substack and the Brits were surmising that Starmer would be subsidizing Jaguar so it would not lose money when Americans could no longer afford their cars. That is how the UK absorbs the tariffs charged on UK products coming to the US .
I should add, the article was written in support of Trump's tariffs and 90% of the commenters agreed. They want their government to man up and quit with the globalist agenda.
Buy British! Buy the best! Drive a mile, walk the rest!
(A little ditty I learned in the mid '80's from the other good Samaritan who joined me in pushing a stranded Triumph out of an intersection in Society Hill, Philadelphia.)
Why? Supply and demand: a tariff increases the price to the buyer (and without generating more revenue for the seller per unit sold), demand decreases with respect to the increased cost to the buyer. If the goods being hit with the tariff have highly elastic demand, the country exporting them will drastically loose revenue.
Right. Several movements may come into play here. 1. Consumers pay a higher price for the foreign product, or for a domestic replacement, or do without. 2. The foreign company loses market share, and hence revenue. 3. Domestic companies who can replace the product are shielded and gain some of that market share, which provides profit and jobs domestically. 4. The nation evolves to become more self-sufficient, united, and perhaps resilient to external hostilities or control.
The anti-tariff side would emphasize the first two factors; the pro-tariff side would be concerned with the latter two. I think it's worth keeping them all in mind when we argue the issue.
Pointing out that Jaguar had already devalued any sale of its cars to the US market through its WOKE commercials. Sure, Starmer can still say future losses in the US market came about because of a tariff . . .
Not really because again, you're acting like marketing is the same thing as trade protectionism. Leave your stupid brainwashed ideologies at the door, this is an economics question.
Right. Surprising to see the braindead parroting of that lie regarding *who* pays tariffs, even here, on Matt's substack. Tariffs are a consumption tax.
To your point about US consumers paying for tariffs. People like Bernie rail against tariffs and in the next breath demand corporations pay more income tax, he thinks we are stupid and don't realize that higher income taxes are passed on to the consumer as higher prices.
This country was built by ass-hole con men. It is just that the history books were written to make everyone think most of our leaders were some pias Mother Teresa's who never swore or cheated on their wives. We now know the truth. Guess what they did!
And those in charge currently. Probably 90+% of CEOs are assholes too. Speaks to what one has to do and be to get the top jobs in industry or government.
What nonsense. The constitution they wrote is a fantastic document. You are the ahole who has benefited from their genius. Otherwise youтАЩd be the one doing menial labor.
And we canтАЩt forget the guy who turbocharged income and wealth inequalityтАФReagan; and the guy who sold out workers for Wall Street moneyтАФClinton.
Yet he was elected to the highest office (in the world) twice. What is the highest public service office you have held Harry? Are you successful in business ?
I think the only thing Trump may be good at is being one large asshole con man!
As I said elsewhere, I would prefer to have someone else doing what Trump is doing - but no one else was offering to do anything but extend the status quo.
Same for killing DEI and sealing the border.
A weird Goldilocks Syndrome has broken out in DC: yes, I wanted that policy, but just not in that precise way!
The only person who could do any of this would have to be an anti-politician not beholden to any Party apparatus and not worried about what names the MSM called him.
Thus Trump.
How about that. What did everyone think would happen to someone who actually played all the face up cards that were on the table for decades that the rest admired and talked about, but never picked up.
IтАЩm not sure they all admired them, since they were voting to make the problem worse.
Excellent point. Unfortunately, the problem exists in both parties. No one wants to focus on the issue, just want to focus on the him vs her. The D vs R. But both D and R are responsible for enabling the gutting of our economy.
Case in point: Matt writes that globalization needs some nihilism, and a bunch of our fellow commenters decide itтАЩs the time to attack Bernie or fucking Pelosi.
Bernie is a naive Socialist with Utopian views surpassed only by the ideological fantasies of young AOC.
Pelosi knows precisely what she's doing.
1) She feeds intel to her husband all the time on investments, which is why several years ago I invested in the ETF named NANC...which mirrors her stock trades. My momma didn't raise no dummies.
2) She ain't leaving DC. She's an addict to the power and knows what happens if she loses all her security protections Jeffries provides for her.
Uh oh! By investing in that ETF, you too profited from globalism. Sticks and stones and glass houses and all that, brah.
Imagine that. And he was turned into the definition of a-hole by those who got us where we are today and profit immensely from the way things are. Funny how that works.
