Trump to Canada...

[Redbull7]

Canada has their own tariff on Chinese steel for what its worth. They absolutely are not "not a good player"

You understand there are other bad players in the market besides china, right ? Egypt, turkey, India, and even Swedish countries all use Canada as their channel to the U.S market .As someone with firsthand knowledge of this industry, I can assure you that Canada is a repeat offender and is not responsible .

 

[Spencer_York]

Am I crazy or could the US basically wipe all of the cartels off the face of the earth with just a few days of military intervention? Hell we could probably do it without a single boot on the ground.

Not saying that’s the right thing to do and don’t know what all the geopolitical ramifications would be, but am I crazy in thinking that we could just squash the cartels? Or would it increase cartel violence in the US? Seems like the Cartels have been very cautious not to directly harm US citizens or do anything else that would provoke US military action.

I don't think it would be feasible even if we would be willing to accept mass civilian casualties. It would also lead to big time reprisals on American citizens

 

[fatpiggy]

Donald Trump: Tariffs won’t cause inflation

Guy who works for Trump: tariffs won’t cause inflstion

Every other economist: tariffs cause inflation

Fatpiggy: I believe the Trump guy

Well, "Every other Economist" also told us that inflation was temporary. Deficits don't matter. And they preach the failure that was MMT.

So I'm going to go with the Trump guy and try something new.

 

[Redbull7]

If the US does that, what does that do to
the American gun market?

The consumer gun market is tied to consumer spending. It’s been crap the last 2 years . We need inflation to come down before we see a rebound there. Defense gun sales are still pretty good. Much of our stockpile has been sent to Ukraine or Israel so expect consistent demand for the next 4-5 years .

 

[fatpiggy]

The American demand for drugs is voracious. There are probably just more customers but on the whole it has increased

Both illegal and legal drugs.

We are addicted to anti-depressants, adderal, etc, All that shit is way over prescribed.

 

[Casa_del_Tigre]

“Restructuring The Global Trading Statem” by Harvard PHD Stephen Miran



Tariffs ultimately make the tariffed nation less wealthy (ie they work) if implemented correctly. So he posits (and his theory is currently being implemented so we can just watch the results in real time)

I’m just pointing out both parties agree with tariffs. Biden didn’t end the trade war. He agreed with it.

It comes down to Trump aligns with democrat economic policies. It gets confusing when democrats have to hate them while also wanting the same policies.

Gold and cryptos didn’t rally on Trump wining the election because he’s fiscally conservative.

 

[dbjork6317]

Well, "Every other Economist" also told us that inflation was temporary. Deficits don't matter. And they preach the failure that was MMT.

So I'm going to go with the Trump guy and try something new.

Can you source a quote from a credible economist that says “inflation is temporary?”

Also, is your source for that Trump? He has said prices will come down, which insinuates that inflation is, in fact, temporary.

 

[fatpiggy]

Can you source a quote from a credible economist that says “inflation is temporary?”

Also, is your source for that Trump? He has said prices will come down, which insinuates that inflation is, in fact, temporary.

Transitory, my bad. Point stands that they were dead wrong.

They were wrong about inflation coming down too. Remember they cut a 1/2 point just prior to the election (to help dems, lol), with another .25 point expected at the next meeting because inflation had subsided? Well, the next cut didnt come, and real interest rates have gone UP since they cut. Spare me that these "every other economist" are some know it all. Maybe you forgot about the book "The smartest people in the room" and the story of long term capital management. They have been dead wrong in many aspects.

And yes, her name was Janet Yellen. Maybe you have heard of her.

 

[fatpiggy]

Can you source a quote from a credible economist that says “inflation is temporary?”

Also, is your source for that Trump? He has said prices will come down, which insinuates that inflation is, in fact, temporary.

No. Prices can still come down and be inflationary. It's called disinflation.

Prices actually coming down is deflation. I dont have the time to explain, but AI can tell you the difference if you ask it.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

“Restructuring The Global Trading Statem” by Harvard PHD Stephen Miran



Tariffs ultimately make the tariffed nation less wealthy (ie they work) if implemented correctly. So he posits (and his theory is currently being implemented so we can just watch the results in real time)

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/09/trumps-terrible-tariffs/

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/economists-understand-tariffs-just-fine-oren-cass-does-not/

 

[fatpiggy]

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/09/trumps-terrible-tariffs/

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/economists-understand-tariffs-just-fine-oren-cass-does-not/

There is one problem, those policies are not being implemented. Maybe they are right, maybe they are not. But I don't need to discuss them becuase they did not win the election and those policies are not being implemented.

Im specifically talking about the paper written by Trumps incoming, Harvard PHD trained, economic advisor.

If you notice, his ideas are being implemented.

Care to discuss the paper, possible economic effects and potential outcomes?

