A lot to take in and think about. DJT certainly thinks differently than anyone else I can remember as President. Not necessarily a bad thing considering the debt levels, bureaucratic overreaching regulations and abundant waste in our government we are currently experiencing. It hasn’t been acknowledged or addressed in a very long time. I personally am happy to see some out of the status quo thinking.
He's certainly different. In some cases, it's good that he's playing his cards close to the vest. In others, not so much - uncertainty is not stabilizing, and leadership is more than a poker game.
I stick to my prediction that his presidency will be a mixed bag - some good, some bad. But, better that than a continuation of the Obama-Biden-Harris debacle.
It will certainly be better. At some future time after his term we will all be able to really see the effects of many of his actions. I’m grateful he is actually taking on so many major issues. The debt crisis in our country is serious, it has been eroding away our purchasing power. In 25 years in Georgia a starter home in the Atlanta suburbs went from 60-70 thousand to 400-500 thousand. That is crazy and young people starting their careers are overburdened with debt to become home owners. Same for vehicles, especially HD passenger trucks and large SUV’s.
I’ve said this in one of your past substack. I know we may not agree. This is the Art of the Deal. His last term he did the same thing. I did not notice hyper inflation like everyone is crying about that “will happen.” I didn’t even notice a blip. But certain people who just hate the man for reasons they don’t even understand are trying to blow the loudest horn or ring the loudest bell to “warn” us of “what will happen”. The problem with that is, it’s already been done with much success. So there’s that. I don’t need to be told by some hyperpartisan jackass (not you) that the world is going to end because of a “tariff war” because I already know better.
I get that, but my point here is that no one other than Trump, and perhaps whoever he let in on his real plans, what the end game is. We can guess, but they'd just be guesses.
As for hyperinflation - that wouldn't happen unless and until tariffs were actually imposed. So, hysterics, yes.
I think some of Trump’s plan is to fly by the seat of his pants and change course as needed. He’s got a sort of genius that works well most of the time. I tend to think he was on the the same spectrum as Elon before there was a spectrum.
I’m thinking he’s way more calculated than people give him credit for. And he’s just cleaning house now. I call that live and learn from the last time.
I agree with both of you. He's instinctive, *and* he's more calculated than people think. But that doesn't mean all his instincts or calculations are good ones. Some, for sure. Others.... well see.
No one gets everything right. I agree with you, he’s both calculated and instinctive, depending on the circumstances, what he hopes to gain, and the lessons of his past successes and failures. We are in a high stakes game and we really have no idea what the outcome is going to be. He’s gonna win some and he’s gonna lose some.
A ditch in the stocks sent them to the microphones to cry foul. None of the those were on their radar during Biden or any other democrat president for the last 40 years.
He’s 3 weeks into office and I’ve already tuned out their dire predictions of what will happen. I’m simply not dealing with wha could happen, what will happen, what’s gonna happen. They can come on back around when any of their doomsday predictions start to occur.
I'm actually enjoying the histrionics - from both the Left and the NT/TDS Right. I am skipping out on much social media discourse because it's dominated by the Chicken Littles who are so desperate to be proven right that they won't take any "wins" into consideration.
When Trump goes full tilt making threats and so forth, one may conclude that it's a negotiating tactic. It may have worked with Canada and Mexico. However, eventually you run into someone willing to call your bluff like the Allies did with Germany over Poland. This is why "crazy" may work but can also result in all sorts of bad outcomes.
I doubt he was ever going to follow through on tariffs. These agreements had been in the works long before. This allowed a media diversion from all the other stuff he's doing. And it worked. Again.
Re #5: tariffs are a de facto consumption tax, of which I could be in favor with a low flat income tax or no income tax. Competition would still be in play and re-shoring would be a strong incentive for business.
I don't think that re-shoring should be "incentivized" by scale-tipping. As I wrote, it's a distortion that costs consumers, and therefore the economy, while benefiting a few.
Re-shoring is a business decision to diminish costs, given tariffs, not necessary scale-tipping per se. By your same logic, taxing income is an incentive to reduce productivity tied to income.
Some things are so wildly out of control; the debt, corruption, unconstitutionality of processes and agencies,internal spying ... too much to list; that I am willing to wait and see. Some mornings I think, if just one of these efforts, say, emasculating USAID, succeeds, then it would be a net benefit. We'll see.
I think the trade deficit is indeed a sign of a structural problem. The dollar’s status as the “reserve currency” seems to allow us – for now - to consume more than we produce and sustain levels of debt that would sink other countries. The budget deficit essentially finances the trade deficit – we “export” Treasury bills and newly printed dollars instead of products.
“DOGE” could help if it truly and significantly reduced government spending and borrowing, but I’m not optimistic. I fear that Trump is wasting political capital on symbolic items like foreign aid that, on the scale of the federal budget, amount to couch cushion change. Let’s see his careful comb-over get straightened out when he steps on that third rail of entitlement reform.
Debt and trade deficits are different matters. Unless a trade deficit is indicative of a coercive imbalance, i.e. a trade deal that isn't "reciprocal," I don't see why it matters.
