Political Posts

[Viking]

4 minutes ago, Castanza said:

Less bitching more buying...this volatility is a gift to anyone under 50...And we've now had two of these "events" in 5 years...

@Castanza , great point. We have now had bear markets in the stock market averages in 2018, 2020 and 2022. And it looks like we might get another in 2025. The market averages were down 20% or more each time. Lots of individual stocks went down much more than 20% during each correction.

[Spooky]

1 hour ago, Castanza said:

Less bitching more buying...this volatility is a gift to anyone under 50...And we've now had two of these "events" in 5 years...

 

Wish markets would drop significantly more...

[LC]

1 hour ago, SharperDingaan said:

The US administration is just incompetent, that's all there is to it.

Hence .... the reliable action is to simply trade against whatever it does, in expectation that it has no idea as to the mechanics, and can be relied upon to f*** ** **.  Orange Boys signature isn't worth anything, and It's essentially a long straddle; if by fluke the administration gets it right - it's a bonus ... but if it screws up, it's also a bonus. Don't much care which way it goes 

 

Shitty way to run a railroad, but it is what it is.

 

SD

 

Yeah I kind of agree. Any attempt to 'peer behind the veil' for some 'deep insight' is wishful thinking.

 

That said I design my "straddle" differently - not so much with options but a bit more qualitatively. 

 

For example I live in a ski town. If overall wealth and tourism fall - yeah my home price goes down, the pizzeria I own makes less money or just breaks even. But the straddle kicks in: less people skiing and more of the mountains to myself. Worth it for some valuation decrease on assets I don't plan on selling.

 

Same with my employment: Put simply, I do math for a living. Less immigration from India/China, more "manufacturing" back in the US - just means less employment competition and more leverage for me to potentially exert.

Edited April 4, 2025 by LC

[73 Reds]

3 minutes ago, LC said:

 

Yeah I kind of agree. Any attempt to 'peer behind the veil' for some 'deep insight' is wishful thinking.

 

That said I design my "straddle" differently - not so much with options but a bit more qualitatively. 

 

For example I live in a ski town. If overall wealth and tourism fall - yeah my home price goes down, the pizzeria I own makes less money or just breaks even. But the straddle kicks in: less people skiing and more of the mountains to myself. Worth it for some valuation decrease on assets I don't plan on selling.

 

Same with my employment: Put simply, I do math for a living. Less immigration from India/China, more "manufacturing" back in the US - just means less employment competition and more leverage for me to potentially exert.

@LC That's a great post.  I do something similar with my various real estate businesses and interests.  When prices rise, the lending business is active and lucrative.  When prices fall, time to buy.  Rentals are always good due to location and title pays a lot of bills.

[Ghost]

Mr. Trump:  “I think it’s going very well.” after Mr. Trump looks at his short portfolio

    

 

 

 

He should hit the 100B dollar club by the end of his term. 

[Red Lion]

25 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Mr. Trump:  “I think it’s going very well.” after Mr. Trump looks at his short portfolio

    

 

 

 

He should hit the 100B dollar club by the end of his term. 

You bring up an interesting point. With the recent Supreme Court ruling, it makes you wonder if insider trading on short dated puts for example would be covered by executive privilege/separation of powers. 
 

I mean just because you’ve got $200 million in puts expiring next week can’t get in the way of exercising your executive authority (which congress abdicated) to impose 1930s level tariffs  

[John Hjorth]

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114279915827492021

 

 

The art of the deal, and all that.

[Viking]

Well, today the US science experiment got another couple of data points. China increased tariffs on US goods by 34%. I know... what a shocker.

 

And the S&P500 sold off another 6%. The sell-off in the S&P500 over the past 2 days has been epic. The tariff sell off has now wiped out a full year of gains in US equities. Good thing most Americans don't have a pension (like a 401k) that is invested in equities - if they did that would really suck. But hey, that is what success tastes like. Sorry if that isn't what you expected. And you better get used to it - because much more is probably coming. Bottom line, that is a massive amount of value destruction. It really is impressive. But hey, this is what Trump promised - so you'll eat it and you'll like it. 

 

The really interesting thing is we are only 2 days into this science experiment - the practical phase. The US economy hasn't even been impacted - yet. As Trump keeps promising, the best is yet to come. It looks pretty clear that inflation is going higher and growth will be slowing - and supporters of the president can't wait.

 

It really is a surreal thing to watch. This is playing out like a slow moving train wreck. And lots of Americans are loving/applauding/supporting it. One of the things we are learning is that other countries don't like getting kicked in the teeth... I know, I know... what a shocker (another one). 

 

What is the next data point? What does Europe do. If they take China's approach... well, that is called a full on trade war. Something we haven't seen in 100 years or so. Why so long? Because it was so bad the last time it happened countries were smart enough to avoid it (that hand over a flame thing). So it appears we need to put that hand over the flame again. Yes I know, history sucks.   

 

So my guess is the US administration will be looking for a win this weekend. Well, if they are smart they will be. (Why are you laughing?)

 

Edited April 4, 2025 by Viking

[mcliu]

Is it obvious that inflation will be higher in the short-term? Energy prices and asset prices are coming down along with demand, isn’t that deflationary?

