A wise man once said, the less the words, the more the meaning.Growing with China. Invested in China.
As we celebrate our first 100 years in China, we are equally excited to be entering our second century and continuing our journey with you.www.jpmorgan.com
January Inflation
- Thread starter SilentBirdHunter
- Start date
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Maybe JP Morgan is conflicted in more ways than one?
The bizarre element of this is most people fail to realize that other countries have been successful with applying tariffs against the US and are quick to vilify Trump at the suggestion of going from no tariff to let’s apply a tariff.
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 1,988
Complex on the one hand but the impacts are no mystery. I posted a link to reporting on impacts to the suppliers of two very large sellers of goods in the US, Wal-Mart and Target. They are squeezing their suppliers, who in turn are looking to find a cheaper place to source and nanufacture the goods they sell to those two giants. That means sourcing OUTSIDE the US, from countries...China being one...that can provide or make those goods more cheaply than we can in the US.
In my state, they just announced a large layoff of many hundreds of mine workers who supply the steel industry....stated reason for the layoffs, a sharp decline in steel and metal parts orders from the auto industry.
Targeted tariffs are one thing, but no reason is being applied to the huge and wide use this administration is implementing.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
LOL, you've convinced no one other than yourself on this point. Isolationism is a dead end street. As much as people hate to admit it, our life of privilege is solidly built on the backs of foreign workers who can do that same things we can do, but for pennies on the dollar.
We'll never be isolated from a global market, as numerous people have pointed out, and you and your red-capped brothers keep ignoring, that products sold on the market will still be priced accordingly. If you raise the price of foreign made steel, or oil, or strawberry jam, the domestic producers will just raise theirs as well. I mean just think about it. If you own a company that all of a sudden has a market advantage because of a political move that can only (unless we hope on the dictator train) only last 4 years, are you going to spend 2 of those designing and building increased capacity or are you simply going to take the extra profit for those 4 years and assume that the next person in the WH reverses this guys checker moves? At which point you'll have that 12th house in the Caiman's?
But at this point, bring on the tariffs, bring on the recession. I hope it hits hard. I hope a shitton of people lose their job, and/or just make less money, and they default on their homes. I hope we don't bail them out or the banks that lent to them. I hope we all stay on this high horse and keep reminding each other to pull on the bootstraps a little harder. Heck, I hope it all crumbles. Because I'm going to make out like a bandit when it does.
This is sad and very disheartening. I’ve lost my job a couple of times and it happened at the worst of times for me and my family.
Logically it would appear that these laid off mine workers would eventually get hired back plus even more to harvest the steel from US soil.
If this short term loss ignites a revived steel industry because it is too expensive to import it, then it could become a net gain.
I have no idea how much time it would take for a shift to occur so that we are able to build the infrastructure necessary to harvest minerals from our soil- certainly not overnight.
For a president to make moves like this, he needs to convince competitors he’s crazy and won’t flinch as he follows through for an unspecified time period.
To do this economic reset towards balanced trade and achieve peace in Ukraine in four years, it seems a strategic move to quickly rename the GOM to GOA and instruct Canada and Greenland that they would be great as States for the US. Everyone is wondering if he is a loony bluffer with an unsuited 7/2 or if he really does have ‘the nuts’ (poker terms).
In theory, I suspect he’s orchestrating something similar with Ukraine and Russia with his statements that intentionally sent Zelenskyy and Democrats reeling to a extent where Putin is satisfied with a tri-lateral peace deal that’s only 100% beneficial to Russia.
In US mediations, a good mediator becomes successful when he gets both sides to make uncomfortable sacrifices and achieve gains - simultaneously. Putin regards this as weak and will only settle if he gets 100% benefit and the other side is either screwed or annihilated.
IF this line of thinking is true, then it takes someone like Trump who understands Putin better than anyone and will continue undeterred by vitriolic press.
These are extreme political times- I’m not for or against all of these changes but merely trying to make sense of it as best I can.
History suggests you could be right. If you take the application of tariffs in isolation, we can conclude that it caused the great depression. The intent was fundamentally fractured to the core since the only goal was to raise money for the US.
A 12 year presidency gave Roosevelt time to recover from generations of tariffs, used the funds to create an inundated flux of government jobs. As the Second World War ended, private enterprise minded politicians diluted the federal workforce and enabled capitalism to generate more income the government, and the gap between the rich and poor was smaller than ever.
