Trumponomics

[Laodicean60]

I am not impressed with it. I see it as inflationary and nothing is mentioned about debt or the deficit which will harm the country in the future. All this shows he is ignorant of economics like the rest of the politicians and the status quo.

How do you help American workers by giving corporations a tax cut? Lowering the Fed funds rate to 1% probably through QE will enable corporations and investors to buy up assets, thus making it hard for Americans to own homes or pay rent, not to mention all the zombie companies created with virtually free money.

"On rates, Trump says Powell can stay on to the end of his term as Fed Chair, “especially if I thought he was doing the right thing.” But what does that mean? For one, that the Fed shouldn’t be cutting rates before the election. “It’s something that they know they shouldn’t be doing,” he says. Not because Trump read the IMF brief, but because he doesn’t want Powell to give Biden a boost. Welcome to the future of monetary policy which, to be fair, is also much of its past: we just pretend it hasn’t been. It seems that questions will linger about Fed independence, at least in terms of more pliable staffing, should Trump win.
On taxes, the message is also stimulatory. Ttump wants to renew his 2017 tax cuts, at a cost of $4.6trn, and reduce corporate tax to 15%. How that doesn’t blow the federal deficit out to peak WW2 levels in peace time remains to be seen – unless the Fed is leaned on to cut rates; on which, Trump also just talked about a 1% Fed Funds rate, and how that made government spending and tax cuts much more workable."

This is such a bad idea because of inflation. Why continue an economic war with China when we need them more than they need us.

"Moreover, the other centrepiece of Trumponomics remains tariffs. As Bloomberg puts it, ”He keeps circling back to William McKinley --who he dubs “the Tariff King”-- for raising enough revenue through tariffs during his turn-of-the-20th-century presidency to avoid instituting a federal income tax, without appropriate credit. “McKinley made this country rich,” Trump says. “He was the most underrated president,” while his successors squandered his legacy on costly government programs and threw away an important tool for economic statecraft. “I can’t believe how many people are negative on tariffs that are actually smart,” Trump says. “Man, is it good for negotiation. I’ve had guys, I’ve had countries that were potentially extremely hostile coming to me and saying, ‘Sir, please stop with the tariff stuff.’”
Clearly, those thinking Trump won’t use tariffs, or will only impose token ones because of inflation, are not reading the room correctly, just old textbooks. Trump says he intends to raise tariffs on China to 60-100%, and on the EU too, to an unspecified level, and will impose a 10% across-the-board tariff on imports from other countries."

This is letting the fox in the henhouse. Elites think elites have all the answers and he chose Jamie Dimon sadly.

Pointedly, Trump makes clear that this time round, he means business. “Now, I know everybody. Now, I am truly experienced.” He floats Jamie Dimon as a potential Treasury Secretary, as sharp a contrast with the other name touted, former USTR Robert Lighthizer, as possible. One would deliver go-go asset growth; the other is all about tariffs and production. Which is it to be? Or can it really be both?

I forgot to add the link: It's Impossible To Model The Dynamics Of Trumponomics | ZeroHedge

 

[iluvatar5150]

Despite what folks may tell themselves, people aren't voting for Trump because they understand and like his economic plan.

 

[Laodicean60]

Despite what folks may tell themselves, people aren't voting for Trump because they understand and like his economic plan.

The debt used to be a right wing talking point that has been forgotten.

 

[bèlla]

I see we're on the same page. I'm glad you started the thread.

I mentioned this yesterday. His most important remarks are related to money and benefit the rich. The people he's chosen thus far are crypto supporters including Dimon. His selection has greater issues in light of JP Morgan's position and the inevitable absorbing of failed institutions. The Big 4 (banks) are going to get larger.

He wants the US to be first in crypto and believes China will get it done. Hence his haste. Vance had some strong statements about the SEC Chairman Gary Gensler recently. His opposition inspired the industry's fury and they're backing the pair financially. Trump considers himself the crypto president and made several promises to them as well. Since they're number 3 on the donor list we should expect additional favors. I'm leaning towards a tax break of some sorts. If he touches capital gains that would make everyone happy.