A lot to take in and think about. DJT certainly thinks differently than anyone else I can remember as President. Not necessarily a bad thing considering the debt levels, bureaucratic overreaching regulations and abundant waste in our government we are currently experiencing. It hasn’t been acknowledged or addressed in a very long time. I personally am happy to see some out of the status quo thinking.
He's certainly different. In some cases, it's good that he's playing his cards close to the vest. In others, not so much - uncertainty is not stabilizing, and leadership is more than a poker game.
I stick to my prediction that his presidency will be a mixed bag - some good, some bad. But, better that than a continuation of the Obama-Biden-Harris debacle.
It will certainly be better. At some future time after his term we will all be able to really see the effects of many of his actions. I’m grateful he is actually taking on so many major issues. The debt crisis in our country is serious, it has been eroding away our purchasing power. In 25 years in Georgia a starter home in the Atlanta suburbs went from 60-70 thousand to 400-500 thousand. That is crazy and young people starting their careers are overburdened with debt to become home owners. Same for vehicles, especially HD passenger trucks and large SUV’s.
I’ve said this in one of your past substack. I know we may not agree. This is the Art of the Deal. His last term he did the same thing. I did not notice hyper inflation like everyone is crying about that “will happen.” I didn’t even notice a blip. But certain people who just hate the man for reasons they don’t even understand are trying to blow the loudest horn or ring the loudest bell to “warn” us of “what will happen”. The problem with that is, it’s already been done with much success. So there’s that. I don’t need to be told by some hyperpartisan jackass (not you) that the world is going to end because of a “tariff war” because I already know better.
I get that, but my point here is that no one other than Trump, and perhaps whoever he let in on his real plans, what the end game is. We can guess, but they'd just be guesses.
As for hyperinflation - that wouldn't happen unless and until tariffs were actually imposed. So, hysterics, yes.
I think some of Trump’s plan is to fly by the seat of his pants and change course as needed. He’s got a sort of genius that works well most of the time. I tend to think he was on the the same spectrum as Elon before there was a spectrum.
I’m thinking he’s way more calculated than people give him credit for. And he’s just cleaning house now. I call that live and learn from the last time.
I agree with both of you. He's instinctive, *and* he's more calculated than people think. But that doesn't mean all his instincts or calculations are good ones. Some, for sure. Others.... well see.
No one gets everything right. I agree with you, he’s both calculated and instinctive, depending on the circumstances, what he hopes to gain, and the lessons of his past successes and failures. We are in a high stakes game and we really have no idea what the outcome is going to be. He’s gonna win some and he’s gonna lose some.
By the way - funny how those now worried about inflation said nothing when Biden was spending us into 20% of it.
A ditch in the stocks sent them to the microphones to cry foul. None of the those were on their radar during Biden or any other democrat president for the last 40 years.
He’s 3 weeks into office and I’ve already tuned out their dire predictions of what will happen. I’m simply not dealing with wha could happen, what will happen, what’s gonna happen. They can come on back around when any of their doomsday predictions start to occur.
I'm actually enjoying the histrionics - from both the Left and the NT/TDS Right. I am skipping out on much social media discourse because it's dominated by the Chicken Littles who are so desperate to be proven right that they won't take any "wins" into consideration.
Ditto! I think we might have been separated at birth😂
When Trump goes full tilt making threats and so forth, one may conclude that it's a negotiating tactic. It may have worked with Canada and Mexico. However, eventually you run into someone willing to call your bluff like the Allies did with Germany over Poland. This is why "crazy" may work but can also result in all sorts of bad outcomes.
Unless it's not a bluff. This is exactly the point of the piece. No one can know at this juncture.
I doubt he was ever going to follow through on tariffs. These agreements had been in the works long before. This allowed a media diversion from all the other stuff he's doing. And it worked. Again.
I think he would have. But, it's impossible to know.
Re #5: tariffs are a de facto consumption tax, of which I could be in favor with a low flat income tax or no income tax. Competition would still be in play and re-shoring would be a strong incentive for business.
I don't think that re-shoring should be "incentivized" by scale-tipping. As I wrote, it's a distortion that costs consumers, and therefore the economy, while benefiting a few.
Re-shoring is a business decision to diminish costs, given tariffs, not necessary scale-tipping per se. By your same logic, taxing income is an incentive to reduce productivity tied to income.
Some things are so wildly out of control; the debt, corruption, unconstitutionality of processes and agencies,internal spying ... too much to list; that I am willing to wait and see. Some mornings I think, if just one of these efforts, say, emasculating USAID, succeeds, then it would be a net benefit. We'll see.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rScc2M1uvw
I think the trade deficit is indeed a sign of a structural problem. The dollar’s status as the “reserve currency” seems to allow us – for now - to consume more than we produce and sustain levels of debt that would sink other countries. The budget deficit essentially finances the trade deficit – we “export” Treasury bills and newly printed dollars instead of products.
“DOGE” could help if it truly and significantly reduced government spending and borrowing, but I’m not optimistic. I fear that Trump is wasting political capital on symbolic items like foreign aid that, on the scale of the federal budget, amount to couch cushion change. Let’s see his careful comb-over get straightened out when he steps on that third rail of entitlement reform.
Debt and trade deficits are different matters. Unless a trade deficit is indicative of a coercive imbalance, i.e. a trade deal that isn't "reciprocal," I don't see why it matters.