Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Most trades - 70 to 80% - are made by bot programs. The programs are looking for the best return for the next day or month or maybe YTD. The programs do not care about or consider your retirement plans or what your portfolio is going to look like in five or 10 years.
We're hanging on out of TRUST in him? What color is the sky on Bessent's home planet, I wanna know. I'm hanging on in white-knuckle fashion, for dear life. And have 25% of total portfolio in cash, hiding from the Orange Fool. I count myself just plain lucky that I'm into the two single-stocks that I chose. One is offshore.
If companies are pulling guidance due to lack of clarity (due to TARIFFS) on future cash flows and earnings, should the markets not respond with a little less exhuberance?
Similar to when a PE fund doesn't bother to mark-to-market except on an annual basis. They can just ignore valuations, as recognizing the current reality on a daily or weekly basis would simply be too much to ask.
Guess the markets can continue ignoring a (potential) recession, inflation, supply chain issues, lower corporate earnings, etc. as long as we get a PR sideshow "announcement" once a week from the regime.
There will be a reckoning sometime later this year. It seems likely that second-quarter GDP will decrease while inflation climbs higher. Despite the recently announced "comprehensive" tariff agreement with the UK, negotiations with China and the EU will be much more contentious.
As expected, regardless of the outcome, the Democrats are likely to deny any progress. Even a signed agreement that delivers just a 1% improvement—though it’s certainly more than that—is still a step forward. Meanwhile, they seem intent on shifting the goalposts, focusing only on the negatives, and appearing to root for recession and high inflation.
As expected, regardless whether or not tariff policies are prudent, the MAGA faithful are likely to trumpet any perceived tariff "wins." They seem intent on justifying the numerous senseless (or illegal) actions initiated by the current administration.
Easy example of moving the goalpost. The yearly inflation in 2025 is down from 3% to 2.4%. Is this great? Yes.
None of the articles mentioned it, but they tell you the inflation will be terrible months from now, inventories will be down and our kids will not be able to buy what they want.
Thanks @Mark. Per the Jen Rubin article you linked:
"As University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers told me this week, “President Trump is more effective than the COVID virus at creating chaos.” He continued, “Why did financial markets respond so badly to Liberation Day? It wasn't just because of the tariffs. It was because it showed that this is an utterly incoherent administration with no serious advisers, completely unwilling to face trade-offs or reality.
Trump observers know that, for all his bluster, he remains a coward—unable to stand the heat. Whether on China tariffs or firing the Federal Reserve Chairman, you can bet he will blink. He pretends he is in talks with China, but lets on that “I’m going to lower [tariffs against China] because otherwise you could never do business with them.” (Then word comes we are in discussions to begin talks.) Why would China’s leaders make any move to appease Trump? If they just wait, he may well retreat on his own."
As expected, regardless of the outcome, the Democrats are likely to deny any progress. Even a signed agreement that delivers just a 1% improvement—though it’s certainly more than that—is still a step forward. Meanwhile, they seem intent on shifting the goalposts, focusing only on the negatives, and appearing to root for recession and high inflation.
Life goes on.
Circular logic. Things were fine, until Trumpy One started "experimenting." What happens when I push THIS button?
The case you're making ignores the mayhem he's created, from the previous baseline of normalcy. Now you want to measure progress within the new, chaotic frame of reference. So, WHO is "moving the goalposts?" The Orange Kool-Aid Ever-Trumpers.
From Barrons last night: "By Sabrina Escobar | Thursday, May 8
Rocket Ship. Stocks jumped Thursday after President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with the U.K. just days before the U.S. is expected to begin negotiations with China. The U.K. deal maintains the baseline 10% tariff on imported goods announced in April, but includes a lower tariff for some cars made in the U.K. as well as "billions of dollars of increased market access for American exports," Trump said. The deal with the U.K. doesn't provide much tariff relief on its own, but markets rallied on the expectation that this is just one of a series of agreements that will bring down overall tariff levels. That hope was enough to shift investors to a risk-on mode. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite rose 1.1%, the S&P 500 closed 0.6% higher, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 255 points, or 0.6%. Even Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies rallied (more on that later). Trump himself seemed to be egging investors on. "You better go out and buy stock now," he said in the Oval Office. "This country will be like a rocket ship that goes straight up. This is going to be numbers that nobody's ever seen before." But as my colleagues note, "there are good reasons the U.K. deal was the quickest and easiest to complete, and it doesn’t necessarily guide the way for others." For one, Trump's biggest gripe at the moment is America's trade deficit with other countries, and a deal with the U.K. won't make a big dent in total deficits. The U.S. actually ran a surplus with Britain in the fourth quarter. Plus, the U.K. has some "low-hanging fruit" it can offer as concessions, such as easing restrictions on agricultural imports from the U.S. It's not clear what countries with trade surpluses with the U.S. (such as China, India, and Vietnam) "can put on the table," my Barron's colleagues wrote. The negotiations with China -- set to start this weekend -- may prove particularly tricky, and analysts warn investors not to get their hopes up for a dramatic rollback in tariff rates. Veda Partners’ Henrietta Treyz told my colleague Reshma Kapadia that investors' expectations that the meeting could result in a tariff rate as low as 40% was “insanity.”"
