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.
Nothing new. They are hoping people to forget the failures. China, however, is imposing 60 days licensing from each applicant on rare earth metals where they own the monopoly.
In the meantime, prices from everything from cars, electronic devices, and food have got up. So much win!
This is so revealing. It stinks of unrealistic expectations, lack of confidence in assumed leverage, and abject fear over adverse market reactions. Anyone with a strong negotiating position and a solid plan doesn't keep moving the goalposts. Nor would they underestimate their adversaries.
A real plan would be that you begin negotiations with a realistic timeframe and a threat of tariffs to potentially arise. That hangs over the negotiations providing uncertainty for your adversary and a sense of urgency, as well. I.e. - Six months and we impose 25% tariffs, unless we have a deal. Then you don't tank your own stock market and end up backing down repeatedly. The tariff threat needs to be something that you can live with, should things not work out. Certainly not 145% tariffs on your biggest trade partner, who has actual leverage. And then you back down, lending the accurate impression that you do not have the confidence you are fronting.
And never don't bite off more than you can chew by targeting everyone all at once. We will either get seriously unimpressive results, or this will still be going on for another year. If, while FAFO, our own economic indicators start to erode, our leverage will diminish accordingly.
Faced with minimum of 10% tariffs on all imported goods, and reciprocal tariffs on exports, and threats not to dare raise prices, how long before corporate American goes with the standard playbook - layoffs?
FAFO = f****Around and Find Out. This describes this administration’s trade policy and their lack of expertise. Peter Navarro, Howard Lutnick, and Scott Bessent are no match to these of the foreign trading teams.
FAFO = f****Around and Find Out. This describes this administration’s trade policy and their lack of expertise. Peter Navarro, Howard Lutnick, and Scott Bessent are no match to these of the foreign trading teams.
What is comical about this is that no competent business leader would want the Treasec job. Same with Navarro and Lutnick. If they had real business chops, they would be making the big CEO bucks in the private sector, not as government hacks with no real accountability. And laughable credibility.
Meanwhile, other nations understand that the value of your "team" is incalculable. And not to be measured in terms of fealty. Like the solid gold CEO who increases shareholder value in multiples, is worth every penny of his pay.
I think this team is comprised of whatever ego-hungry rube they could find at Central Casting ... imo they're not even worthy of a rating.
We're all unwitting passengers sailing on the 'USS Make Some Sh--t Up' and the bridge crew is without a care in the world.....
At this point i think other countries know the WH is full of smoke and will cave in the face of any serious retaliation - or might decide to just wait it out for the next 3 years? Who knows.
FAFO = f****Around and Find Out. This describes this administration’s trade policy and their lack of expertise. Peter Navarro, Howard Lutnick, and Scott Bessent are no match to these of the foreign trading teams.
seems canada just realized if not hauling in a bribe, they can be doing actual work rather than engage trump\gop on trade. maybe they will someday have more time for production-free meetings with unreliable promises.
authoritarian BFFs, please shift your cash bags and trumpcoin purchases up the que.
Comments
In the meantime, prices from everything from cars, electronic devices, and food have got up. So much win!
A real plan would be that you begin negotiations with a realistic timeframe and a threat of tariffs to potentially arise. That hangs over the negotiations providing uncertainty for your adversary and a sense of urgency, as well. I.e. - Six months and we impose 25% tariffs, unless we have a deal. Then you don't tank your own stock market and end up backing down repeatedly. The tariff threat needs to be something that you can live with, should things not work out. Certainly not 145% tariffs on your biggest trade partner, who has actual leverage. And then you back down, lending the accurate impression that you do not have the confidence you are fronting.
And never don't bite off more than you can chew by targeting everyone all at once. We will either get seriously unimpressive results, or this will still be going on for another year. If, while FAFO, our own economic indicators start to erode, our leverage will diminish accordingly.
Faced with minimum of 10% tariffs on all imported goods, and reciprocal tariffs on exports, and threats not to dare raise prices, how long before corporate American goes with the standard playbook - layoffs?
Meanwhile, other nations understand that the value of your "team" is incalculable. And not to be measured in terms of fealty. Like the solid gold CEO who increases shareholder value in multiples, is worth every penny of his pay.
We get the "C" team. I pity the fool.
We're all unwitting passengers sailing on the 'USS Make Some Sh--t Up' and the bridge crew is without a care in the world.....
At this point i think other countries know the WH is full of smoke and will cave in the face of any serious retaliation - or might decide to just wait it out for the next 3 years? Who knows.
authoritarian BFFs, please shift your cash bags and trumpcoin purchases up the que.