Trump was an ass before he was President. He was also astute, seeing the clown-show that was the '16 Republican nominee-wannabes. He's also been smart enough to not repeat his mistakes for the most part from his first administration - that is better than I expected.
HIS mistakes?! He was a DC newbie, who got there without DC blessing, and who trusted advice given to him by DC, IтАЩll wager. DC screwed him at every turn. He may be a jerk, but no one offered to help, but in fact worked to тАФ- Resist!
Some of his "mistakes" were in not sticking to his instincts and instead being swayed (by those swamp-dwellers), at least that's my opinion. He doesn't appear to be doing that this time, which doesn't mean everything will be fine, but at least it won't be the same old shit.
That is what my son and I keep saying. He might be right, he might be wrong, but nobody has tried this before, so we are willing to go for the ride...
Hear! Hear!
Like, can it get worse for regular Americans to keep on keeping on?
The Dude abides...:)
Especially Republicans.
I don't disagree.
I"m not a Trump fan at all..was a long time NeverTrumper...but came to realize that if we were ever going to restore the balance of power between those who govern and We the People they govern...we'd need someone with cajones the size of Texas to do it.
MAGA parade was already under way from 2010 on...Trump was savvy enough media-wise to jump in front of the parade and appoint himself Parade Marshall.
Truth is...he's a useful tool for us who've demanded these changes for 2-3 decades but never had the political tools to do it on our own.
Now we have what is..in essence.. a downfield blocker for us to get some first downs.
We're a long way from the endzone, but momentum is on our side.
Don't get too excited, nothing has changed with Congress, and for long term results it will take Congress to enact them.
Do you mean upend the rule of law by defying court orders? Or do you mean that you want someone else to tank global markets to the tune of trillions within days (the US hurts, too, when this happens, btw)? Or do you want someone else to...ah forget it. At the end of Trump's second term, just as at the end of Trump's first term, the status quo will be fully preserved and a lot of billionaires will be billions richer. That's what the Repugs do--make their clients richer. That's their raison d'etre. Of course, the same is true of the Dems.
Well Harry C, if youтАЩve watched politics for decades like I have, and like many Racket readers, name me one politician that could accomplish what Trump is doing. Just one. Get rid of waste, fraud & abuse through DOGE? тЬЕ Fire crooked grifter bureaucrats and defund CIA fronts like USAID?тЬЕ Deport gangsters running fentanyl into the country?тЬЕ stopping child trafficking from Mexico & South America?тЬЕ Establishing tariffs to make other countries pay & saving US taxpayers billions?тЬЕ Lots and lots more. Only Trump has even considered doing anything to help Main Street. And you think heтАЩs an asshole?
Those are nice green checkmarks there. Too bad not a single one of them has any basis in reality.
But just like some people can say "fiery but mostly peaceful" with a straight face, others will look at empty shelves and tripled prices for whatever's left and claim that they are "winning bigly."
DonтАЩt be dumb in public Boris. ItтАЩs unseemly.
Yeah, I have no idea why you keep doing it.
Shit! Did another pandemic break out! Is all the fucking toilet paper gone from
Costco again?
Eggs had a very Soviet-looking "no more than 3 cartons per customer" signs on them. Toilet paper could be next. (Hmmm, where does a lot of raw materials for it come from?...)
Don't you have a bidet at home? Water's still local.
Yes there was a planned egg shortage manufactured by the previous administration who culled the egg producing chickens because of a bird flu plandemic, lol.
LOL, indeed.
One problem with your analysis: other countries do not pay tariffs, Americans who use imported goods pay them, if businesses pass them on as part of the cost of acquiring the goods to process or sell, or American businesses pay them if they absorb them as a cost, rather than pass them on to consumers, and some goods must be imported (e.g. tropical crops we cannot grow in adequate supply to meet demand, like coffee, cacao, bananas, or rubber).
Americans have been paying for foreign tariffs for 80 years, since WW2. If countries donтАЩt want their market share to tank, they will absorb the cost of the tariffs. If they donтАЩt, they wonтАЩt sell product. Many companies (like my MILтАЩs in Mexico) will absorb some of the hit and the retailers will absorb some & buyers the rest. ItтАЩs time for a reset. Europe et al have been coasting on our money for decades. No more.
I've often heard the argument that other countries don't pay tariffs; we do. At one level, I agree with that analysis, but on another I wonder why it should matter then to the countries being tariffed?
