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.
Wonder what the tariff was on that jet that was gifted (grifted) from Qatar.
Business licenses for his next major hotel project in the country, probably. Or maybe friendly bankers who don't mind dealing with an un-lendable crook?
U.S. tariffs of 145% on Chinese goods and Chinese tariffs of 125% on U.S. goods were nonsensical. In essence, a de facto trade embargo between the two largest economies in the world was in place. Temporarily dropping U.S. levies on Chinese goods to 30% while dropping Chinese levies to 10% on U.S. goods is a welcome development. However, much hard work remains. We will need to see what transpires over the next 90 days and beyond...
Derek Scissors of the American Enterprise Institute discusses the U.S./China tariff pause and provides an unbiased analysis of the situation.
Got to get a kick out of this “all bark and NO bite”. Asian Leaders See Right Through Trump’s Tariff Man Act
President Donald Trump just taught a masterclass in how to lose a trade war. His spectacular retreat on China tariffs in Geneva this week—for very little in return—has officials across Asia sighing with relief. Trump’s slashing import taxes on China from 145% to 30% increases the odds Asia’s biggest economy will achieve its 5% growth target this year. That will be a boon for growth and markets across the region. And other Asian governments now have a blueprint on how to slow-walk Trump’s bilateral trade deal process and avoid giving away the store to America’s most mercantilist leader in 125 years. A caveat: Trump won’t be happy to read the many headlines about him caving in Geneva, nor will he be pleased to learn China isn’t about to throw big concessions his way. This unflattering news cycle could see the “Tariff Man” return to negotiating tables with a vengeance.
despite coming off a bit scary, all interviews from derek scissors are shockingly direct (and compelling). completely the opposite of every other spin-heavy conservative source. am tempted to setup a web alert for any new clips.
not exactly the type of person appreciated by those that are deluded into believing investing\business\economic policy can always be decoupled during discussion.
Is it me or did his tweet earlier today essentially say that China wasn't paying tariffs? So if they weren't, who was? Oh, right ... the American consumer. (But let's not talk about that, mmmksy?)
You can learn from somebody else's mistakes. Watching these negotiations was a lesson in how not to approach a situation.
Liberation day was a bust.
On Friday, Trump claimed about 150 countries would soon receive letters “essentially telling” them of new US duty rates on their exports. Many learned of similar rates last month, only for the plan to change in a matter of days.
Not much winning here.
Well, at least he negotiated some shady deals in the Middle East for his family this past week. I'm sure he feels "liberated".
"Is it normal for the POTUS to instruct a retail company (Walmart) to eat tariffs that he was responsible for?"
You know, I have/had the same question. I also wondered how many previous presidents had a throng of CEO's following them half way around the world on trips of these sorts? I'm sure I'm missing something but what? It's not just Walmart he thinks he runs or can tell them what to do. Didn't he also tell Apple that they shouldn't source their parts/supplies from India? What's going on here? I always thought that the republicans or their party were all about free enterprise and letting businesses do whatever wherever.
"Is it normal for the POTUS to instruct a retail company (Walmart) to eat tariffs that he was responsible for?"
You know, I have/had the same question. I also wondered how many previous presidents had a throng of CEO's following them half way around the world on trips of these sorts? I'm sure I'm missing something but what? It's not just Walmart he thinks he runs or can tell them what to do. Didn't he also tell Apple that they shouldn't source their parts/supplies from India? What's going on here? I always thought that the republicans or their party were all about free enterprise and letting businesses do whatever wherever.
He likes having an 'entourage' of people who are better/wealthier/smarter than him to make him feel more special/talented than he really is. Remember, he was shunned from every elite group/cliq he ever applied to -- NYC socialites, NFL team owner, etc.
As to FOTUS demanding companies bend to his tantrums on tariffs, pricing, and production locations, it's totally fine even though it's essentially state-control of industry (aka socialism!). However, its only acceptable when the GQP does it, otherwise it's evil communism marxism socialist evil that must never happen in this country!
Walmart and Apple are private companies and they answer only to their shareholders like you and me. These companies focus on their operational cost that translates to earnings. That is what capitalism is all about.
Unless one is willing to pay an iPhone similar to that of Rolex watches, it is not feasible to manufacture complex electronic devices in US at low cost. When large retailers such as Walmart is raising their prices due to the tariffs, this will apply to all retailers who import most of their goods from elsewhere, whether it is from China, Mexico, or Canada. Retail prices will rise whether you like it or not, and the added cost get passed on to the consumers.
Next quarter’s earnings will show the full impact of tariffs. Tourism is already down with fewer foreign tourists, and the season has just began.
Is it normal for the POTUS to instruct a retail company (Walmart) to eat tariffs that he was responsible for?