Given Elon's $45 million monthly pledge to the super pac on his behalf I wouldn't be surprised if his name crops up. And he's keeping Tik-Tok which would endear him to younger voters.

~bella

 

[Nithavela]

The debt used to be a right wing talking point that has been forgotten.

Normally they forget it only after being voted into office, but at this point they are already ruling in their own head, so no need to use the debt to attack the current occupiers of government.

 

[durangodawood]

I see we're on the same page. I'm glad you started the thread.

I mentioned this yesterday. His most important remarks are related to money and benefit the rich. The people he's chosen thus far are crypto supporters including Dimon. His selection has greater issues in light of JP Morgan's position and the inevitable absorbing of failed institutions. The Big 4 (banks) are going to get larger.

He wants the US to be first in crypto and believes China will get it done. Hence his haste. Vance had some strong statements about the SEC Chairman Gary Gensler recently. His opposition inspired the industry's fury and they're backing the pair financially. Trump considers himself the crypto president and made several promises to them as well. Since they're number 3 on the donor list we should expect additional favors. I'm leaning towards a tax break of some sorts. If he touches capital gains that would make everyone happy.

Given Elon's $45 million monthly pledge to the super pac on his behalf I wouldn't be surprised if his name crops up. And he's keeping Tik-Tok which would endear him to younger voters.

~bella

Elon at Treasury? Hes more interested in Mars.

I think his monthly 45 mil is just to ensure his current enterprises are looked at favorably. He want to put EV skepticism in an R govt to bed for sure.

 

[Laodicean60]

Trump considers himself the crypto president and made several promises to them as well.

I agree with everything you said but I think crypto technology is the future. Trump is using crypto to attract young voters. I have liberal nephews in California who own crypto and I'm sure they don't like what the government is saying about it.

And he's keeping Tik-Tok which would endear him to younger voters.

Probably his war against other social media that conflicts with his. We've all heard about the dangers of Tik-Tok and he supports it?

 

[durangodawood]

Normally they forget it only after being voted into office, but at this point they are already ruling in their own head, so no need to use the debt to attack the current occupiers of government.

Yes Rs talk a big game re debt, but in modern times once they achieve power they are worse than Ds. Neither party can resist the political payoff of debt fueled spending.

 

[bèlla]

Elon at Treasury? Hes more interested in Mars.

I think his monthly 45 mil is just to ensure his current enterprises are looked at favorably. He want to put EV skepticism in an R govt to bed for sure.

In the administration. The treasury is Dimon's if he wants it. The nod to Elon may be symbolic. It correlates with the business man ethos he promotes.

~bella

 

[bèlla]

I agree with everything you said but I think crypto technology is the future. Trump is using crypto to attract young voters. I have liberal nephews in California who own crypto and I'm sure they don't like what the government is saying about it.

It's closer than they admit. It's all theater. Ask your nephews for recommendations and research their picks and buy accordingly. Have your children do the same.

Look up Gensler's comments on crypto at MIT. You'll hear him speaking favorably to the class. Then reference the stuff he said with the SEC.

Probably his war against other social media that conflicts with his. We've all heard about the dangers of Tik-Tok and he supports it?

He said he believes competition is good for Facebook and Instagram. You know he has a beef with Zuck.

~bella

 

[Laodicean60]

It's closer than they admit. It's all theater. Ask your nephews for recommendations and research their picks and buy accordingly. Have your children do the same.

I have one who is knowledgeable about crypto the other three have no interest. All blockchain is a glorified ledger system just like the banks use today in business transactions. Gensler must have turned because he showed his colors in the SEC attacking crypto.

Ask your nephews for recommendations and research their picks and buy accordingly.

I'll stick to the big two, Bitcoin and Ethereum all that other stuff is questionable.

 

[bèlla]

I have one who is knowledgeable about crypto the other three have no interest. All blockchain is a glorified ledger system just like the banks use today in business transactions. Gensler must have turned because he showed his colors in the SEC attacking crypto.

I'll stick to the big two, Bitcoin and Ethereum all that other stuff is questionable.

