Political Posts

[Ghost]

22 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

That's pretty idiotic really.  If Trump wanted to be richer, he would have never run for a second term. He had it made.

 

Running for a second term resulting in the opposition trying to bankrupt him by destroying his businesses, then try to kill him, then put him in jail for 300 years.

 

Yeah, I'm sure he did this for the money.

 

Being the President of the USA is one of if not the most powerful person in the world?   He is the President for power...come on now.  If I am not mistaken he wants another term. 

[cubsfan]

2 minutes ago, Luke said:

China uses its own domestic market to scale out global companies that can underprice their competitors. If their own market would be owned by international companies they would be stuck and have no control about their economic future.

 

The US has exactly that ALREADY, they own large cap technology companies etc BUT these companies do not employ a lot of people anymore. Thats why there is a large part of the society that has been left alone and could not join into that wealth creation.

 

Now, look at your domestic market, americans now have no choice but pay up or buy your domestic cars, semiconductors or other non existing manufacturing merch.

 

Cars might get a boost, but will the tariffs make intel more competitive? TSCM is still years ahead and continues to progress and delivery globally while intel cant make proper chips...ON TOP comes that manufacturing for a lot of basics will not return because financial capital in the US wont invest in large factories to make toys that costs hundred of millions that are uncompetitive globally.

 

You will then face huge inflation, very angry citizens and trump soon will either cut tariffs of or will be voted out.

 

So, in other words, China will keep 60% tariffs forever, but we can't.  That's what I thought.

 

Very poor answer.

Edited April 3, 2025 by cubsfan

[backtothebeach]

Bessent yesterday sounded very uncomfortable, he might be on his way out. However Lutnick is a believer.
 

 

[Luke]

3 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

Not at all. It's a reset for the USA, plain and simple. America first. 

This reads like a marketing slogan and was also the marketing trump promoted to get your vote.

 

Reality is complex and just setting up tariffs and saying "its done now it will fix itself" is anything but what will happen.

 

This has a high likelyhood of failure and consequences are disastrous. It was not smart to go through with and i expect him to revert his decision soon.

[Viking]

20 hours ago, Viking said:

Well it looks like the American science experiment is moving from the theory stage to the practical stage. 
 

The theory stage was the fun part - because, well, there are no real consequences at this stage. You get to say whatever you want - and you don’t need to be right (or even in the right zip code). 
 

But once you move to the practical stage - well, this is when we start to see consequences. And if it turns out you are wrong - well, things will not be pretty. 
 

How will we know how things are going?
 

The problem today, is it is almost impossible to find an impartial observer. Except we are talking about the economy and financial markets. And the last time I checked, the stock market is as impartial as it gets - it is not Republican or Democrat. 
 

So what does the stock market think about the theory part of America’s science experiment? 
 

It is giving it a solid ‘C-‘ grade. Stock averages are down about 8% from their all-time highs. Business and consumer confidence is tanking. And the economy looks like it is slowing. 
 

And starting tomorrow, we are moving to the practical stage. So things are likely about to get real. It will be very interesting to see what financial markets do in the coming weeks/months. 
 

—————-

 

What was one of the reasons the ‘theory’ part got such a low grade?

 

Well, our student did not put anything in writing. What they discussed (in the verbal part) was not coherent. And their communication skills were terrible. 
 

So why didn’t they get a lower grade? 
 

Because that would be mean. And cruel on the part of the grader. (And this student has notoriously thin skin). 

Well, the US science experiment is getting some new data. The S&P500 is down 4.66% and the Nasdaq is down 5.74%. These are historic one day moves. Needless to say, the stock market is not drinking the Kool-Aid. If fact, today it just threw up. 

Where do we go from here? Economic heaven, if you listen to Trump supporters. I remain unconvinced. But hey, I have been wrong once or twice in my life before. But I remain open minded and inquisitive (and with a cash weighting of 40%). 

 

Edited April 3, 2025 by Viking

[cubsfan]

1 minute ago, Luke said:

This reads like a marketing slogan and was also the marketing trump promoted to get your vote.

 

Reality is complex and just setting up tariffs and saying "its done now it will fix itself" is anything but what will happen.

 

This has a high likelyhood of failure and consequences are disastrous. It was not smart to go through with and i expect him to revert his decision soon.

 

It's not complex at all. 60% tariffs are terrifically unfair trade. And you can't defend it with any sort of logic. You just make it up as you go along.

 

This country can make great products - but we can't sell them overseas with 60% tariffs.

 

 

[Luke]

Just now, cubsfan said:

So, in other words, China will keep 60% tariff forever, but we can't.  That's what I thought.

 

Very poor answer.

You can but you are in a different situation than china. I found your answer remarkebly poor because you have not explained how these tariffs will make uncompetitive US manufacturing competitive? Who is going to invest money into low margin, uncompetitive manufacturing goods and do you think wages for US citizens will be better in those than in mcdonalds+having access to cheap chinese goods? The latter is whats the better call. 