As to FOTUS demanding companies bend to his tantrums on tariffs, pricing, and production locations
WaPo:
Trump’s view of his role was reflected in his recent comparison of the U.S. economy to a department store. “It’s a giant, beautiful store, and everybody wants to go shopping there,” he told Time magazine last month. “And on behalf of the American people, I own the store, and I set prices, and I’ll say, if you want to shop here, this is what you have to pay.” ... Trump is not the first president to take a direct hand in economic decisions, although that has generally happened when the country faced dire conditions.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, scrambling to overcome the Great Depression, personally dictated the government’s daily price for gold, reportedly raising it by 21 cents on one occasion because that was a lucky number. Richard M. Nixon, worried that inflation would dampen his reelection prospects, imposed wage and price controls in 1971.
Anent the fantasy of US "reindustrialization," Krugman today:
The economy changes over time, and so do the industries in which people work. A century and a half ago, despite rising industry, America was still largely a nation of farmers; today hardly any of us work on the land:
Oh, and many, possibly a majority of farm workers are foreign-born, with many of them undocumented.
You don’t hear a lot of nostalgia for the days when agriculture dominated employment, although some politicians still portray rural areas and small towns as the “real America.” (If you ask me, Queens, New York comes a lot closer to being who we are now.)
There is, however, a lot of nostalgia for the 1950s and 1960s, when more than a quarter of U.S. workers were employed in manufacturing. Income inequality was much lower in that era; many blue-collar workers considered themselves middle-class. And there’s a widespread narrative that (a) attributes those good times for workers to the availability of well-paid jobs in manufacturing, and (b) attributes the relative decline of manufacturing to outsourcing and trade deficits.
But is this narrative right? It’s a simple, compelling story, but as I tried to explain to Clinton all those years ago, the math doesn’t work. To preview the conclusions: Even if we could somehow eliminate our trade deficit (which Trump’s tariffs won’t do, but that’s another story), America wouldn’t reindustrialize — our manufacturing sector would be slightly bigger, but nothing like what it used to be. And any wage gains for ordinary workers would be trivial at best. ...
"There is, however, a lot of nostalgia for the 1950s and 1960s, when more than a quarter of U.S. workers were employed in manufacturing. Income inequality was much lower in that era; many blue-collar workers considered themselves middle-class. And there’s a widespread narrative that (a) attributes those good times for workers to the availability of well-paid jobs in manufacturing, and (b) attributes the relative decline of manufacturing to outsourcing and trade deficits."
That was only true for white males. For the most part all women, Hispanics, Asians and of course African Americans were denied such opportunity. In addition, redlining of mortgage applications, "equal but separate" educations, and other vestiges of Jim Crow laws impaired income equality for a large part of the workforce. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were slow to come; currently both are under assault in (SCOTUS?) cases. As a 63 year old straight white male with a life-long physical handicap I, for one, am far from nostalgic for those days.
(If you ask me, Queens, New York comes a lot closer to being who we are now.)
I hope Krugman's economics are more thorough than his demographics. While Queens is often cited as the most diverse county in the country, that diversity is only, pardon the pun, skin deep.
[Researchers] estimate that the [redlining maps] maps account for 15 to 30 percent of the overall gaps in segregation and homeownership that they find between “D” and “C” neighborhoods from 1950 to 2010 (the gaps between “D” and “A” neighborhoods are clearly even wider).
Agriculture doesn't dominate employment for a variety of reasons including consolidation and mechanization. Likewise, even with "reindustrialization" manufacturing wouldn't dominate employment due to automation and increasingly "intelligent" factory floors.
Comments
In essence, a de facto trade embargo between the two largest economies in the world was in place.
Temporarily dropping U.S. levies on Chinese goods to 30% while dropping Chinese levies to 10%
on U.S. goods is a welcome development.
However, much hard work remains.
We will need to see what transpires over the next 90 days and beyond...
Derek Scissors of the American Enterprise Institute discusses the U.S./China tariff pause
and provides an unbiased analysis of the situation.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/whats-next-for-trumps-trade-war-after-pausing-tariffs-with-china
https://pbs.org/newshour/show/whats-next-for-trumps-trade-war-after-pausing-tariffs-with-china
Thanks for letting me know the link was broken.
I inadvertently omitted the protocol (https).
The link has been fixed.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/xi-defiance-pays-off-trump-212056893.html
https://open.substack.com/pub/paulkrugman/p/the-trade-war-isnt-over?r=tcpky&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
Asian Leaders See Right Through Trump’s Tariff Man Act https://apple.news/AATAs-ngPRjqT835j3HvWeQ
some great takes on tariffs, will larger implications regarding the gop in entirety :
tariffs as part of the costliest entertainment bundle ever subscribed by americans, no strategy needed :
https://kyla.substack.com/p/wweconomics-kayfabe-and-the-trade
tariffs as a dynamic ratings contest for whatever MAGA will blindly amplify :
https://www.epsilontheory.com/narrative-shopping/
despite coming off a bit scary, all interviews from derek scissors are shockingly direct (and compelling).
completely the opposite of every other spin-heavy conservative source.
am tempted to setup a web alert for any new clips.
not exactly the type of person appreciated by those that are deluded into believing investing\business\economic policy can always be decoupled during discussion.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/17/trump-tells-walmart-to-eat-the-tariffs.html
Is it me or did his tweet earlier today essentially say that China wasn't paying tariffs? So if they weren't, who was? Oh, right ... the American consumer. (But let's not talk about that, mmmksy?)