Right now it seems that Trump is trying to do all of this starting with upping tariffs, achieve peace, might start a war, more peace, acquire states, generate jobs, boost the economy, shrink the gap between rich and poor with ‘better jobs’, and then potentially reduce tariffs, in just four years- this list of things all happened over the course of time from 1938-1959; at the end of this period, American infrastructure was robust, significant numbers of federal jobs were cut, private enterprise took off, and finally tariffs went down.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
The Trump Show sounds a lot like The Truman Show, but in reverse.
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 1,988
Piece in Reuters this am that has some relation to the thread:
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Would be nice if he would start talking stuff up...
The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index® fell by 7.2 points in March to 92.9 (1985=100). The Present Situation Index—based on consumers’ assessment of current business and labor market conditions—decreased 3.6 points to 134.5. The Expectations Index—based on consumers’ short-term outlook for income, business, and labor market conditions—dropped 9.6 points to 65.2, the lowest level in 12 years and well below the threshold of 80 that usually signals a recession ahead. The cutoff date for preliminary results was March 19, 2025.
www.conference-board.org
The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index® fell by 7.2 points in March to 92.9 (1985=100). The Present Situation Index—based on consumers’ assessment of current business and labor market conditions—decreased 3.6 points to 134.5. The Expectations Index—based on consumers’ short-term outlook for income, business, and labor market conditions—dropped 9.6 points to 65.2, the lowest level in 12 years and well below the threshold of 80 that usually signals a recession ahead. The cutoff date for preliminary results was March 19, 2025.
US Consumer Confidence
A monthly survey of US consumer attitudes, spending plans, and expectations for inflation, stock prices, and interest rates
www.conference-board.org
@SAJ-99 agreed; a joke is a serious thing.
Since the thread is about inflation, I have to keep on topic even though all my meandering posts arguably are material to the components of inflation.
Do ya'll have a preferred source for inflation calculators? Why one over the other?
Below is a snapshot-chart from an article that tracks inflation: https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/:
Since the thread is about inflation, I have to keep on topic even though all my meandering posts arguably are material to the components of inflation.
Do ya'll have a preferred source for inflation calculators? Why one over the other?
Below is a snapshot-chart from an article that tracks inflation: https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/:
The Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks inflation. All other sources reflect back to the BLS data.
Consumer Price Index Summary - 2025 M02 Results
www.bls.gov
Would be nice if he would start talking stuff up...
The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index® fell by 7.2 points in March to 92.9 (1985=100). The Present Situation Index—based on consumers’ assessment of current business and labor market conditions—decreased 3.6 points to 134.5. The Expectations Index—based on consumers’ short-term outlook for income, business, and labor market conditions—dropped 9.6 points to 65.2, the lowest level in 12 years and well below the threshold of 80 that usually signals a recession ahead. The cutoff date for preliminary results was March 19, 2025.
US Consumer Confidence
A monthly survey of US consumer attitudes, spending plans, and expectations for inflation, stock prices, and interest rates
I have a daughter who is a purebred liberal, I cherish her, and like that she has strong convictions, but struggles to listen to data or alternate perceptions about what's going on. Her struggle is mainly because she's young, but for her age she does a pretty good job of being self-aware.
The reason I bring that up, she is part of a following that is boycotting the American economy. I wonder how much traction or impact that has on the numbers you shared. It seems the information conveys that consumers are fearful, but other consumers (like my daughter) are demonstrating an intrepid streak.
I just keep asking her questions since it is safe to see what makes her and her camp tick. I'm more of a centrist/libertarian who likes to observe and understand the rise and fall of good ideas that work and don't work. Our discussions are fruitful as long as she doesn't yell at me or start crying uncontrollably.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I track all of them. But they often need to be torn apart and investigate the pieces to determine the drivers. Even then, context matters. That said, surveys on future inflation are tough. ISM has components that include prices paid and inflation expectations, so you can see them both. Sometimes they get weird. My general view is that inflation is driven by workers ability to pay higher prices. Sure they complain, but they still pay them. When they have no choice, like due to a job loss, that is when prices might see an adjustment. Stagflation is oft-used word, but is very rare, especially to predict.
JAG I give you credit for at least making an argument and being coherent. The main problem with tariffs is I have heard different reasons for them depending on who is talking.