 

How is Intel becoming more competitive if they lack decades of RnD, poor leadership, brain and talent from overseas that now have less access to your country and less of a welcome? How will intel compete internationally with a TSMC anytime soon?

 

You have no idea whats coming frankly and only repeat trump marketing lines unfortunately.

[Luke]

The show of the future will now play in eurasia and the US exited markets currently trying to fix things that are super hard to fix with a low likelyhood of success. good luck!

[Luke]

2 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

It's not complex at all. 60% tariffs are terrifically unfair trade. And you can't defend it with any sort of logic. You just make it up as you go along.

 

This country can make great products - but we can't sell them overseas with 60% tariffs.

Yes but what happens if you cant produce things you import and citizens of your country rely on those imports? Tell me how long it takes to scale up manufacturing to be as cheap as current chinese manufacturing. It will take years and years and everything will cost more and more...disaster.

[cubsfan]

1 minute ago, Luke said:

You can but you are in a different situation than china. I found your answer remarkebly poor because you have not explained how these tariffs will make uncompetitive US manufacturing competitive? Who is going to invest money into low margin, uncompetitive manufacturing goods and do you think wages for US citizens will be better in those than in mcdonalds+having access to cheap chinese goods? The latter is whats the better call. 

 

How is Intel becoming more competitive if they lack decades of RnD, poor leadership, brain and talent from overseas that now have less access to your country and less of a welcome? How will intel compete internationally with a TSMC anytime soon?

 

You have no idea whats coming frankly and only repeat trump marketing lines unfortunately.

 

OF course, you make no sense at all.  IF there are no export markets available for US companies, due to high tariffs,  of course they will be uncompetitive. 

[longlake95]

no expert here either, but it sure looks like these "policies" will have to moderate in the near future. The pressure will become too great. Global trade, particularly countries like Canada and Mexico,  seems too integrated not to harm the U.S. just as much as everyone else. We'll see...

[Luke]

Just now, cubsfan said:

OF course, you make no sense at all.  IF there are no export markets available for US companies, due to high tariffs,  of course they will be uncompetitive. 

The reason for US uncompetitiveness is NOT foreign tariffs Look at your uncompetitve companies and tell me why Intel would be better if it has less tariffs in china! It is simply not the case and reality. 

[Luke]

2 minutes ago, longlake95 said:

no expert here either, but it sure looks like these "policies" will have to moderate in the near future. The pressure will become too great. Global trade, particularly countries like Canada and Mexico,  seems too integrated not to harm the U.S. just as much as everyone else. We'll see...

Yes or people living in the US will get squeezed. I wouldnt have thought this but today i am very happy of not living in the US while in the past i sometimes thought it would be enticing to move over there.

[thepupil]

8 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

It's not complex at all. 60% tariffs are terrifically unfair trade. And you can't defend it with any sort of logic. You just make it up as you go along.

 

This country can make great products - but we can't sell them overseas with 60% tariffs.

 

 

 

I'm a little confused by the 60% number you cite. I do not have a source for it anywhere. there is the trump chart from last night with a dubiously calculated 67% number, which is the subject of ridicule. Is this what you are referring to?

 

From my understanding, the  Trump admin and China began a trade war/raising of tariffs against each other in Trump's first term. Biden / China kept those stable, then Trump just did this. 

 

A chart of the tariff rates between the two countries is below.

 

Prior to Trump initiating the trade war it appears China had a tariff on US exports b/w 5-10% on fewer than 2% of US exports. The tarriffs on US exports were in line with those charged by China relative to the rest of the world and on an immaterial portion of trade.

 

https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/2019/us-china-trade-war-tariffs-date-chart

 

my assumption that China became manufacturer to the world because of, initially, cheap labor, and thereafter, scale, innovation, and a healthy dose of systematic IP "exchange" facilitated by compliant multinationals who lusted for access to the chinese market. I don't belief tariffs played a material role. 

 

Edited April 3, 2025 by thepupil

[Luke]

8 minutes ago, Viking said:

Well, the US science experiment is getting some new data. The S&P500 is down 4.66% and the Nasdaq is down 5.74%. These are historic one day moves. Needless to say, the stock market is not drinking the Kool-Aid. If fact, today it just threw up. 

Where do we go from here? Economic heaven, if you listen to Trump supporters. I remain unconvinced. But hey, I have been wrong once or twice in my life before. But I remain open minded and inquisitive (and with a cash weighting of 40%). 

 

Yeah, i think 40% cash is a nice position. Crazy how buffett might have predicted something like this, two months ago i was still laughing about his cash position. But he didnt know trump would be reelected or did he? Anyways, we will be in for some ride!

 

I sold my 40% in the green hang lung group position this morning when hong kong was open to reduce margin. I think tougher times ahead and wanna have some room...

[cubsfan]

2 minutes ago, Luke said:

The reason for US uncompetitiveness is NOT foreign tariffs Look at your uncompetitve companies and tell me why Intel would be better if it has less tariffs in china! It is simply not the case and reality. 

