LIBERATION DAY: 90 day pause on all tariffs except China

[HellToupee 1,543]

 

[Horseman 2,306]

5 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

It's pretty obvious you don't work. I don't think people would have much interest about politics if the issue was how do policies affect the non-working wealthy. You should buy a pub or do something fun with your money.

The fundamentals of economics and investing don't change just because you've reached financial independence.  You'd protect yourself and react the exact same way.  Really the only thing that changes, that should change, is your risk tolerance and asset allocation the more wealthy you become.  That's exactly why inflation doesn't bother me, I'd take 4-5% guaranteed all day long.  

And it's a small farm in God's country.   

[Horseman 2,306]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Second guy to brag about this in the thread. Why are most MAGA people such a$$holes? Surely it’s not a coincidence…

It was in response to a jab about being employable. Learn to read dumbasss. Employment is the furthest thing from my mind.  

But there is a larger point. If you're smart enough to get there you're smart enough to not scream at the sky at each down turn in the market. The market does that, take advantage instd of crying about it.    

[Engorgeous George 2,024]

55 minutes ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

The other countries aren't going to come begging. They're going to strengthen alliances with each other, like China, Japan and South Korea just announced yesterday.

Always the most gullible. 

Strange bedfellows, historically.

[The Psychic Observer 384]

57 minutes ago, Horseman said:

I don't mind inflation at all as long as interest rates go up. Inflation only hurts poor people.  

Inflation hurts savers and retirees on fixed incomes.

[Gepetto 1,280]

Maybe he will keep the tariffs long term and significantly lower income taxes.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,800]

23 minutes ago, The Psychic Observer said:

Inflation hurts savers and retirees on fixed incomes.

0 pct interest rate under Obama.  Crickets about savers. 

[Strike 5,134]

23 minutes ago, Gepetto said:

Maybe he will keep the tariffs long term and significantly lower income taxes.

Yep.  I posted an article from a prominent economist on that exact topic yesterday and surprise surprise *CRICKETS* from the libs around here.  They don't really want intelligent discussion.  They just want to post unsupported drivel and whine about Trump.

 

[Strike 5,134]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

0 pct interest rate under Obama.  Crickets about savers. 

They don't really care.  They just look for reasons to whine about Trump.

[iam90sbaby 2,418]

5 hours ago, HotRod said:

Stellantis paused production at 2 plants as a result of the tariffs.  700 US employees laid off.

This is going great.

 

4 hours ago, The Psychic Observer said:

Whirlpool announced layoffs too. It's only the start.

This has crashed the economy.  Congress has to act.

 

Learn to code

[jbycho 515]

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

They don't really care.  They just look for reasons to whine about Trump.

You know it's bad when a whole political party as prominent as the democratic party in this country define their whole approach and policy based solely on Trump's approach to this country. They want, and fight violently for, the opposite of any and every thing Trump puts in place. Even before they know what he wants to do. 

[Strike 5,134]

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/gm-increase-us-truck-production-following-trumps-tariffs-2025-04-03/

WINNING!!!!

[Grace Under Pressure 55]

Hold up. People vote for the guy not knowing what he’s going to do, and they think the people opposing him are the problem?

Did supporters willingly sign up for a 10% drop in the stock market? As long as transgenders and immigrants are punished that was fine? Get a clue. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,782]

1 minute ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

Hold up. People vote for the guy not knowing what he’s going to do, and they think the people opposing him are the problem?

Did supporters willingly sign up for a 10% drop in the stock market? As long as transgenders and immigrants are punished that was fine? Get a clue. 

WTF you talking about, retard?  We all knew exactly what he was going to do and yes, short term pain for long term gain, moron.

If you want to shack up with trannies in your spare time, that's fine.  No one has a problem with that.  It's when you force the trannies on every one else is where normal and logical people push back.

GTFO.

[MDC 7,043]

3 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

WTF you talking about, retard?  We all knew exactly what he was going to do and yes, short term pain for long term gain, moron.

Trump campaigned on lowering costs Day 1. That’s the exact opposite of short term pain.