Everything is going on the blockchain eventually and Gensler's there for two reasons. Emerging markets are first and we're lagging behind on purpose. The dollar has to go for them to make the switch. And CBDCs are a certainty. The banks aren't giving up control. They'll have to work with them as he said to the class.

Gensler's kicking the can to slow it down and discourage early adoption. Fink and Dimon call it a fraud while buying heavily in the shadows. And who came out with an ETF? BlackRock.

That's how things work in finance. They keep it to themselves and only a limited amount know otherwise. Don't you remember when there were no taxes on crypto sales? When did that change? During the lockdown. That's when the bill was introduced because they were discussing it online. We can thank Reddit for that and the Gamestop fiasco. It's like the tower of babel. Understand?

You'll know the results when you look on social media. The majority will sell and they're not holding bitcoin. When I disappear you'll know why. ;-)

~bella

 

[Richard T]

I am not impressed with it. I see it as inflationary and nothing is mentioned about debt or the deficit which will harm the country in the future. All this shows he is ignorant of economics like the rest of the politicians and the status quo.

How do you help American workers by giving corporations a tax cut? Lowering the Fed funds rate to 1% probably through QE will enable corporations and investors to buy up assets, thus making it hard for Americans to own homes or pay rent, not to mention all the zombie companies created with virtually free money.

"On rates, Trump says Powell can stay on to the end of his term as Fed Chair, “especially if I thought he was doing the right thing.” But what does that mean? For one, that the Fed shouldn’t be cutting rates before the election. “It’s something that they know they shouldn’t be doing,” he says. Not because Trump read the IMF brief, but because he doesn’t want Powell to give Biden a boost. Welcome to the future of monetary policy which, to be fair, is also much of its past: we just pretend it hasn’t been. It seems that questions will linger about Fed independence, at least in terms of more pliable staffing, should Trump win.
On taxes, the message is also stimulatory. Ttump wants to renew his 2017 tax cuts, at a cost of $4.6trn, and reduce corporate tax to 15%. How that doesn’t blow the federal deficit out to peak WW2 levels in peace time remains to be seen – unless the Fed is leaned on to cut rates; on which, Trump also just talked about a 1% Fed Funds rate, and how that made government spending and tax cuts much more workable."

This is such a bad idea because of inflation. Why continue an economic war with China when we need them more than they need us.

"Moreover, the other centrepiece of Trumponomics remains tariffs. As Bloomberg puts it, ”He keeps circling back to William McKinley --who he dubs “the Tariff King”-- for raising enough revenue through tariffs during his turn-of-the-20th-century presidency to avoid instituting a federal income tax, without appropriate credit. “McKinley made this country rich,” Trump says. “He was the most underrated president,” while his successors squandered his legacy on costly government programs and threw away an important tool for economic statecraft. “I can’t believe how many people are negative on tariffs that are actually smart,” Trump says. “Man, is it good for negotiation. I’ve had guys, I’ve had countries that were potentially extremely hostile coming to me and saying, ‘Sir, please stop with the tariff stuff.’”
Clearly, those thinking Trump won’t use tariffs, or will only impose token ones because of inflation, are not reading the room correctly, just old textbooks. Trump says he intends to raise tariffs on China to 60-100%, and on the EU too, to an unspecified level, and will impose a 10% across-the-board tariff on imports from other countries."

This is letting the fox in the henhouse. Elites think elites have all the answers and he chose Jamie Dimon sadly.

Pointedly, Trump makes clear that this time round, he means business. “Now, I know everybody. Now, I am truly experienced.” He floats Jamie Dimon as a potential Treasury Secretary, as sharp a contrast with the other name touted, former USTR Robert Lighthizer, as possible. One would deliver go-go asset growth; the other is all about tariffs and production. Which is it to be? Or can it really be both?

I forgot to add the link: It's Impossible To Model The Dynamics Of Trumponomics | ZeroHedge

Great post. The challenges are huge for any administration. Negative real interest rates (Where the rate of interest is less than inflation) are a tax. So 3% inflation and 0% short-term rates will not happen again. Your in effect losing money by investing in Treasuries. Even the Fed has said they will not lower like that again.

