The absolutely best cat post that I have seen for quite a while. Why do voters (and Trump administration personnel) seemingly reject the very clear identification of tariffs as a tax that producers, distributors and ultimately consumers will pay? It is baffling
Trump has loved tariffs all his life but since he has the Oval Offfice, he gets an added sugar high from the personal power he feels. He's like an Emperor reveling in the ability to seem powerful and cause others pain. Trump is an emotionally and psychologically driven man. Expecting rational policies from an irrational person is a waste of time. He's driven by power, not economics so I fear the worst.
“The president has got a heck of a lot of analysis before him, and he’s going to make the right choice, I’m sure.” Now that is truly wishful thinking ...
Personally, I think we could be looking at something a lot worse than stagflation. Shades of the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 and its role in the Great Depression of the 1930s.
One of the problems, potentially, with making predictions like stagflation, is that we don't know what other countries will do. Vietnam just rolled over for Trump and announced it would eliminate all of its tariffs on American goods and services. Trump has been distressingly successful in getting others to surrender to his demands, which makes it difficult to know what will happen. So far, in the U.S. we've seen appalling cowardice on the part of Columbia University, the Paul Weiss lawfirm, and ABC. Expecting courage and principled action on the part on any large and seemingly powerful American group is foolish.
One of the problems with Vietnam's decision is that it may lead to other countries not doing what economists such as Bernstein and Krugman expect them to do, but instead give in without even offering a token fight. Obviously, the most important decision will come from the EU. If European countries ultimately decide to surrender then the future may look very different from that expected by those predicting stagflation.
Another problem with Vietnam's decision for itself, but it extends to anyone trying to offer predictions. There has been a persistent problem with people expecting Trump and other countries to behave rationally. By now, it has sunk in for the Krugmans and Bernsteins that Trump is an idiot, so rationality is not part of any situation involving him. Vietnam may have also made the mistake of assuming that Trump can be trusted. I've often made the point that Trump is a person without a single positive characteristic. The list of all the things that is wrong with him as a human being is incredibly long, but we can start with the following: He's stupid, ignorant, and dishonest. Trust, but verify isn't adequate when dealing with Trump. Absolutely don't trust and never let don your guard for even a nanosecond.
Canada and Mexico signed renegotiated trade agreements with Trump during his first term and now he has unilaterally thrown those agreements in the trash. No one should ever assume that an agreement made with Trump can be depended on. Turn your back on Trump for a second and you may find yourself experiencing the severe pain of a knife being buried between your shoulder blades.
I was struck by the visual images that Fox showed during your discussion, showing Trump as strong, glamorous (with Melania), having serious-looking discussions, etc. That was no accident. Softening negative messages with positive visuals is a tactic perfected by Michael Denver head of Reagan’s PR team:
“Deaver, famously, didn’t care what the network reporters said about the President as long as Reagan was pictured in upbeat, patriotic settings, preferably surrounded by American flags. The pictures, he knew, were far more powerful than the words.”
hard to equate a policy as sound due to constant lying .... the relevance of lying to arithematic calculation doesn't exist. Its existence becomes a lie.
The absolutely best cat post that I have seen for quite a while. Why do voters (and Trump administration personnel) seemingly reject the very clear identification of tariffs as a tax that producers, distributors and ultimately consumers will pay? It is baffling
Wow! You have to squint pretty hard to see "courage" in Kevin Hassett. But I admire you for trying.
I totally hear you. But I also know from experience that it can be pretty hard to push back in that setting.
It's not hard to push back if you have the slightest shred of integrity.
You quit and publish the receipts.
Trump has loved tariffs all his life but since he has the Oval Offfice, he gets an added sugar high from the personal power he feels. He's like an Emperor reveling in the ability to seem powerful and cause others pain. Trump is an emotionally and psychologically driven man. Expecting rational policies from an irrational person is a waste of time. He's driven by power, not economics so I fear the worst.
Expecting rational policies from an irrational person is a waste of time.
Yes. Expecting quality fiscal ideas from a 6 time bankrupt? One will waste more than time.
“The president has got a heck of a lot of analysis before him, and he’s going to make the right choice, I’m sure.” Now that is truly wishful thinking ...
Personally, I think we could be looking at something a lot worse than stagflation. Shades of the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 and its role in the Great Depression of the 1930s.
I don’t think we should expect positive news from con artists. Which brings up the question: What happened with all that Fort Knox nonsense?
One of the problems, potentially, with making predictions like stagflation, is that we don't know what other countries will do. Vietnam just rolled over for Trump and announced it would eliminate all of its tariffs on American goods and services. Trump has been distressingly successful in getting others to surrender to his demands, which makes it difficult to know what will happen. So far, in the U.S. we've seen appalling cowardice on the part of Columbia University, the Paul Weiss lawfirm, and ABC. Expecting courage and principled action on the part on any large and seemingly powerful American group is foolish.
One of the problems with Vietnam's decision is that it may lead to other countries not doing what economists such as Bernstein and Krugman expect them to do, but instead give in without even offering a token fight. Obviously, the most important decision will come from the EU. If European countries ultimately decide to surrender then the future may look very different from that expected by those predicting stagflation.
Another problem with Vietnam's decision for itself, but it extends to anyone trying to offer predictions. There has been a persistent problem with people expecting Trump and other countries to behave rationally. By now, it has sunk in for the Krugmans and Bernsteins that Trump is an idiot, so rationality is not part of any situation involving him. Vietnam may have also made the mistake of assuming that Trump can be trusted. I've often made the point that Trump is a person without a single positive characteristic. The list of all the things that is wrong with him as a human being is incredibly long, but we can start with the following: He's stupid, ignorant, and dishonest. Trust, but verify isn't adequate when dealing with Trump. Absolutely don't trust and never let don your guard for even a nanosecond.
Canada and Mexico signed renegotiated trade agreements with Trump during his first term and now he has unilaterally thrown those agreements in the trash. No one should ever assume that an agreement made with Trump can be depended on. Turn your back on Trump for a second and you may find yourself experiencing the severe pain of a knife being buried between your shoulder blades.
I was struck by the visual images that Fox showed during your discussion, showing Trump as strong, glamorous (with Melania), having serious-looking discussions, etc. That was no accident. Softening negative messages with positive visuals is a tactic perfected by Michael Denver head of Reagan’s PR team:
“Deaver, famously, didn’t care what the network reporters said about the President as long as Reagan was pictured in upbeat, patriotic settings, preferably surrounded by American flags. The pictures, he knew, were far more powerful than the words.”
https://time.com/archive/6738763/the-secrets-of-reagans-success/
Arithmetic calculations do not use lying. The results are negated by lies.
hard to equate a policy as sound due to constant lying .... the relevance of lying to arithematic calculation doesn't exist. Its existence becomes a lie.
" Decades of tax cuts, mostly at the high-end of the income scale..."
Trickle-down economics, since Reagan at the least. Killing Capitalism and Democracy while it slides the debt towards 40 trillion.
The debt is much less problematic than most people think.
Is there an October 29th in our future?
Jared….you meant $600 per year.
Correct. Will fix.
Is it $600B over 10 years or $6 trillion over 10 years? I assume the latter..
Yep. Fixed. Riedl has this right in the quote I lifted from WaPo.