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.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
The REAL Economy: 'Empty shelves, higher prices’- Americans tell cost of Trump’s tariffs
They for sure won't result in more coffee and banana manufacturing plants.
Great local coffee out here, but not on the Mainland. Can't somehow manage to make Cheerios, though. Every one they plant, dies. https://www.konacoffeeandtea.com/
Condo prices are falling in certain locales because of oversupply. Utterly irrelevant to inflationary pressures that everyone is experiencing, as a result of tariffs mainly. We should be below 2%, but are instead heading back up.
And this phenomenon has been going on for a while in many markets. If you want a condo, in an overbuilt market, grab one up.
Wholesale Turkey Prices Are Up by a Staggering 40% This Thanksgiving POULTRY OFFERING
U.S. turkey stocks have plummeted to a 40-year low amid bird flu outbreaks, driving up wholesale prices by almost half. The American Farm Bureau Federation reports that tighter production is putting a squeeze on the nation’s flock ahead of Thanksgiving. It said wholesale turkey prices are about 40 percent higher than last year. Data from the USDA shows that 514,000 birds have been affected by avian flu this month. In total, 2.2 million birds have died in the past year across 12 states.
Maybe buy your turkeys a bit early this year?
We, and many people we know, are moving away from traditional turkey at Thanksgiving. We will be having a nice spread (at friends) that includes Beef Wellington. They are "foodies" and love to cook fancy meals. We are also invited to a Friendsgiving event, they will be serving turkey.
@msf I hear you. But I tend to keep thinking about young people starting out and forming a family while facing job disruptions and high housing costs. Also, from what I can see the direction of the country safety net is headed, they will need to have wages that cover private pay, unsubsidized, of things like healthcare, food and retirement. This means wages that grow from jobs that are secure. What counts is prospering over time. Stagnation won't get them there.
The unemployment rate for youth graduates (20-24) has averaged 8.1% over the last three months, its highest in four years.
And you rightfully point out that employers are eliminating pensions and passing on higher health care costs. The government wants them to be popping out kids to help with labor shortages. The employment/economic conditions do not support this.
This is a very interesting read from 2015. Mass deportations will absolutely accelerate the problems with population decline.
on the upside, FOTUS gets a nice gilden chintzy ballroom, and threw a Gatsby-themed high-rollers Halloween party the day SNAP funding expired and ACA premiums skyrocketed, because of course he would. Aren't you happy for him? After all, he needs his diversions from the very busy affairs of state.
They for sure won't result in more coffee and banana manufacturing plants.
Great local coffee out here, but not on the Mainland. Can't somehow manage to make Cheerios, though. Every one they plant, dies. https://www.konacoffeeandtea.com/
What I am fixing to say doesn't change my current concern about the unwinnable situation we are creating for our young people. This is just a random off the cuff incoherent set of thoughts I had after reading the Forbes article and more about the far range future, if there is one.
Yes, we all might have written a similar article ourselves with variations in both imagination and vision. The population issues are monovariant in a polyvariant world projection. The author brings up some of the other variables (e.g. AI) but, without a precedence on which to train, the interactions of the missing variables is subject to speculation. For example, in my childhood I would have had no way to even speculate how I filled my time in retirement since I would have, with my limited vision, not seen the iPhone and computer that fill my retirement days.
Probably because of my own background, my version of the Forbes article would have embedded more AI/robotics in the vision of the direction of a future of declining birth rates. But bi, tri, etc. variations still can never incorporate the future unknowns, e.g. my own transistor world that died with digital evolution and information age.
The author of the Forbes article seems to be wringing his hands over demographic worldwide shifts. I am more optimistic, or have been until recently. (I cannot predict outcomes if time moves backward along with decreased fertility rates. I suppose birth control would need to be outlawed completely to keep wages at poverty levels.) Assuming a more forward projected future, I just see positive change for the human experience. Who says the measure of life is a job? Maybe, with refusal to morph the cast system into something more fun and satisfying, meaningless exchanges of work for subsidence might be unchangeable. I want to believe we just have limited vision about the result of our more powerful, sometimes pessimistic and frightening, imagination.
You can wait until November to buy your discounted Halloween candy, but you still have to pony up. Prices are scary high.
Get ready to buy just "2 dolls instead of 30" this XMAS.
The average new car price in the US surpassed $50,000 for the first time in September 2025.
Separately, something has give with housing prices:
"The average age for first-time homebuyers had hit an all-time record high of 40 years old, according to the National Association of Realtors."
It just ain't right.
But rest assured, that nasty East Wing demolition was completely necessary. Completely. Meanwhile the Epstein fiasco was buried somewhere in the rubble.
What I am fixing to say doesn't change my current concern about the unwinnable situation we are creating for our young people. This is just a random off the cuff incoherent set of thoughts I had after reading the Forbes article and more about the far range future, if there is one.