 

China is not going to have access to the wealthiest country in the world with our high tariffs.

 

Rebuilding manufacturing will take time and is well worth it - especially against countries that had a field day destroying our manufacturing base.

 

You still have not told me why China does not drop their 60% tariffs against the USA.

[Luke]

2 minutes ago, thepupil said:

 

I'm a little confused by the 60% number you cite. I do not have a source for it anywhere. there is the trump chart from last night with a dubiously calculated 67% number, which is the subject of ridicule. Is this what you are referring to?

 

From my understanding, the  Trump admin and China began a trade war/raising of tariffs against each other in Trump's first term. Biden / China kept those stable, then Trump just did this. 

 

A chart of the tariff rates between the two countries is below.

 

Prior to Trump initiating the trade war it appears China had a tariff on US exports b/w 5-10% on fewer than 2% of US exports. The tarriffs on US exports were in line with those charged by China relative to the rest of the world and on an immaterial portion of trade.

 

https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/2019/us-china-trade-war-tariffs-date-chart

 

Thanks for the data. Tariffs probably less a role but these forced shared ventures etc where decisive in the upscaling of chinese companies. You have some of that with tiktok now that comes close but trump seems to overly focus on tariffs.

[thepupil]

Just now, cubsfan said:

You still have not told me why China does not drop their 60% tariffs against the USA.

 

because prior to any resulting retaliation from yesterday, they did not exist?

[Luke]

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

China is not going to have access to the wealthiest country in the world with our high tariffs.

The party will not play in the US, chinese domestic market and europe, now africa will be more the focus and all will be good. China can diversify and does not rely that much on imports.

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

Rebuilding manufacturing will take time and is well worth it - especially against countries that had a field day destroying our manufacturing base.

You have no idea...

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

You still have not told me why China does not drop their 60% tariffs against the USA.

I told you why these dont matter on which you havent replied. You just repeat trump slogans and "everything will be great, america first".

[cubsfan]

2 minutes ago, Luke said:

The party will not play in the US, chinese domestic market and europe, now africa will be more the focus and all will be good. China can diversify and does not rely that much on imports.

You have no idea...

I told you why these dont matter on which you havent replied. You just repeat trump slogans and "everything will be great, america first".

 

Yeah Africa will be a great substitute for the US market. Good luck with that.

 

You just love those high tariffs, so long as it's not the US imposing them.

 

What a hypocrite.

[Ghost]

The market has spoken of what it thinks of the Tariffs. 

[mcliu]

14 minutes ago, thepupil said:

my assumption that China became manufacturer to the world because of, initially, cheap labor, and thereafter, scale, innovation, and a healthy dose of systematic IP "exchange" facilitated by compliant multinationals who lusted for access to the chinese market. I don't belief tariffs played a material role. 

 

100%. Chinese industrial policy and protectionism for domestic champions helped make it a manufacturing powerhouse. But the USA is also at fault for not countering such policy at the onset.

 

Look at the solar and battery business. Massive Chinese subsidies a few decades ago bankrupted huge swaths of US manufacturers. Once the supply chain and economies of scale have built up, it's difficult to replicate without tremendous pain.

 

15 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

Rebuilding manufacturing will take time and is well worth it - especially against countries that had a field day destroying our manufacturing base.

 

Yes in many ways, these countries did destroy the manufacturing base of the US but the US is also complicit in letting it happen by not crafting an adequate response from the beginning.

[Luke]

7 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

Yeah Africa will be a great substitute for the US market. Good luck with that.

Most important is asian and european markets but the US seems to totally lose their respect in africa and this continent (if you do the work and look at the numbers) will have one of the youngest and eager populations on the globe and i think its not to be underestimated over the long term.

7 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

You just love those high tariffs, so long as it's not the US imposing them.

 

What a hypocrite.

Are you even reading my comments? Are you talking with someone else? Sry cubsfan but you just write a few oneliner marketing slogans without any fundamentals for why trumps tariff would lead to american companies becoming so much more competitive.

[Luke]

Just now, mcliu said:

Yes in many ways, these countries did destroy the manufacturing base of the US but the US is also complicit in letting it happen by not crafting an adequate response from the beginning.

NO. It was NOT china who destroyed US manufacturing. It was destroyed by greedy US capitalists that looked for the cheapest labor available and fucked over US workers. China started from nothing but selling their asses to capitalists from the west, slowly using surplus proceeds with trade barriers and technology transfers to scale up their own industry. Its a miracle and probably the highest service any government has done to any country. That process took decades and benefitted from massive population scale, top down dictator approach without election or blocking senate whatever.

[Dalal.Holdings]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

 

Really, China?   China has 60% tariffs on US goods, but the US is the bully.  Gotcha 

 

If tariffs are so horrible, how did China grow at 10% per annum for decades?

 

Why don't they ditch them?

The logic: Tariffs are only bad when the U.S. does them. China can tariff and peg their currency to an artificially weak level for decades and no complaints or much of anything from “freetraders” and economists