1) they are simply a starting point for negotiations
2) they are to eliminate the flow of fentanyl
3) they are for reciprocation/fairness
4) they are to raise money/ lower taxes
5) the are for defense purposes (this one is easiest to defend)
6) they are to bring jobs back to US (this one is comical)
None of those are true, while simultaneously all are true. As long as you like one of them and will defend it in conversation with your daughter, it is working. The main driver is that Trump likes tariffs so his sycophants will give him tariffs. The fact that he doesn't understand basic principles of macroeconomics is irrelevant to followers. It is all about messaging and him wanted the admiration of the his crowd. It is subtle, like when the Admin says "China will pay..." or "Mexico will pay..." when they know it is the US citizen that ends up paying. But messaging is important, if not everything.
What is interesting to watch is who gets the exceptions. Hyundai announced a new car plant in LA and new steel plant. That probably fits right in with your view and expectation. The problem overlooked is Hyundai also gave $1m to the Trump inauguration, which is his money now. And these promises will take YEARS to come to fruition if they do at all. We can tell that from the promises never fulfilled the last time he was in office. Seems to be more in the PR of making an announcement in front of cameras regardless if it was something already long-planned (Apple) or something new that has little chance of being completed (Hyundai)
I don't pretend to know how this is going end up, all I can do make decisions on what I see. Right now, mostly it is playing out in the courts. I can tell you on tariffs the market/corporations are not liking getting jerked around. But maybe that is all part of his new reality TV show.
I'm still seeking to understand and make sense of what is happening. To your point, "context matters". Context takes a while to learn and understand. Meme's and reels do an enormous disservice to the general public by giving the uninformed masses unstable confidence and goading them to take unnecessarily hostile positions (like my daughter for example).
This has to be one of the most politically dynamic and volatile times ever. When I speak with my daughter, I'm careful to remind her I don't have an opinion. Everyone thinks you have to have an opinion or a side, but you don't. When she gets upset, she's not angry at me, but the world. I remind her that all we can do is vote. I also remind her that if she can keep from going apesh!t, it can be an entertaining learning experience.
As such, there's too much to lose and too little to gain by having an opinion, especially concerning the mysterious Trump logic or his reasons for tariffs. I don't think he intends to leave them there forever, but use them until he achieves his objectives. I enjoy learning about it because it matters to the people I love; I have a diverse family, politically and racially. No one knows how it will pan out. To rely on history lessons ('if you don't learn it, you will repeat it')- I don't recall a time when the recipe of these extreme factors took place inside such a short window as this one.
Trump sat in a four-year time-out to chart out what he wanted to do next, took names, got angrier, and decided he's going to swing harder. Curiously, Trump is borrowing the Democrat playbook on 1) Govt. fraud/waste/abuse, 2) Peace not war.
Trade Balance:
One person on this thread mentioned earlier that Canada had tariffs on the US before this mess, but this was only if dairy exceeded a certain margin and then applied a 200% tariff to keep a check on their own supply/availability. The Canada tariff excuse is a red herring that is reasonably explained for those willing to understand its metrics (article that better explains this in this link)- the point becomes moot.
Most people on this thread agree that tariffs don't work, but if you ask China if tariffs work, they would say an emphatic yes! And they get awesome intellectual property and RD in exchange for cheap labor.
Tariff objectives in isolation are fatal since they dismiss the context of greater economic variables and concerns. I would add to your good list of 6 purposes one more:
This chart tracks these imbalances. Understanding the context of these imbalances and how to best correct them is way beyond my purview, but I'm getting there.
The US is number one in the world for the largest trade deficit. We, the US, spend more money in a year than we receive from our exports. We could benefit from greater balance.
I'm curious why Biden didn't revoke the tariffs that Trump applied to China in his first term. Does that mean he agreed in principle? It's too easy to quip 'yes of course', but I'm sure there's more to it than that.
This has to be one of the most politically dynamic and volatile times ever. When I speak with my daughter, I'm careful to remind her I don't have an opinion. Everyone thinks you have to have an opinion or a side, but you don't. When she gets upset, she's not angry at me, but the world. I remind her that all we can do is vote. I also remind her that if she can keep from going apesh!t, it can be an entertaining learning experience.