Donnie is panicking over his trade war based on his ALL-CAPS plea to China this morning. Better yet, another post suggests he's going to try and pin any trade policy failure or tariff drama on the Treasury Secretary -- because he can't accept responsibility for anything bad that happens on his watch.
this is why i am so shocked when i read something sensible...but now realize it may happen only if non-political. no goalpost has been moved further then the perpetual golden age of the post-election trump bump.
i admit to being puzzled why the mkt thinks the baked in damage from tariffs will be minor, especially when the longterm gop strategy is an impossibility (reshoring by midterms? only MAGA would believe that could be a dent)
several analysts have floated the idea that the ever shrinking time window of mkt participants has shifted the voting vs weighting balance. anyway, the short-term is not a game i have to play, and would rather keep the family net worth stable in a disaster scenario than increase it in an uncertain one. (despite my biological age being ~60% of buffett!)
The "major trade deal" with the UK is not as comprehensive as some may have suggested.
"Trump declared on social media this announcement would be a "major trade deal" - it's not. He does not have the authority to sign the type of free-trade agreement India and the UK finalised earlier this week - this lies with Congress. Congress would need to approve a trade agreement, which would take longer than the 90-day pause in place on some of Trump's tariffs. This is an agreement which has reversed or cut some of those tariffs on specific goods. It is only the bare bones of a narrow agreement, there will be months of negotiations and legal paperwork to follow."
Good BBC piece. One thing I've been wondering about:
Crucially, there will be no weakening of UK food standards on imports as part of this deal, the UK government statement said, insisting that American hormone-treated meat will not seep onto the UK market.
Many American farmers use growth hormones as a standard part of their beef production, something that was banned in the UK and the European Union in the 1980s.
It's very likely U.S. commodity chicken will run into the same types of "problems."
FYI, here is an excerpt from an article in today's NYT that brings the US/China tariff situation up to date:
"President Trump suggested on Friday that he was open to sharply reducing the tariffs that the United States had imposed on China, as American and Chinese negotiators prepare to meet in Switzerland this weekend for high-stakes trade talks.
Trade tensions between the United States and China have roiled international markets and the global economy. The negotiations on Saturday and Sunday are intended to de-escalate the situation and help set the stage for a broader trade pact between the two economic superpowers.
In a post on social media, Mr. Trump said that an 80 percent tariff on China “seems right,” adding that it would be “up to Scott B,” an apparent reference to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
An 80 percent tariff would be a big drop from the current 145 percent that Mr. Trump imposed on Chinese imports in recent months. But that high a level would still shut off most trade between the countries. Chinese data released on Friday showed shipments from that country to the United States plunged 21 percent in April from the same period a year ago.
This week, the two sides agreed to hold meetings in Geneva that will include Mr. Bessent; Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative; and He Lifeng, China’s vice premier for economic policy.
The recent elevation of Mr. Bessent, who is viewed as a pragmatist on trade, to lead the talks with China has also helped to calm markets. The Treasury secretary has argued that the tariffs and trade restrictions that the United States and China have levied are “unsustainable” and has urged Beijing to begin talks to address what the Trump administration views as unfair trade practices.
Despite signs of greater flexibility from Mr. Trump, an 80 percent tariff may not be low enough to restart business across the Pacific.
While it differs from company to company, some executives have said that tariffs above 50 percent are generally enough to freeze exports to the United States. Companies that are not able to find an alternative source of supply for their products outside China are facing the prospect of bankruptcy and layoffs as the summer grinds on and even 25 percent tariffs can be crippling.