Powell is a dove (favors lower rates, no matter the inflation rate). He cut rates a year or more late, but when it comes time to lower rates he gets the whole market looking for cuts way too far in advance, in "anticipation" of lower inflation and growth. Funny how estimates were for 5 cuts this year, I think the first one was supposed to start in March. Perhaps they will cut a half percent, then when inflation spikes even a little over their 3% target the entire market and Trump will be taken by surprise. I say 3% target because though they say 2%, they don't mean it. 3% inflation means the dollar would lose half its value in about 24 years instead of 36 years at 2%. (Rule of 72).

I think there will be a conflict that will send another high round of inflation. Even the Houthis could do that with oil. Two ships attacked, one oil tanker damaged. just this Monday. Two attacks by Yemen's Houthi rebels strike ships in the Red Sea

I'm not sure this is the plan of God but it would be ironic if a big crash came under Trump's watch. Is there a more outward materialist in Presidential history? Seems cruel that it would not happen with Obama, or Biden but which party often emphasizes money the most?

There is no way to control the deficit. The social security surplus account is empty, the Federal Govt owes it back and the bill is ramping up. The bible is right, better to be a lender than a debtor. Too bad so many just care about getting elected and the more freebies the better. dem freebies are social and environmental stuff, GOP freebies are tax cuts. Technically, I do not think there has been any real tax cuts since Reagan. It should be called tax deferment. I love Tom Cruise as a young lawyer explaining why tax deferment will be good for this mafia type in the movie the Firm. Deferment though of the USA's size only is good if you die before the bill is due with no kids or anyone you care about.

 

[eleos1954]

I am not impressed with it. I see it as inflationary and nothing is mentioned about debt or the deficit which will harm the country in the future. All this shows he is ignorant of economics like the rest of the politicians and the status quo.

How do you help American workers by giving corporations a tax cut? Lowering the Fed funds rate to 1% probably through QE will enable corporations and investors to buy up assets, thus making it hard for Americans to own homes or pay rent, not to mention all the zombie companies created with virtually free money.

"On rates, Trump says Powell can stay on to the end of his term as Fed Chair, “especially if I thought he was doing the right thing.” But what does that mean? For one, that the Fed shouldn’t be cutting rates before the election. “It’s something that they know they shouldn’t be doing,” he says. Not because Trump read the IMF brief, but because he doesn’t want Powell to give Biden a boost. Welcome to the future of monetary policy which, to be fair, is also much of its past: we just pretend it hasn’t been. It seems that questions will linger about Fed independence, at least in terms of more pliable staffing, should Trump win.
On taxes, the message is also stimulatory. Ttump wants to renew his 2017 tax cuts, at a cost of $4.6trn, and reduce corporate tax to 15%. How that doesn’t blow the federal deficit out to peak WW2 levels in peace time remains to be seen – unless the Fed is leaned on to cut rates; on which, Trump also just talked about a 1% Fed Funds rate, and how that made government spending and tax cuts much more workable."

This is such a bad idea because of inflation. Why continue an economic war with China when we need them more than they need us.

"Moreover, the other centrepiece of Trumponomics remains tariffs. As Bloomberg puts it, ”He keeps circling back to William McKinley --who he dubs “the Tariff King”-- for raising enough revenue through tariffs during his turn-of-the-20th-century presidency to avoid instituting a federal income tax, without appropriate credit. “McKinley made this country rich,” Trump says. “He was the most underrated president,” while his successors squandered his legacy on costly government programs and threw away an important tool for economic statecraft. “I can’t believe how many people are negative on tariffs that are actually smart,” Trump says. “Man, is it good for negotiation. I’ve had guys, I’ve had countries that were potentially extremely hostile coming to me and saying, ‘Sir, please stop with the tariff stuff.’”
Clearly, those thinking Trump won’t use tariffs, or will only impose token ones because of inflation, are not reading the room correctly, just old textbooks. Trump says he intends to raise tariffs on China to 60-100%, and on the EU too, to an unspecified level, and will impose a 10% across-the-board tariff on imports from other countries."