[73 Reds]

10 minutes ago, Viking said:

Well, today the US science experiment got another couple of data points. China increased tariffs on US goods by 34%. I know... what a shocker.

 

And the S&P500 sold off another 6%. The sell-off in the S&P500 over the past 2 days has been epic. The tariff sell off has now wiped out a full year of gains in US equities. Good thing most Americans don't have a pension (like a 401k) that is invested in equities - if they did that would really suck. But hey, that is what success tastes like. Sorry if that isn't what you expected. And you better get used to it - because much more is probably coming. Bottom line, that is a massive amount of value destruction. It really is impressive. But hey, this is what Trump promised - so you'll eat it and you'll like it. 

 

The really interesting thing is we are only 2 days into this science experiment - the practical phase. The US economy hasn't even been impacted - yet. As Trump keeps promising, the best is yet to come. It looks pretty clear that inflation is going higher and growth will be slowing - and supporters of the president can't wait.

 

It really is a surreal thing to watch. This is playing out like a slow moving train wreck. And lots of Americans are loving/applauding/supporting it. One of the things we are learning is that other countries don't like getting kicked in the teeth... I know, I know... what a shocker (another one). 

 

What is the next data point? What does Europe do. If they take China's approach... well, that is called a full on trade war. Something we haven't seen in 100 years or so. Why so long? Because it was so bad the last time it happened countries were smart enough to avoid it (that hand over a flame thing). So it appears we need to put that hand over the flame again. Yes I know, history sucks.   

 

So my guess is the US administration will be looking for a win this weekend. Well, if they are smart they will be. (Why are you laughing?)

 

@Viking Stocks needed a reason to fall.  Seriously.  I recall before the US presidential election thinking that regardless of who won, stocks would go down (I posted something to that effect here).  Two bad choices, albeit for different reasons don't lend themselves to investor confidence which we all know determines current prices.  What is surprising is folks just now realized that Trump wasn't kidding about tariffs.  Folks here on this board should be getting ready for an opportunity that doesn't often come along.  Hopefully Buffett, too finds a way to wet his beak because unlike Covid, this has a readily foreseeable conclusion.

[Mephistopheles]

So now even lying Ted Cruz is warning about a bloodbath in 2026.

 

Me thinks the GOP eventually stands up to him and this will soon end…famous last words. 

[Gregmal]

Just now, mcliu said:

Is it obvious that inflation will be higher in the short-term? Energy prices and asset prices are coming down along with demand, isn’t that deflationary?

Yea it’s really funny watching people state this matter of factly. Guess $130 Nikes…..pending Vietnam negotiations….are the new housing/oil? We went through this before when people bet on inflation, post the actual inflation, right into the 2022 peak, and they missed it all. Same will happen again.
 

People get so confused when the market gets volatile. It’s great. 

[Gregmal]

1 minute ago, 73 Reds said:

@Viking Stocks needed a reason to fall.  Seriously.  I recall before the US presidential election thinking that regardless of who won, stocks would go down (I posted something to that effect here).  Two bad choices, albeit for different reasons don't lend themselves to investor confidence which we all know determines current prices.  What is surprising is folks just now realized that Trump wasn't kidding about tariffs.  Folks here on this board should be getting ready for an opportunity that doesn't often come along.  Hopefully Buffett, too finds a way to wet his beak because unlike Covid, this has a readily foreseeable conclusion.

Viking does this long winded pontificating whenever we get a 10% pullback. It’s NBD.

[dealraker]

9 minutes ago, Mephistopheles said:

So now even lying Ted Cruz is warning about a bloodbath in 2026.

 

Me thinks the GOP eventually stands up to him and this will soon end…famous last words. 

Trump has proven for 55 years that he is financially illiterate.  He can intimidate, cheat, take a niece's inheritance,repeatedly defraud, and tell fantasy lies as to anything he's involved with.  But business and finance?  Glaring in your face goofball life.   We wanted him and his disruption, we were sure it was those other people he would destroy.  We deserve all we get.

[Viking]

16 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

@Viking Stocks needed a reason to fall.  Seriously.  I recall before the US presidential election thinking that regardless of who won, stocks would go down (I posted something to that effect here).  Two bad choices, albeit for different reasons don't lend themselves to investor confidence which we all know determines current prices.  What is surprising is folks just now realized that Trump wasn't kidding about tariffs.  Folks here on this board should be getting ready for an opportunity that doesn't often come along.  Hopefully Buffett, too finds a way to wet his beak because unlike Covid, this has a readily foreseeable conclusion.

 

@73 Reds , I agree: "Folks here on this board should be getting ready for an opportunity that doesn't often come along."

• Crisis = opportunity. 

[rogermunibond]

Cruz added to the list of Grassley, McConnell, Rand, Murkowski, Collins and now French Hill House financial services chair. 
 

Plus no rate cuts from Powell.  
 

The pressure rises. 