Did he ever say costs might go up while campaigning?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,782]

3 minutes ago, MDC said:

Trump campaigned on lowering costs Day 1. That’s the exact opposite of short term pain.

Did he ever say costs might go up while campaigning?

Tarifs imply costs going up short term.  Did he have to explicitly say "costs might go up"?

Also, eggs are down in price. 

[Engorgeous George 2,024]

32 minutes ago, Strike said:

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/gm-increase-us-truck-production-following-trumps-tariffs-2025-04-03/

WINNING!!!!

Well that is a bit of good news in an otherwise bad day.  I expect another rough day tomorrow and on Monday as Europe and asia have time to react, and right now they seem to be in a fighting mood.  They are all proud peoples and they don't like to feel they are being dictated too.  

 

I wonder whether this will increase the odds the world moves away from the dollar as the default currency.  Certainly the E.U and or China would reveal in the cahnce to become the new default world currency.

 

I am holding off pulling the triggeer on buying a new house until at least Monday.  Even then I anticipate only the vaguest idea where all this is heading.  I may choose to simply update what I have.

[MDC 7,043]

2 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Tarifs imply costs going up short term.  Did he have to explicitly say "costs might go up"?

No, but he did the exact opposite of that by saying costs would go down. 

[The Psychic Observer 384]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

Yep.  I posted an article from a prominent economist on that exact topic yesterday and surprise surprise *CRICKETS* from the libs around here.  They don't really want intelligent discussion.  They just want to post unsupported drivel and whine about Trump.

 

Id like to hear the argument because as much as I know it's hogwash and would only benefit the wealthy.  Please educate me.

[Engorgeous George 2,024]

10 minutes ago, MDC said:

Trump campaigned on lowering costs Day 1. That’s the exact opposite of short term pain.

Did he ever say costs might go up while campaigning?

Did he over promise with that exact promise, as is his wont, or did he promise to get to work on lowering prices on day one, as a prudent politician would have.  To my memory he promised the former but my memory may be off.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,782]

2 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Well that is a bit of good news in an otherwise bad day.  I expect another rough day tomorrow and on Monday as Europe and asia have time to react, and right now they seem to be in a fighting mood.  They are all proud peoples and they don't like to feel they are being dictated too.  

 

I wonder whether this will increase the odds the world moves away from the dollar as the default currency.  Certainly the E.U and or China would reveal in the cahnce to become the new default world currency.

 

I am holding off pulling the triggeer on buying a new house until at least Monday.  Even then I anticipate only the vaguest idea where all this is heading.  I may choose to simply update what I have.

This is the problem: WTF are they fighting about?  From what I understand, Europe and a lot of other countries have levied far greater tarifs against us PRIOR to all this and we've been taking it in the @ss.

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't Trump just trying to balance things out?

[Mike Honcho 5,024]

5 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Tarifs imply costs going up short term.  Did he have to explicitly say "costs might go up"?

Also, eggs are down in price. 

Not according to Trump (video cued up to relevant part).

 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,782]

2 minutes ago, MDC said:

No, but he did the exact opposite of that by saying costs would go down. 

Fair enough. 

[Tree of Knowledge 1,670]

If you experience higher prices because your Chinese junk is more expensive, that’s on you, not Trump.  Buy American  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,782]

2 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Not according to Trump (video cued up to relevant part).

 

I like you Honcho, but you can't possibly think I would watch the Daily Show, do you?  They're so far left Michael Moore calls them "the crazy left".   

[Strike 5,134]

5 minutes ago, The Psychic Observer said:

Id like to hear the argument because as much as I know it's hogwash and would only benefit the wealthy.  Please educate me.

I posted an article.  Feel free to go find it.  It's here somewhere.  Not my problem you chose not to read it when it was posted.  Go dumpster diving my friend.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,782]

Just now, Strike said:

I posted an article.  Feel free to go find it.  It's here somewhere.  Not my problem you chose not to read it when it was posted.  Go dumpster diving my friend.