Economists have warned that the chances of a recession in the United States are rising because of Mr. Trump’s tariffs. Last month, the International Monetary Fund downgraded its outlook for the United States and global output."
"A group representing General Motors (GM.N), Ford (F.N), and Stellantis (STLAM.MI), blasted President Donald Trump's trade deal announced with the United Kingdom, saying it would harm the U.S. auto sector."
"'Under this deal, it will now be cheaper to import a UK vehicle with very little U.S. content than a USMCA compliant vehicle from Mexico or Canada that is half American parts,' the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents the Detroit Three automakers, said on Thursday. 'This hurts American automakers, suppliers, and auto workers.'"
Comments
For sure!
I'll try. ;^)
"No worries, be happy" ignores the longer-term outlook.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/29/treasury-secretary-says-individual-investors-trust-president-trump.html
"Vanguard, one of the largest money management firms in America, said that over the past 100 days, 97% of Americans haven’t done a trade"
Similar to when a PE fund doesn't bother to mark-to-market except on an annual basis. They can just ignore valuations, as recognizing the current reality on a daily or weekly basis would simply be too much to ask.
Guess the markets can continue ignoring a (potential) recession, inflation, supply chain issues, lower corporate earnings, etc. as long as we get a PR sideshow "announcement" once a week from the regime.
It seems likely that second-quarter GDP will decrease while inflation climbs higher.
Despite the recently announced "comprehensive" tariff agreement with the UK,
negotiations with China and the EU will be much more contentious.
Life goes on.
the MAGA faithful are likely to trumpet any perceived tariff "wins."
They seem intent on justifying the numerous senseless (or illegal) actions initiated by the current administration.
"The economy is at the mercy of the least informed president in history"
Trump’s scattered brain creates havoc
From Paul Krugman:
"Why you shouldn’t get excited about his “deals”"
Will Trump Pretend to Fix What He Broke?
The yearly inflation in 2025 is down from 3% to 2.4%.
Is this great? Yes.
None of the articles mentioned it, but they tell you the inflation will be terrible months from now, inventories will be down and our kids will not be able to buy what they want.
Thanks for sharing these articles!
"As University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers told me this week, “President Trump is more effective than the COVID virus at creating chaos.” He continued, “Why did financial markets respond so badly to Liberation Day? It wasn't just because of the tariffs. It was because it showed that this is an utterly incoherent administration with no serious advisers, completely unwilling to face trade-offs or reality.
Trump observers know that, for all his bluster, he remains a coward—unable to stand the heat. Whether on China tariffs or firing the Federal Reserve Chairman, you can bet he will blink. He pretends he is in talks with China, but lets on that “I’m going to lower [tariffs against China] because otherwise you could never do business with them.” (Then word comes we are in discussions to begin talks.) Why would China’s leaders make any move to appease Trump? If they just wait, he may well retreat on his own."
The case you're making ignores the mayhem he's created, from the previous baseline of normalcy. Now you want to measure progress within the new, chaotic frame of reference. So, WHO is "moving the goalposts?" The Orange Kool-Aid Ever-Trumpers.
"By Sabrina Escobar | Thursday, May 8
Rocket Ship. Stocks jumped Thursday after President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with the U.K. just days before the U.S. is expected to begin negotiations with China.
The U.K. deal maintains the baseline 10% tariff on imported goods announced in April, but includes a lower tariff for some cars made in the U.K. as well as "billions of dollars of increased market access for American exports," Trump said.
The deal with the U.K. doesn't provide much tariff relief on its own, but markets rallied on the expectation that this is just one of a series of agreements that will bring down overall tariff levels.
That hope was enough to shift investors to a risk-on mode. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite rose 1.1%, the S&P 500 closed 0.6% higher, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 255 points, or 0.6%. Even Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies rallied (more on that later).
Trump himself seemed to be egging investors on.
"You better go out and buy stock now," he said in the Oval Office. "This country will be like a rocket ship that goes straight up. This is going to be numbers that nobody's ever seen before."
But as my colleagues note, "there are good reasons the U.K. deal was the quickest and easiest to complete, and it doesn’t necessarily guide the way for others."
For one, Trump's biggest gripe at the moment is America's trade deficit with other countries, and a deal with the U.K. won't make a big dent in total deficits. The U.S. actually ran a surplus with Britain in the fourth quarter. Plus, the U.K. has some "low-hanging fruit" it can offer as concessions, such as easing restrictions on agricultural imports from the U.S. It's not clear what countries with trade surpluses with the U.S. (such as China, India, and Vietnam) "can put on the table," my Barron's colleagues wrote.
