25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports.

[cwericb]

This is from something back in November...

 

"President-elect Donald Trump has noticed something in his travels across the U.S. Many parts of his country are running out of water. Groundwater supplies are being depleted faster than they can be replenished. The American west is in a multi-year water crisis. National Geographic says the country is “running out of water.”

 

For Trump, to “Make America Great Again” is to bring jobs, agriculture and energy production as well as manufacturing back to the U.S. He can’t do that without water, and he has already signaled where he could find some. Canada has a “massive faucet” that would take only one day to turn on, and all of that water “would come right down here and right into Los Angeles.”

[Blake Hampton]

13 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Sounds like we better get back to university and study up then! But hey, maybe JPow can channel some sort of voodoo spell from his living room couch in 2026.

Yeah, I can’t wait for the ol’ fascist to instill a lapdog and really destroy what little faith people still had for our currency.
 

But the Fed is purposeless right?

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Blake Hampton

[dwy000]

2 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Canada will end up contributing more money to defense spending and that will probably be it. 

That would suggest that Trump is plunging the country into an expensive trade war, causing a rift with its closest allies, causing what will likely be interim chaos in the home building and auto sectors (plus food), all for some defense spending from a country that only has one border?  How is any of that good for America???  What is the win?  

[james22]

10 minutes ago, Blake Hampton said:

The Fed then might have to teach some of you a hard lesson in economics.

 

What's your degree in, Blake?

[Gregmal]

3 minutes ago, Blake Hampton said:

Yeah, I can’t for the ol’ fascist to instill a lapdog and really destroy what little faith people still had for our currency.
 

But the Fed is purposeless right?

I swear sometimes I think you post here just for the amusement of everybody. The unwavering belief in the idea that you have it all figured out and that everything just goes the way the textbook teaches is remarkable. 
 

However the trailing returns tied to such beliefs I would imagine are quite paltry.

Edited 4 hours ago by Gregmal

[Gregmal]

6 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

That would suggest that Trump is plunging the country into an expensive trade war, causing a rift with its closest allies, causing what will likely be interim chaos in the home building and auto sectors (plus food), all for some defense spending from a country that only has one border?  How is any of that good for America???  What is the win?  

Plunging the country into an expensive trade war and yet people like Blake are predicting inflation? Lmfao….its gonna be short term, and if the country can’t handle it guess where rates go? If they can, it’s overblown much like all the other supposed horror stories we were told were right around the corner the last 5 years, that yup…never actually showed up. 
 

Trumps MO with Canada is likely to deliver on a stupid campaign promise and then use a publicity win to gouge Mexico. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Gregmal

[Blake Hampton]

10 minutes ago, james22 said:

What's your degree in, Blake?

Look at Michael Salyor, he went to MIT and he’s retarded.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Blake Hampton

[dwy000]

5 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Plunging the country into an expensive trade war and yet people like Blake are predicting inflation? Lmfao….its gonna be short term, and if the country can’t handle it guess where rates go? If they can, it’s overblown much like all the other supposed horror stories we were told were right around the corner the last 5 years, that yup…never actually showed up. 
 

Trumps MO with Canada is likely to deliver on a stupid campaign promise and then use a publicly win to gouge Mexico. 

The sad part for America is i completely agree. This will be short term chaos for nothing. It's a PR stunt to show he fulfilled a campaign promise.

 

It's not good for American jobs, it's not good for American consumers. It's not good for America's global relationships.  It's not good for prices.  It's not good for anyone except Trump's ego.

 

And yet mindless hoards will believe this as a great thing because Hannity told them so.

Edited 4 hours ago by dwy000

[cwericb]

4 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Plunging the country into an expensive trade war and yet people like Blake are predicting inflation?

 

Adding a 25% tax onto imports is not inflationary?

[Sweet]

2 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

Adding a 25% tax onto imports is not inflationary?

It really depends on other factors.  If it tanks the economy it’s not inflationary.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Sweet

[Spekulatius]

2 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

Adding a 25% tax onto imports is not inflationary?

Mr Bond Market will let us know tomorrow how he thinks about it. Could go either way, imo.

[james22]

3 minutes ago, Blake Hampton said:

Look at Michael Salyor, he went to MIT and he’s retarded.

 

Your shtick is wearing thin.

[gary17]

Just now, Spekulatius said:

Mr Bond Market will let us know tomorrow how he thinks about it. Could go either way, imo.

 i 'd be very curious that in an inflationary (due to taxes) enviroment ,    but economy is weak -   how will the fed tweak the lever on rates.    yikes

[cwericb]

1 minute ago, Sweet said:

It really depends on other factors.  If it tanks the economy it’s not inflationary.

 

 

True. I guess that would be one way to avoid inflation.

[Gregmal]

4 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

Adding a 25% tax onto imports is not inflationary?

Only in a very simplistic and first level thinking kinda way. Its just gonna crater demand and push people to alternative products. This was actually one of Trumps stated goals, to get people to buy made in America. 

 

Besides...havent all the experts been telling us how weak the economy is? It would have to be pretty durable to eat that bump, but even still, its only effecting specific segment, not the entire economy, so its not going to massively throw off inflation readings for that long, if at all. Like homebuilders are already seeing low volume...theyre not pushing it off on the consumer, they'll eat it for a little bit, maybe the stonk bois try to use this as an excuse to bid them down and scare everyone off like they did in 2022, but again, it'll just be a short term manipulative thing, not some huge structural issue. 

[Gregmal]

8 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

Mr Bond Market will let us know tomorrow how he thinks about it. Could go either way, imo.