Well, there's a reason he's not reading it.  The propaganda and lies he consumes are just so much tastier and sweeter.  Why would he EVER want the truth?

[thegeneral 2,841]

1 hour ago, iam90sbaby said:

Learn to code

In this case it’s learn to be a line worker for 8 bucks an hour in a few years when these factories “come on line”.

[Engorgeous George 2,024]

14 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

This is the problem: WTF are they fighting about?  From what I understand, Europe and a lot of other countries have levied far greater tarifs against us and we've been taking it in the @ss.

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't Trump just trying to balance things out?

An argument can be made that Trump did not start this tariff war, that he is simply joining in and now fighting a war which has raged against America for decades with us doing nothing.  As for balance, to my understanding he looks at trade disparity and wants trade equality ignoring the fact that we are a consumer people.  The tariffs are not directly reciprocal, but rather are that and a function of equalizing the trade imbalance.  I would argue directly recioprocal tariffs, phased in with a bit more lead time, and with a stated policy that we will phase them out reciprocally might have been merited.  The current policy is undefined as to phase out or return to normalcy and further they seek to accomplish some non-trade goals such as border security.  It is a bridge too far for me, but then I am more or less a functional illiterate when it comes to economics and world trade markets.  I am sure those better educated and informed can correct me where I'm wrong and I may learn a thing or two. (Then again, maybe you can't teach this old dog any new tricks as I am in the process of even forgetting my old tricks.)

[MDC 7,043]

8 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Did he over promise with that exact promise, as is his wont, or did he promise to get to work on lowering prices on day one, as a prudent politician would have.  To my memory he promised the former but my memory may be off.

Trump said starting on Day 1 they’d bring prices down and they’d do it “very fast.” 

Did he ever mention this period of higher prices while on the campaign trail? I keep asking and getting crickets.

[Engorgeous George 2,024]

8 minutes ago, Tree of Knowledge said:

If you experience higher prices because your Chinese junk is more expensive, that’s on you, not Trump.  Buy American  

Multiple jokes tee'd up here.  I am going to ignore the one about old fashioned Chinese sailing ships called junks and go with I am german/irish, and so is my junk

[The Psychic Observer 384]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

I posted an article.  Feel free to go find it.  It's here somewhere.  Not my problem you chose not to read it when it was posted.  Go dumpster diving my friend.

I read your article. The guy simply has a theory of how tariffs can replace income tax. He offers no specifics at all. In practicality it would never work. Prices for everything would have to be extremely expensive and would severely hurt the middle and upper class. 

Happy to hear your rebuttal or any specifics you have

[jbycho 515]

3 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

In this case it’s learn to be a line worker for 8 bucks an hour in a few years when these factories “come on line”.

You don't know anything about what you are talking about. And you prove it with every post.  You should take a break from this topic. 

[Strike 5,134]

1 minute ago, Engorgeous George said:

An argument can be made that Trump did not start this tariff war, that he is simply joining in and now fighting a war which has raged against America for decades with us doing nothing.  As for balance, to my understandinghe looks at trade disparity and wants trade equality ignoring the fact that we are a consumer people.  The tariffs are not directly reciprocal, but rather are that and a function ofequalizing the trade imbalance.  I would argue directly recioprocal tariffs, phased in with a bit more lead time, and with a stated policy that we will phase them out reciprocally might have been merited.  The current policy is undefined as to phase out or return to normalcy and further they seek to accomplish some non-trade goals such as border security.  It is a bridge too far for me, but then I am more or less a functional illiterate when it comes to economics and world trade markets.  I am sure those better educated and informed can correct me where I'm wrong and i may learn a thing or two. (Then again, maybe you can't teach this old dog any new tricks as I am in the process of even forgetting my old tricks.)

I tend to agree with you but might suggest that instead of the bolded what Trump is doing is defining a NEW normal, with any change to that new normal being initiated by the other parties.  Then an even newer normal with different levels of tariffs on both sides could be negotiated.  But, if they choose not to negotiate their tariffs down to a level acceptable to Trump, and he keeps the new tariffs just implemented, it would be fair to say he's defining a new normal and not that we should anticipate a return to our current normal.