Liberation day was a bust.
On Friday, Trump claimed about 150 countries would soon receive letters “essentially telling” them of new US duty rates on their exports. Many learned of similar rates last month, only for the plan to change in a matter of days.
Not much winning here.
Well, at least he negotiated some shady deals in the Middle East for his family this past week. I'm sure he feels "liberated".
You know, I have/had the same question. I also wondered how many previous presidents had a throng of CEO's following them half way around the world on trips of these sorts? I'm sure I'm missing something but what? It's not just Walmart he thinks he runs or can tell them what to do. Didn't he also tell Apple that they shouldn't source their parts/supplies from India? What's going on here? I always thought that the republicans or their party were all about free enterprise and letting businesses do whatever wherever.
As to FOTUS demanding companies bend to his tantrums on tariffs, pricing, and production locations, it's totally fine even though it's essentially state-control of industry (aka socialism!). However, its only acceptable when the GQP does it, otherwise it's evil communism marxism socialist evil that must never happen in this country!
Unless one is willing to pay an iPhone similar to that of Rolex watches, it is not feasible to manufacture complex electronic devices in US at low cost. When large retailers such as Walmart is raising their prices due to the tariffs, this will apply to all retailers who import most of their goods from elsewhere, whether it is from China, Mexico, or Canada. Retail prices will rise whether you like it or not, and the added cost get passed on to the consumers.
Next quarter’s earnings will show the full impact of tariffs. Tourism is already down with fewer foreign tourists, and the season has just began.
As to FOTUS demanding companies bend to his tantrums on tariffs, pricing, and production locations
WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/05/18/trump-economy-tariffs-taxes-trade/
Is it normal? No. Does it happen? Yes, under dire conditions. Though not when those dire conditions are self-induced (higher costs due to tariffs).
in capitalism, companies adapt.
in krony kleptocracy, companies adapt to grift.
active decisions in either scenario.
The economy changes over time, and so do the industries in which people work. A century and a half ago, despite rising industry, America was still largely a nation of farmers; today hardly any of us work on the land:
Oh, and many, possibly a majority of farm workers are foreign-born, with many of them undocumented.
You don’t hear a lot of nostalgia for the days when agriculture dominated employment, although some politicians still portray rural areas and small towns as the “real America.” (If you ask me, Queens, New York comes a lot closer to being who we are now.)
There is, however, a lot of nostalgia for the 1950s and 1960s, when more than a quarter of U.S. workers were employed in manufacturing. Income inequality was much lower in that era; many blue-collar workers considered themselves middle-class. And there’s a widespread narrative that
(a) attributes those good times for workers to the availability of well-paid jobs in manufacturing, and
(b) attributes the relative decline of manufacturing to outsourcing and trade deficits.
But is this narrative right? It’s a simple, compelling story, but as I tried to explain to Clinton all those years ago, the math doesn’t work. To preview the conclusions: Even if we could somehow eliminate our trade deficit (which Trump’s tariffs won’t do, but that’s another story), America wouldn’t reindustrialize — our manufacturing sector would be slightly bigger, but nothing like what it used to be. And any wage gains for ordinary workers would be trivial at best. ...
(a) attributes those good times for workers to the availability of well-paid jobs in manufacturing, and
(b) attributes the relative decline of manufacturing to outsourcing and trade deficits."
That was only true for white males. For the most part all women, Hispanics, Asians and of course African Americans were denied such opportunity. In addition, redlining of mortgage applications, "equal but separate" educations, and other vestiges of Jim Crow laws impaired income equality for a large part of the workforce. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were slow to come; currently both are under assault in (SCOTUS?) cases. As a 63 year old straight white male with a life-long physical handicap I, for one, am far from nostalgic for those days.
I hope Krugman's economics are more thorough than his demographics. While Queens is often cited as the most diverse county in the country, that diversity is only, pardon the pun, skin deep.
By one measure, Queens is the most segregated county in NYS, itself one of the most segregated states in the country.
Yes, the impact of redlining is still felt. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/upshot/how-redlinings-racist-effects-lasted-for-decades.html
Agriculture doesn't dominate employment for a variety of reasons including consolidation and mechanization. Likewise, even with "reindustrialization" manufacturing wouldn't dominate employment due to automation and increasingly "intelligent" factory floors.