Short term rates probably go higher because thats the natural knee jerk assumption that the talking heads and academics have been feeding everyone. First move is usually wrong though. 

[james22]

33 minutes ago, Maverick47 said:

Don’t you think that @John Hjorth might not appreciate Trump’s threats to take Greenland from Denmark, which is similar to Trump’s desire to use tariffs to turn Canada into a 51st state?

 

 

[Tenerife]

What are the secondary impact on the sectors like:

MIC (Military Industrial Complex)

MAG7 (Google, Apple, Etc.)

What happens to them when other countries act like China or slide with China in avoiding them.

Most of US exports are concentrated in these. US outperformance over the past decade is mainly due to these exports. What are the tertiary effects?

[Gamecock-YT]

24 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

 

 

https://www.bild.de/news/ausland/nato-generalsekretaer-rutte-bereit-fuer-krieg-um-frieden-zu-sichern-679be76e08bc756e749d2966

 

Back to Trump: The US president is not ruling out using military means to gain access to Greenland. Could this be the end of NATO?

"No! But when it comes to defense in the Arctic, Trump is right. What I think is really good is that the Prime Minister of Denmark immediately held talks with President Trump. Essentially, it was about the high urgency of defense in the far north. This is not just about Greenland, but also about Iceland, Norway, Finland, Sweden and Canada. We all have to work together to protect the areas. And Trump is right about that."

 

Noch mal zurück zu Trump: Der US-Präsident schließt militärische Mittel nicht aus, um an Grönland zu kommen. Könnte das das Ende der Nato sein? „Nein! Aber wenn es um die die Verteidigung in der Arktis geht, hat Trump recht. Was ich wirklich gut finde ist, dass der Premierminister von Dänemark sofort Gespräche mit Präsident Trump geführt hat. Im Wesentlichen ging es dabei um die hohe Dringlichkeit der Verteidigung im hohen Norden. Da geht es nicht nur um Grönland, sondern auch um Island, Norwegen, Finnland, Schweden und Kanada. Wir müssen alle zusammenarbeiten, um die Gebiete zu schützen. Und da hat Trump recht.“

 

 

Guess 'George' @BehizyTweets needs to sharpen up on his translation of 'negotiations'

 

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by Gamecock-YT

[yesman182]

34 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

Adding a 25% tax onto imports is not inflationary?

I think it could be deflationary. If I was thinking about buying a new car and on Tuesday it was 25% more. I wouldn’t buy it. The same could be said for a lot of non essential spending. Yes, eventually I would need to buy a new car, but Americans buy a lot of wasteful stuff than isn’t needed if prices increase 25%. 
 

If my state increased sales tax to 30% I think consumption would go down, and although prices would go up because of the tax, I don’t think it would result in a climbing inflation spiral. 

[Gregmal]

It’s been totally jaw dropping the past several years hearing people discuss inflation and seeing how pure ignorance just rules the day. 
 

Good economy? Inflation. People have jobs? Inflation? Getting raises? Inflation. Rate cuts? Inflation. Tariffs? Inflation. lol for fucks sake. 

[LC]

How does an economy look with a lot of high priced goods that nobody buys?

 

Is this perhaps where corporate profit margins come down to adjust? (Recall a few years ago everyone was talking about unsustainable corporate profit margins v historic norms)

Edited 3 hours ago by LC

[cwericb]

46 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Only in a very simplistic and first level thinking kinda way. Its just gonna crater demand and push people to alternative products. This was actually one of Trumps stated goals, to get people to buy made in America. 

 

Besides...havent all the experts been telling us how weak the economy is? It would have to be pretty durable to eat that bump, but even still, its only effecting specific segment, not the entire economy, so its not going to massively throw off inflation readings for that long, if at all. Like homebuilders are already seeing low volume...theyre not pushing it off on the consumer, they'll eat it for a little bit, maybe the stonk bois try to use this as an excuse to bid them down and scare everyone off like they did in 2022, but again, it'll just be a short term manipulative thing, not some huge structural issue. 

 

18 minutes ago, yesman182 said:

I think it could be deflationary. If I was thinking about buying a new car and on Tuesday it was 25% more. I wouldn’t buy it. The same could be said for a lot of non essential spending. Yes, eventually I would need to buy a new car, but Americans buy a lot of wasteful stuff than isn’t needed if prices increase 25%. 
 

If my state increased sales tax to 30% I think consumption would go down, and although prices would go up because of the tax, I don’t think it would result in a climbing inflation spiral. 

 

All good points. Trump has threatened higher tariffs if Canada retaliates which it has, so we will see how how things settle out.  Keep in mind that a lot of Canada's exports are not particularly discretionary. oil, gas, lumber, electricity, etc. So simply not consuming electricity, oil, etc is not that easily done.

[Gregmal]

8 minutes ago, LC said:

How does an economy look with a lot of high priced goods that nobody buys?

 

Is this perhaps where corporate profit margins come down to adjust? (Recall a few years ago everyone was talking about unsustainable corporate profit margins v historic norms)

Yup you give some of that back temporarily. Then the corporate tax rate gets cut. Eventually tariffs are sorted out, much ado about nothing. 

[ICUMD]

2 hours ago, Gamecock-YT said:

 

Canada should call his bluff and ban all exports of Canadian energy to the United States then. That's clearly the weakness in this tariff equation given the non-25% carve out. I don't think the Canadians have the guts/political capital to put up with the issues it would cause, but if you want to fight fire with fire that's your bargaining chip.

 

You don't try and act rational with a bully, you punch him back in the fucking face. No different than playing hockey.

 

 

+1

100%