... The author of the Forbes article seems to be wringing his hands over demographic worldwide shifts. I am more optimistic, or have been until recently. (I cannot predict outcomes if time moves backward along with decreased fertility rates. I suppose birth control would need to be outlawed completely to keep wages at poverty levels.) Assuming a more forward projected future, I just see positive change for the human experience. Who says the measure of life is a job? Maybe, with refusal to morph the cast system into something more fun and satisfying, meaningless exchanges of work for subsidence might be unchangeable. I want to believe we just have limited vision about the result of our more powerful, sometimes pessimistic and frightening, imagination.
Thanks for that link. It is important to note that the article I linked is 10 years old, so way behind the curve on the technology.
My main takeaway is that demographics like this are extremely hard (impossible?) to reverse, minus immigration. People having less children, no children, and waiting longer to have children. In our economy, the consumer drives growth. Can that be replaced by AI or robotics? Maybe, it implies higher wages for everyone, due to labor shortfalls?
"Conservative and liberal justices sharply questioned Solicitor General D. John Sauer on the Trump administration’s legal justification of the tariffs, which critics say infringes on the power of Congress to tax."
I hope to Gawd SCOTUS doesn't lie down for this. The country and the world need these Orange suck-tariffs to be REVERSED. Bessent was crying on tv about what a mess it would be to attempt to correctly refund the companies. Of course, you and I get... the shaft.
"The President possesses the authority to impose tariffs under a variety of trade statutes that he can turn to if the Supreme Court rules that IEEPA does not, or constitutionally cannot, provide broad tariff-setting authority to the executive. Some of these authorities, including Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, require the executive branch to conduct investigations and prepare bespoke reports before imposing new tariffs. However, two authorities empower the President to potentially impose tariffs without any predicate agency action: (1) Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which empowers the President to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent for a period of 150 days to address balance-of-payment problems; and (2) Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which permits the President to impose new or additional tariffs up to 50 percent without any durational limit to counter discrimination by foreign governments against U.S. commerce." https://www.cov.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/2025/11/dont-count-on-immediate-ieepa-refunds-what-president-trump-might-do-if-scotus-throws-out-ieepa-tariffs
Whack-a-mole. Shit. Nevertheless, the tariffs were instituted under an Emergency Declaration where no real emergency exists. It could be correctly asserted that is where the coup d'etat from within the government began. The "emergency" was manufactured.
Fecal, all around... Meanwhile, ICE and DHS are roving around like effing GESTAPO scumbags.
It clearly was an 'emergency' for the American people when Ontario ran an ad using Regan's words on tariffs against him too, right? I felt threatened, for sure.
Comments
https://www.konacoffeeandtea.com/
Condo prices are falling in certain locales because of oversupply. Utterly irrelevant to inflationary pressures that everyone is experiencing, as a result of tariffs mainly. We should be below 2%, but are instead heading back up.
And this phenomenon has been going on for a while in many markets. If you want a condo, in an overbuilt market, grab one up.
And you rightfully point out that employers are eliminating pensions and passing on higher health care costs. The government wants them to be popping out kids to help with labor shortages. The employment/economic conditions do not support this.
This is a very interesting read from 2015. Mass deportations will absolutely accelerate the problems with population decline.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stratfor/2015/02/17/population-decline-and-the-great-economic-reversal/
(I think my tongue just flew off its roller....)
"U.S." coffee and banana production will increase significantly!
Get ready to buy just "2 dolls instead of 30" this XMAS.
The average new car price in the US surpassed $50,000 for the first time in September 2025.
Separately, something has give with housing prices:
"The average age for first-time homebuyers had hit an all-time record high of 40 years old, according to the National Association of Realtors."
It just ain't right.
But rest assured, that nasty East Wing demolition was completely necessary. Completely. Meanwhile the Epstein fiasco was buried somewhere in the rubble.
My, what a fortunate coincidence!
This issue will, no doubt, rear its head again. Around mid-terms.
Problem solved!
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/05/supreme-court-trump-trade-tarrifs-vos.html
"Conservative and liberal justices sharply questioned Solicitor General D. John Sauer on the Trump administration’s legal justification of the tariffs, which critics say infringes on the power of Congress to tax."
the president's power to impose tariffs via the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/supreme-court-justices-question-trumps-authority-to-impose-sweeping-tariffs
"The President possesses the authority to impose tariffs under a variety of trade statutes
that he can turn to if the Supreme Court rules that IEEPA does not, or constitutionally cannot,
provide broad tariff-setting authority to the executive.
Some of these authorities, including Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232
of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, require the executive branch to conduct investigations
and prepare bespoke reports before imposing new tariffs.
However, two authorities empower the President to potentially impose tariffs without
any predicate agency action: (1) Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which empowers the President
to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent for a period of 150 days to address balance-of-payment problems;
and (2) Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which permits the President to impose new or additional tariffs
up to 50 percent without any durational limit to counter discrimination by foreign governments against
U.S. commerce."
https://www.cov.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/2025/11/dont-count-on-immediate-ieepa-refunds-what-president-trump-might-do-if-scotus-throws-out-ieepa-tariffs
Note: Bold text above added for emphasis.
Fecal, all around...
Meanwhile, ICE and DHS are roving around like effing GESTAPO scumbags.