The negotiations with China -- set to start this weekend -- may prove particularly tricky, and analysts warn investors not to get their hopes up for a dramatic rollback in tariff rates. Veda Partners’ Henrietta Treyz told my colleague Reshma Kapadia that investors' expectations that the meeting could result in a tariff rate as low as 40% was “insanity.”"
Donnie is panicking over his trade war based on his ALL-CAPS plea to China this morning. Better yet, another post suggests he's going to try and pin any trade policy failure or tariff drama on the Treasury Secretary -- because he can't accept responsibility for anything bad that happens on his watch.
Harry Truman, he ain't.
this is why i am so shocked when i read something sensible...but now realize it may happen only if non-political.
no goalpost has been moved further then the perpetual golden age of the post-election trump bump.
i admit to being puzzled why the mkt thinks the baked in damage from tariffs will be minor, especially when the longterm gop strategy is an impossibility (reshoring by midterms? only MAGA would believe that could be a dent)
several analysts have floated the idea that the ever shrinking time window of mkt participants has shifted the voting vs weighting balance. anyway, the short-term is not a game i have to play, and would rather keep the family net worth stable in a disaster scenario than increase it in an uncertain one. (despite my biological age being ~60% of buffett!)
"Trump declared on social media this announcement would be a "major trade deal" - it's not.
He does not have the authority to sign the type of free-trade agreement India
and the UK finalised earlier this week - this lies with Congress.
Congress would need to approve a trade agreement, which would take longer
than the 90-day pause in place on some of Trump's tariffs.
This is an agreement which has reversed or cut some of those tariffs on specific goods.
It is only the bare bones of a narrow agreement,
there will be months of negotiations and legal paperwork to follow."
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c15ng4g5g0eo
"President Trump suggested on Friday that he was open to sharply reducing the tariffs that the United States had imposed on China, as American and Chinese negotiators prepare to meet in Switzerland this weekend for high-stakes trade talks.
Trade tensions between the United States and China have roiled international markets and the global economy. The negotiations on Saturday and Sunday are intended to de-escalate the situation and help set the stage for a broader trade pact between the two economic superpowers.
In a post on social media, Mr. Trump said that an 80 percent tariff on China “seems right,” adding that it would be “up to Scott B,” an apparent reference to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
An 80 percent tariff would be a big drop from the current 145 percent that Mr. Trump imposed on Chinese imports in recent months. But that high a level would still shut off most trade between the countries. Chinese data released on Friday showed shipments from that country to the United States plunged 21 percent in April from the same period a year ago.
This week, the two sides agreed to hold meetings in Geneva that will include Mr. Bessent; Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative; and He Lifeng, China’s vice premier for economic policy.
The recent elevation of Mr. Bessent, who is viewed as a pragmatist on trade, to lead the talks with China has also helped to calm markets. The Treasury secretary has argued that the tariffs and trade restrictions that the United States and China have levied are “unsustainable” and has urged Beijing to begin talks to address what the Trump administration views as unfair trade practices.
Despite signs of greater flexibility from Mr. Trump, an 80 percent tariff may not be low enough to restart business across the Pacific.
While it differs from company to company, some executives have said that tariffs above 50 percent are generally enough to freeze exports to the United States. Companies that are not able to find an alternative source of supply for their products outside China are facing the prospect of bankruptcy and layoffs as the summer grinds on and even 25 percent tariffs can be crippling.
Economists have warned that the chances of a recession in the United States are rising because of Mr. Trump’s tariffs. Last month, the International Monetary Fund downgraded its outlook for the United States and global output."
ANOTHER MAJOR WIN-WIN-WIN FOR TRUMP !!! WHAT A NEGOCIATOR !!! WHAT A DEAL !!!
WHAT A GUY !!!
blasted President Donald Trump's trade deal announced with the United Kingdom,
saying it would harm the U.S. auto sector."
"'Under this deal, it will now be cheaper to import a UK vehicle with very little U.S. content
than a USMCA compliant vehicle from Mexico or Canada that is half American parts,'
the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents the Detroit Three automakers,
said on Thursday. 'This hurts American automakers, suppliers, and auto workers.'"
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/detroit-three-automakers-blast-trump-uk-trade-deal-2025-05-08/