[Engorgeous George 2,024]

2 minutes ago, MDC said:

Trump said starting on Day 1 they’d bring prices down and they’d do it “very fast.” 

Did he ever mention this period of higher prices while on the campaign trail? I keep asking and getting crickets.

Seems maybe some questioning of Trump on the campaign trail may have been beneficial.  Maybe his terms could have been brought into focus.  In the end, though, I don't believe a politicians puffery on the campaign trail.  Gotchas based upon such don't particulary register with me either, though I do take note as they reinforce my general sceptism and who does not like their world view confirmed?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,782]

7 minutes ago, MDC said:

Trump said starting on Day 1 they’d bring prices down and they’d do it “very fast.” 

Did he ever mention this period of higher prices while on the campaign trail? I keep asking and getting crickets.

So then it depends on what your definition of "very fast" means in regards to prices.  I think most people would argue that 2 months in for "very fast" in regards to prices is probably still a bit too soon.  Maybe 6 months?  Not sure, but I'm willing to give it more time.

Biden DID say he would cure cancer if you voted for him, but AFAIK he didn't.  So, if Biden couldn't cure cancer in 4 years can we give Trump at least that long?  Maybe more than 2 months, at least?

[Engorgeous George 2,024]

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

I tend to agree with you but might suggest that instead of the bolded what Trump is doing is defining a NEW normal, with any change to that new normal being initiated by the other parties.  Then an even newer normal with different levels of tariffs on both sides could be negotiated.  But, if they choose not to negotiate their tariffs down to a level acceptable to Trump, and he keeps the new tariffs just implemented, it would be fair to say he's defining a new normal and not that we should anticipate a return to our current normal.

As i said, this is not my area, yet I find your analysis interesting.  It is clear to me that eventually a new equilibrium will be reached.  When and what the terms of that equilibrium are alludes my imagination or speculation.  I just hope that the process of reachign that point does not have unintended or unanticipated consequences, like the dollar no longer being the world's default currency or allowing China greater inroads into our hemisphere, or alienating longstanding and critical allies.

 

Regardless of my fears we have jumped, and unless we can learn to fly we are going to find out if we have the strength to land on our feet and walk away.

[jbycho 515]

3 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

So then it depends on what your definition of "very fast" means in regards to prices.  I think most people would argue that 2 months in for "very fast" in regards to prices is probably still a bit too soon.  Maybe 6 months?  Not sure, but I'm willing to give it more time.

Biden DID say he would cure cancer if you voted for him, but AFAIK he didn't.  So, if Biden couldn't cure cancer in 4 years can we give Trump at least that long?  Maybe more than 2 months, at least?

If Trump cured cancer, liberals would scream and whine about how he singlehandedly created a world over-population problem. 

[MDC 7,043]

10 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Seems maybe some questioning of Trump on the campaign trail may have been beneficial.  Maybe his terms could have been brought into focus.  In the end, though, I don't believe a politicians puffery on the campaign trail.  Gotchas based upon such don't particulary register with me either, though I do take note as they reinforce my general sceptism and who does not like their world view confirmed?

It’s one thing to say “I’ll do X” and then not do it. It’s another thing to do the exact opposite of X and then claim everyone should have known it. 

It’s all academic because Trump will never follow through with it anyway. 

[MDC 7,043]

10 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

So then it depends on what your definition of "very fast" means in regards to prices.  I think most people would argue that 2 months in for "very fast" in regards to prices is probably still a bit too soon.  Maybe 6 months?  Not sure, but I'm willing to give it more time.

Biden DID say he would cure cancer if you voted for him, but AFAIK he didn't.  So, if Biden couldn't cure cancer in 4 years can we give Trump at least that long?  Maybe more than 2 months, at least?

How about if Biden promised to cure cancer day 1, then increased cancer and had his rubes tell everyone they should have known that’s what was going to happen?

Cause that’s where we’re at.