So far no one has read the paper.

His paper claims that tariffs can be implemented in a way such that the tariffed nations become less wealthy. This is in defiance of generally accepted theory and at least 5 posters in this thread.

It seems like an important paper for people discussing tariffs and economics.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

There is one problem, those policies are not being implemented. Maybe they are right, maybe they are not. But I don't need to discuss them becuase they did not win the election and those policies are not being implemented.

Im specifically talking about the paper written by Trumps incoming, Harvard PHD trained, economic advisor.

If you notice, his ideas are being implemented.

Care to discuss the paper, possible economic effects and potential outcomes?

So far no one has read the paper.

What I linked to was criticizing the policies being implemented.

 

[fatpiggy]

What I linked to was criticizing the policies being implemented.

On day 3? Have they even been implemented yet? I'll answer that for you. They have not been implemented yet.

And i can tell you haven't read the paper. If you had you would know that they only way it works is with gradual implementation.

 

[tgrharley]

Would love to hear how Canada is "freeloading" and why forcibly annexing (aka invading) another sovereign nation and one of our closest allies is a good idea. Some of y'all would jump off a cliff if Trump said you should

Invading?? Hyperbole much?

 

[UrHuckleberry]

On day 3? Have they even been implemented yet? I'll answer that for you. They have not been implemented yet.

And i can tell you haven't read the paper. If you had you would know that they only way it works is with gradual implementation.

So you want discussion on the policies actually being implemented, but also, don't discuss the policies because its only been 3 days and they haven't been implemented yet?

 

[fatpiggy]

So you want discussion on the policies actually being implemented, but also, don't discuss the policies because its only been 3 days and they haven't been implemented yet?

No.

Discuss the theories behind the policies being implemented to see if the do what they are intended to do. What is he doing differently? Why hasnt it been done in the past? Or has it been done and what were the results? Why does his theory reach conclusions different than generally accepted theroy? And then, give them time to work. Policies don't show results the second they are implemented.

The paper specifically says the tariffs can't be implemented all at once and shock the market. They must be implemented gradually, over time. A 20% tariff should be implemented at a rate of 2% a month until the full 20% is reached. etc. read the paper for yourself if you would like.

And if you notice what happened the last few days? Small tariffs were placed on several countries.

So is it fair to measure results when the policy has not even been put in place?

 

[UrHuckleberry]

No.

Discuss the theories behind the policies being implemented to see if the do what they are intended to do. What is he doing differently? Why hasnt it been done in the past? Or has it been done and what were the results? Why does his theory reach conclusions different than generally accepted theroy? And then, give them time to work. Policies don't show results the second they are implemented.

The paper specifically says the tariffs can't be implemented all at once and shock the market. They must be implemented gradually, over time. A 20% tariff should be implemented at a rate of 2% a month until the full 20% is reached. etc. read the paper for yourself if you would like.

So is it fair to measure results when the policy has not even been put in place?

Your first sentence is what he said. @firegiver , I think you said you read the paper right?

 

[fatpiggy]

Your first sentence is what he said. @firegiver , I think you said you read the paper right?

Have you head of google notebook? Serious question, not sarcastic.

It is amazing. You can upload any PDF file and it will summarize, make a study guide, create a podcast etc. It is unbelieveable.

Get that paper and put it in google notebook. its crazy

 

[Spencer_York]

Invading?? Hyperbole much?

What do you think annexing Canada against its will means?

 

[DW4_2016]

“Restructuring The Global Trading Statem” by Harvard PHD Stephen Miran



Tariffs ultimately make the tariffed nation less wealthy (ie they work) if implemented correctly. So he posits (and his theory is currently being implemented so we can just watch the results in real time)

You’ll know they’ll work when they’re working?

Pass the bill and find out what’s inside it?

How are these two things functionally different?

Keep voting R or D. All politicians appreciate you for it

 

[DW4_2016]

Well, "Every other Economist" also told us that inflation was temporary. Deficits don't matter. And they preach the failure that was MMT.

So I'm going to go with the Trump guy and try something new.

Did they? I remember your media latching onto it, but rational people knew better. You guys always find the one dentist who didn’t recommend crest and take that as an endorsement to brush your teeth with shit.

 

[tgrharley]

Canada has their own tariff on Chinese steel for what its worth. They absolutely are not "not a good player"

That you Pierre?

 

[tgrharley]

What do you think annexing Canada against its will means?

Certainly doesn't mean "invasion".

 

[Spencer_York]

Certainly doesn't mean "invasion".

Ok so Trump says we’re annexing Canada as a state, Canada says no, then what?

 

[fatpiggy]

You’ll know they’ll work when they’re working?

Pass the bill and find out what’s inside it?

How are these two things functionally different?