Just this morning I was on a UK substack and the Brits were surmising that Starmer would be subsidizing Jaguar so it would not lose money when Americans could no longer afford their cars. That is how the UK absorbs the tariffs charged on UK products coming to the US .
I should add, the article was written in support of Trump's tariffs and 90% of the commenters agreed. They want their government to man up and quit with the globalist agenda.
Jaguars and Range Rovers suck anyway.
Buy British! Buy the best! Drive a mile, walk the rest!
(A little ditty I learned in the mid '80's from the other good Samaritan who joined me in pushing a stranded Triumph out of an intersection in Society Hill, Philadelphia.)
Wow, we are in a sour mood this morning. ЁЯди
But I'm not wrong.
There was a comment about Range Rovers "I wonder if Americans know who owns the Range Rover company?'.
I have no idea and did not care to look it up.
McClaren is the best British made car, but the company is owned by Abu Dhabi.
Germans (BMW) own Cooper Motor Works.
India (TATA) owns Jaguar.
Canadian owns Aston Martin.
Shall we go on?
Germans own Bentley.
Rolls Royce is about all they've got owned by a UK firm.
Seen any Rolls Royce's rolling about your Costco parking lot lately?
The working class of the UK does...but not the Globalists who are currently in power.
Anyone who dares protest will be arrested and jailed..for daring to share their opinion that the Globalists are selling out the UK.
Why? Supply and demand: a tariff increases the price to the buyer (and without generating more revenue for the seller per unit sold), demand decreases with respect to the increased cost to the buyer. If the goods being hit with the tariff have highly elastic demand, the country exporting them will drastically loose revenue.
Right. Several movements may come into play here. 1. Consumers pay a higher price for the foreign product, or for a domestic replacement, or do without. 2. The foreign company loses market share, and hence revenue. 3. Domestic companies who can replace the product are shielded and gain some of that market share, which provides profit and jobs domestically. 4. The nation evolves to become more self-sufficient, united, and perhaps resilient to external hostilities or control.
The anti-tariff side would emphasize the first two factors; the pro-tariff side would be concerned with the latter two. I think it's worth keeping them all in mind when we argue the issue.
That's correct! My comment to the Brits was the Nov. 2024 video commercial Jaguar did had the internet in a buzz and it was not a good one.
What does that have to do with anything regarding trade policy.
Pointing out that Jaguar had already devalued any sale of its cars to the US market through its WOKE commercials. Sure, Starmer can still say future losses in the US market came about because of a tariff . . .
Was that helpful?
Not really because again, you're acting like marketing is the same thing as trade protectionism. Leave your stupid brainwashed ideologies at the door, this is an economics question.
Right. Surprising to see the braindead parroting of that lie regarding *who* pays tariffs, even here, on Matt's substack. Tariffs are a consumption tax.
To your point about US consumers paying for tariffs. People like Bernie rail against tariffs and in the next breath demand corporations pay more income tax, he thinks we are stupid and don't realize that higher income taxes are passed on to the consumer as higher prices.
Great comment.
but sometimes that's just who u need!
This country was built by ass-hole con men. It is just that the history books were written to make everyone think most of our leaders were some pias Mother Teresa's who never swore or cheated on their wives. We now know the truth. Guess what they did!
You nailed it--from Carnegie to Morgan to Ford, our nation-builders were some nasty kind of work.
Pussies donтАЩt build anything.
And those in charge currently. Probably 90+% of CEOs are assholes too. Speaks to what one has to do and be to get the top jobs in industry or government.
What nonsense. The constitution they wrote is a fantastic document. You are the ahole who has benefited from their genius. Otherwise youтАЩd be the one doing menial labor.
Yeah, Sam Adams and Ben Franklin are two that come to mind that current bluestockings would edit out if they could.
Joe Biden's Democratic party says, "Hold my beer, chump."
There you go, Harry
ThatтАЩs exactly what we need after Bush, Obama & Biden almost destroyed our country.
Start your list with Lyndon Baines Johnson...
And we canтАЩt forget the guy who turbocharged income and wealth inequalityтАФReagan; and the guy who sold out workers for Wall Street moneyтАФClinton.
And who are youтАФand why should anybody care what you think?
He is still what we need.
ЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСОЁЯСО
What are you trying to say?
Agreed.
Are you a Tesla scratcher withTDS?
Yet he was elected to the highest office (in the world) twice. What is the highest public service office you have held Harry? Are you successful in business ?
To some extent, all successful politicians are conmen.