This is letting the fox in the henhouse. Elites think elites have all the answers and he chose Jamie Dimon sadly.

Pointedly, Trump makes clear that this time round, he means business. “Now, I know everybody. Now, I am truly experienced.” He floats Jamie Dimon as a potential Treasury Secretary, as sharp a contrast with the other name touted, former USTR Robert Lighthizer, as possible. One would deliver go-go asset growth; the other is all about tariffs and production. Which is it to be? Or can it really be both?

I forgot to add the link: It's Impossible To Model The Dynamics Of Trumponomics | ZeroHedge

Each side has their "banking buddies" ... what people say and what they do can be different .. the health of the country is largely dependent on energy and job growth/availability and government spending plays a part as well. Trump wants to bring manufacturing of goods back into America as much as possible ... and I think that is a good thing.

 

[Laodicean60]

Each side has their "banking buddies" ... what people say and what they do can be different .. the health of the country is largely dependent on energy and job growth/availability and government spending plays a part as well. Trump wants to bring manufacturing of goods back into America as much as possible ... and I think that is a good thing.

I agree both presidents are trying to bring back manufacturing and a smart move since we are deglobalizing. I think this is good for American workers because it will create competition. Both D&Rs have lived through broken campaign promises (and conveniently forget because of the Party) because we are arguing the same stuff today immigration and debt/spending I posted this because of its inflationary potential, especially the tariffs. My whole focus is how hard my kids and grandkids will have it in the future if we continue the status quo.

 

[eleos1954]

I agree both presidents are trying to bring back manufacturing and a smart move since we are deglobalizing. I think this is good for American workers because it will create competition. Both D&Rs have lived through broken campaign promises (and conveniently forget because of the Party) because we are arguing the same stuff today immigration and debt/spending I posted this because of its inflationary potential, especially the tariffs. My whole focus is how hard my kids and grandkids will have it in the future if we continue the status quo.

well if American manufacturing is significantly increased ... then I don't think tariffs would effect us all that much. If this comes to fruition it will make our country stronger and more opportunity for our kids.

Status quo ???

Is manufacturing in the US slowing down?

The situation has changed significantly over the past two years, with official data showing that manufacturing output has stalled since early 2022. The Institute for Supply Management's (ISM) widely watched manufacturing survey is even more downbeat, indicating contraction for 16 consecutive months.Mar 11, 2024

 

[Laodicean60]

well if American manufacturing is significantly increased ... then I don't think tariffs would effect us all that much.

With an economic war, tariffs go both ways.

Status quo ???

From the R side, I've been hearing about debt since Bush and how many trillions are we in debt now? Politicians are ignorant about economics.

Is manufacturing in the US slowing down?

The situation has changed significantly over the past two years, with official data showing that manufacturing output has stalled since early 2022. The Institute for Supply Management's (ISM) widely watched manufacturing survey is even more downbeat, indicating contraction for 16 consecutive months.Mar 11, 2024

If you look at the big picture manufacturing has flatlined since the GFC or is way below trend. I think it was the Federal Reserve monetary policy after the GFC that depressed manufacturing some how, QE???

 

[eleos1954]

With an economic war, tariffs go both ways.

From the R side, I've been hearing about debt since Bush and how many trillions are we in debt now? Politicians are ignorant about economics.

If you look at the big picture manufacturing has flatlined since the GFC or is way below trend. I think it was the Federal Reserve monetary policy after the GFC that depressed manufacturing some how, QE???
View attachment 351886

Yeah well there are "statistics" reported from various sources and then there is real life experience ... people are struggling and there is no doubt about that ... and more so under the Biden leadership that that of Trumps leadership.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

From what I noticed his last term. He helped the rich. And could care less about the poor. Also , he's doesn't seem to care about the National Debt. I guess he was going to bankrupt that.

 

[Laodicean60]

From what I noticed his last term. He helped the rich. And could care less about the poor. Also , he's doesn't seem to care about the National Debt. I guess he was going to bankrupt that.

You are blaming Trump for what both parties have allowed, the rich get richer plus an unsustainable debt.