Keep voting R or D. All politicians appreciate you for it

I guess the problem for you is that you can't tell how they are fundamentally different. Think about it and get back to us. The rest of us see it.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

On day 3? Have they even been implemented yet? I'll answer that for you. They have not been implemented yet.

And i can tell you haven't read the paper. If you had you would know that they only way it works is with gradual implementation.

I’m confused about what you’re trying to say here. People can’t argue against tariffs until after they’re implemented? Trump didn’t increase and levy new tariffs in his first term?

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

What do you think annexing Canada against its will means?

This is another example of the way fanatics will defend anything, even if they would’ve called that crazy the day before.

 

[fatpiggy]

I’m confused about what you’re trying to say here. People can’t argue against tariffs until after they’re implemented? Trump didn’t increase and levy new tariffs in his first term?

The new incoming economic advisor has published a paper saying that tariffs can be implented in a way that defies current accepted thinking that they are a zero sum game.

Currently, all the clowns keep parroting the idea that tariffs don't work and that it is zero-sum game.

Trumps economic advisor has published, for the world to see, his thoughts on how to implement tariffs in such a way that is not a zero-sum game and will punish the tariffed nation and make the tariffing nation wealthier. In other words, if implemented his way the tariffs work.

So, im trying to get people to actually read and think for themselves and tell us why he is wrong. Tell us where he is wrong in his thinking and why his policies won't work. If you are just going off the usual conventional wisdom of "tariffs are a zero sum game" then you havent read his paper and are being very closed minded.

I find it funny that everyone wants to assert their opinion on tariffs, but no one even reads the paper on how they will be implemented. if you dont know how they are used, then how do you know if it will work?


Add to that, you can use AI to read and analyze papers, and i think people are being lazy by not "reading" the paper. It takes 5 minutes to run it though AI and you can ask it anything you want. Instead, people keep repeating the mantra that tariffs dont work.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

The new incoming economic advisor has published a paper saying that tariffs can be implented in a way that defies current accepted thinking that they are a zero sum game.

Currently, all the clowns keep parroting the idea that tariffs don't work and that it is zero-sum game.

Trumps economic advisor has published, for the world to see, his thoughts on how to implement tariffs in such a way that is not a zero-sum game and will punish the tariffed nation and make the tariffing nation wealthier. In other words, if implemented his way the tariffs work.

So, im trying to get people to actually read and think for themselves and tell us why he is wrong. Tell us where he is wrong in his thinking and why his policies won't work. If you are just going off the usual conventional wisdom of "tariffs are a zero sum game" then you havent read his paper and are being very closed minded.

I find it funny that everyone wants to assert their opinion on tariffs, but no one even reads the paper on how they will be implemented. if you dont know how they are used, then how do you know if it will work?


Add to that, you can use AI to read and analyze papers, and i think people are being lazy by not "reading" the paper. It takes 5 minutes to run it though AI and you can ask it anything you want. Instead, people keep repeating the mantra that tariffs dont work.

Have you read the articles posted previously that discuss those policies?

I do have Cass's paper open in my browser and plan to read, before you ask.

 

[fatpiggy]

Have you read the articles posted previously that discuss those policies?

I do have Cass's paper open in my browser and plan to read, before you ask.

From the first article he posted

Tariffs don’t cause inflation, strictly speaking, because inflation is caused by an increase in the money supply, something tariffs have nothing to do with. Tariffs do, however, cause price increases for the things on which they are levied because — follow this next part carefully — they are taxes. And tariffs on all goods from all foreign countries would cause much more significant price increases than the already existing tariffs on steel and aluminum and goods from one foreign country.

Make no mistake: Protectionists want tariffs to cause price increases. Trump’s platform says the purpose of his trade policy is to “protect American Workers, Farmers, and Industries from unfair Foreign Competition.” If tariffs don’t cause price increases, because foreign producers lower their prices to compensate for the tax, then domestic producers aren’t protected by the tariff, because the price for the foreign good will be the same one Americans are already willing to pay.



The economic advisor disagrees with all of these premises in bold (mine) in the article.

I think he deserves his chance to try his way. He won after all.

 

[fatpiggy]

Did they? I remember your media latching onto it, but rational people knew better. You guys always find the one dentist who didn’t recommend crest and take that as an endorsement to brush your teeth with shit.

Janet Yellen was the one dentist who didn't recommend crest? She made the crest. Get out of here.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

From the first article he posted

Tariffs don’t cause inflation, strictly speaking, because inflation is caused by an increase in the money supply, something tariffs have nothing to do with. Tariffs do, however, cause price increases for the things on which they are levied because — follow this next part carefully — they are taxes. And tariffs on all goods from all foreign countries would cause much more significant price increases than the already existing tariffs on steel and aluminum and goods from one foreign country.