Edited April 4, 2025 by rogermunibond

[mattee2264]

The gameplan seems fairly clearcut. Trump and his team are mercantilists and they believe they can win the trade war and get concessions from their trading partners. You just need to look at the way the tariff rates were set. It is just tit-for-tat. And early in Trump's term they are prepared to endure a bit of pain confident they will emerge victorious and with better terms of trade. Another motive for protectionism is that USA wants to on-shore strategic industries such as semiconductors and AI and through on-shoring try to create jobs for Americans. And Trump will probably be encouraged by some offsetting benefits such as lower oil prices and lower 10 year yields. 

 

While economic theory argues that tariffs reduce the overall size of the pie there are redistributive effects so winners and losers and therefore to expect that reason will prevail and tariff increases will get completely reversed is naïve. So there is likely to be an enduring shift away from free trade and that will have a negative impact on the global economy that will probably persist so long as Trump remains in power. Also Trump isn't going to unilaterally reverse the tariff increases it will require other countries to lower their pre-existing tariff rates on American goods so Trump can claim a win. I can't see countries doing that easily or quickly not least because if they do Trump will push it and demand even more but also because there are political reasons why countries have tariffs on US goods such as lobby groups and other vested interests and that will make it difficult to give Trump the extent of concessions he probably wants. So I think this could drag on longer than people think.

 

 

 

 

[Viking]

20 minutes ago, mcliu said:

Is it obvious that inflation will be higher in the short-term? Energy prices and asset prices are coming down along with demand, isn’t that deflationary?

 

Guess what all those beautiful tariffs announced 2 days ago will be doing to prices for many of the goods the US imports? Not just the finished products... but also the inputs and raw materials? Now I am not a rocket scientist but I can do basic math.

 

Now the really interesting thing with tariffs is what the protected domestic producers tend to do... when a tariff is introduced (raising prices on imports) they also raise prices (because they can). And once they get that benefit guess what happens to their political donations? It increases - they then actively lobby to ensure the beautiful tariffs stay in place.

 

Now of course, there are lots of things going on in the economy at the same time. So there will be puts and takes.

 

 

[Blake Hampton]

It really is quite incredible just how much chaos one man can cause.

[Blake Hampton]

He must feel like a god.

[Viking]

12 minutes ago, mattee2264 said:

The gameplan seems fairly clearcut. Trump and his team are mercantilists and they believe they can win the trade war and get concessions from their trading partners. You just need to look at the way the tariff rates were set. It is just tit-for-tat. And early in Trump's term they are prepared to endure a bit of pain confident they will emerge victorious and with better terms of trade. Another motive for protectionism is that USA wants to on-shore strategic industries such as semiconductors and AI and through on-shoring try to create jobs for Americans. And Trump will probably be encouraged by some offsetting benefits such as lower oil prices and lower 10 year yields. 

 

While economic theory argues that tariffs reduce the overall size of the pie there are redistributive effects so winners and losers and therefore to expect that reason will prevail and tariff increases will get completely reversed is naïve. So there is likely to be an enduring shift away from free trade and that will have a negative impact on the global economy that will probably persist so long as Trump remains in power. Also Trump isn't going to unilaterally reverse the tariff increases it will require other countries to lower their pre-existing tariff rates on American goods so Trump can claim a win. I can't see countries doing that easily or quickly not least because if they do Trump will push it and demand even more but also because there are political reasons why countries have tariffs on US goods such as lobby groups and other vested interests and that will make it difficult to give Trump the extent of concessions he probably wants. So I think this could drag on longer than people think.

 

@mattee2264 , you are assuming Trump is a rational actor. With a plan. Who can be trusted to honour a deal. 

 

What if this is not the case?

[dwy000]

When Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are willing to come out publicly against the tariffs there are serious cracks forming. If there are more stock declines next week (remember the adage that the market never bottoms on a Friday) or layoff announcements, the wave will grow and congress are likely to act.  If there's no strategy or message for Fox to rally around it makes crazy, painful moves very difficult to support. And it appears Fox is hiding - there isn't a message about the stock declines on their web page and they removed the ticker.  

 

The only way Trump can hold this plan is if there's a strategy to get behind.  And what I keep hearing from both sides is a lack of understanding of why he's doing this. 

[Simba]

This is painful to watch. If there is no deal with major trading partners, and tariffs war stays in effect, there will be more pain ahead IMO in markets.

 

Two back to back -5% days? Market is saying something . And it’s loud and clear. Unlike Covid which had an end game (vaccine), I’m not an economist but did take economics 101, and without relief - what is the end game?

 

This just feels like a massive policy error (although we won’t know until hindsight but the market clearly isn’t buying it)

 

just my 2c

[RichardGibbons]

12 minutes ago, Simba said:

Two back to back -5% days? Market is saying something . And it’s loud and clear. Unlike Covid which had an end game (vaccine), I’m not an economist but did take economics 101, and without relief - what is the end game?

 

The end game is, at worst, the election of a Democratic majority to the Senate and Congress after the massive crushing of American standards of living.

[Red Lion]

Just now, RichardGibbons said:

 

The end game is, at worst, the election of a Democratic majority to the Senate and Congress after the massive crushing of American standards of living.

Yeah and maybe enough disagreement in the razor thin house to actually not pass a tax bill if we're talking worst case scenario. Certainly seems like a huge risk to take.