Make no mistake: Protectionists want tariffs to cause price increases. Trump’s platform says the purpose of his trade policy is to “protect American Workers, Farmers, and Industries from unfair Foreign Competition.” If tariffs don’t cause price increases, because foreign producers lower their prices to compensate for the tax, then domestic producers aren’t protected by the tariff, because the price for the foreign good will be the same one Americans are already willing to pay.



The economic advisor disagrees with all of these premises in bold (mine) in the article.

I think he deserves his chance to try his way. He won after all.

He is absolutely getting his chance. I don't understand that argument. People are saying it isn't a good policy based on studies that have been done testing some of Oren's conclusions. It is their opinion of the policy. They can have opinions on policies prior to the end game of the policy playing out.

Just like, Biden can put DEI policies into place to try to drive for more equity. And I don't remember your opinion being that we should see if those policies work and actually do provide equity, etc. You had an opinion on the policies based on what you have seen in life, etc and thought they wouldn't work like stated. (I am sure it's not a perfect analogy, but I think my point is coming across regardless).

 

[fatpiggy]

He is absolutely getting his chance. I don't understand that argument. People are saying it isn't a good policy based on studies that have been done testing some of Oren's conclusions. It is their opinion of the policy. They can have opinions on policies prior to the end game of the policy playing out.

Just like, Biden can put DEI policies into place to try to drive for more equity. And I don't remember your opinion being that we should see if those policies work and actually do provide equity, etc. You had an opinion on the policies based on what you have seen in life, etc and thought they wouldn't work like stated. (I am sure it's not a perfect analogy, but I think my point is coming across regardless).

My opinion of DEI is based on morals. It is morally wrong to discriminate on the basis of race.

Biden had a chance to put in his economic policies and he did. It resulted in a lot of inflation, the most in 50 years.

Trump has his chance to enact his policies. Everyone is bitching about them, but they aren't actually listening to what he is saying.

I think there is a lot of information to be gleaned, and money to be made, for people that can accurately digest the information. I'm trying to help my fellow TI'ers out, as i don't think they are digesting the information properly. They are focused on the "it can't work" as opposed to listening to the guy who holds the power saying "I think it can work this way". While y'all squabble over whether it can work, im going to front run the actual policy.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

My opinion of DEI is based on morals. It is morally wrong to discriminate on the basis of race.

Biden had a chance to put in his economic policies and he did. It resulted in a lot of inflation, the most in 50 years.

Trump has his chance to enact his policies. Everyone is bitching about them, but they aren't actually listening to what he is saying.

I think there is a lot of information to be gleaned, and money to be made, for people that can accurately digest the information. I'm trying to help my fellow TI'ers out, as i don't think they are digesting the information properly. They are focused on the "it can't work" as opposed to listening to the guy who holds the power saying "I think it can work this way". While y'all squabble over whether it can work, im going to front run the actual policy.

I correctly assumed you wouldn't get my point on DEI, thank you.

 

[TopGun01]

Down with free trade!!

What is free about the current system? No worries -- the best is about to come whether you like it or not.

 

[TopGun01]

did a search and found this on a German message board from 1938:

“The GOAT just said that if Austria didn’t like us building up our military they should “just become part of Germany.” LMAO.”

On another note, I think it’d be great if Canada joined as a state. They’d be a blue state with a ton of electoral votes. Would probably swing the Presidency Democrat for decades to come.

Don't you guys tire of the same old "fascist" references....tell me you have something else to support why you hate Trump so much. Nine years of fighting him at every turn isn't enough?

 

[fatpiggy]

I correctly assumed you wouldn't get my point on DEI, thank you.

There is only one correct point on DEI. It's is a racist program that needs to stop. There is nothing else to know about it.

 

[Spencer_York]

What is free about the current system? No worries -- the best is about to come whether you like it or not.

What is free? I as a consumer don't have to pay for an import fee on foreign goods. The United States and its people are wealthier because we don't have tariffs on Canadian goods.

60% of our crude oil imports are from Canada. 85% of our energy imports are from Canada. ~25% of the daily oil consumption in the US comes from Canada. The largest export destination for 36 states is Canada. Canada is our largest foreign supplier of steel, aluminum, and uranium. We also import a ton of other metals and minerals, critical to national infrastructure, the military, and national security from Canada.

What benefit do we get from starting a trade war with Canada? No one can explain that to me

 

[UrHuckleberry]

There is only one correct point on DEI. It's is a racist program that needs to stop. There is nothing else to know about it.

So insert literally any other policy. My point wasn't about DEI itself, and I literally called that out. Congrats, I'll be done.

 

[Spencer_York]

So insert literally any other policy. My point wasn't about DEI itself, and I literally called that out. Congrats, I'll be done.

He's dumber than bricks, don't bother engaging with him