As such, there's too much to lose and too little to gain by having an opinion, especially concerning the mysterious Trump logic or his reasons for tariffs. I don't think he intends to leave them there forever, but use them until he achieves his objectives. I enjoy learning about it because it matters to the people I love; I have a diverse family, politically and racially. No one knows how it will pan out. To rely on history lessons ('if you don't learn it, you will repeat it')- I don't recall a time when the recipe of these extreme factors took place inside such a short window as this one.
Trump sat in a four-year time-out to chart out what he wanted to do next, took names, got angrier, and decided he's going to swing harder. Curiously, Trump is borrowing the Democrat playbook on 1) Govt. fraud/waste/abuse, 2) Peace not war.
Trade Balance:
One person on this thread mentioned earlier that Canada had tariffs on the US before this mess, but this was only if dairy exceeded a certain margin and then applied a 200% tariff to keep a check on their own supply/availability. The Canada tariff excuse is a red herring that is reasonably explained for those willing to understand its metrics (article that better explains this in this link)- the point becomes moot.
Most people on this thread agree that tariffs don't work, but if you ask China if tariffs work, they would say an emphatic yes! And they get awesome intellectual property and RD in exchange for cheap labor.
Tariff objectives in isolation are fatal since they dismiss the context of greater economic variables and concerns. I would add to your good list of 6 purposes one more:
7) to offset trade deficits.
This chart tracks these imbalances. Understanding the context of these imbalances and how to best correct them is way beyond my purview, but I'm getting there.
The US is number one in the world for the largest trade deficit. We, the US, spend more money in a year than we receive from our exports. We could benefit from greater balance.
I'm curious why Biden didn't revoke the tariffs that Trump applied to China in his first term. Does that mean he agreed in principle? It's too easy to quip 'yes of course', but I'm sure there's more to it than that.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I’m sure you have an opinion.
Sure, but in your mind (and Trump’s) that is a bad thing. It’s not that simple. It is actually a benefit that has allowed us to raise our average standard of living over the past 50yrs (post Bretton Woods 2). You only want to look at traded goods. The accounts have to balance and the other piece comes into the US in the form of financial payments. Ie they buy our bonds and stocks and land and companies. The entire global economic system revolves around the $. Be careful in trying to “fix” that. We have some of highest average wages in the world. Hard to complain the system is “unfair” to us. We built the damn thing.
My general view is hubris gets us all in the end. So when I see it, I like to go the other way quickly.
Just guessing, but Biden probably left those tariffs on for defense reasons, at least for semiconductors. Same reason Trump hasn’t lifted ban on Nvida exporting chips to China. Doesn’t mean they work as intended. Very little does in economics.
Sure, but in your mind (and Trump’s) that is a bad thing. It’s not that simple. It is actually a benefit that has allowed us to raise our average standard of living over the past 50yrs (post Bretton Woods 2). You only want to look at traded goods. The accounts have to balance and the other piece comes into the US in the form of financial payments. Ie they buy our bonds and stocks and land and companies. The entire global economic system revolves around the $. Be careful in trying to “fix” that. We have some of highest average wages in the world. Hard to complain the system is “unfair” to us. We built the damn thing.
My general view is hubris gets us all in the end. So when I see it, I like to go the other way quickly.
Just guessing, but Biden probably left those tariffs on for defense reasons, at least for semiconductors. Same reason Trump hasn’t lifted ban on Nvida exporting chips to China. Doesn’t mean they work as intended. Very little does in economics.
I don't know enough to have an opinion. Also, I know enough to know that if I chose to have an opinion, it would be terribly informed.
For example, a trade deficit seems like a bad thing per 'deficit'. I appreciate your synopsis about how trade deficits work. I understand what you said and respect it, but other components indicate I've got some more reading to do about the chain of impacts you mentioned.
Hubris is a good thing to be aware of, especially to appreciate what the extent of what 'unfair' means to you, me, someone else?
You've given me a lot of reading to do- thank you!
For example, a trade deficit seems like a bad thing per 'deficit'. I appreciate your synopsis about how trade deficits work. I understand what you said and respect it, but other components indicate I've got some more reading to do about the chain of impacts you mentioned.
Hubris is a good thing to be aware of, especially to appreciate what the extent of what 'unfair' means to you, me, someone else?
You've given me a lot of reading to do- thank you!
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Article is an example of the derivative effects of acting like an a-hole to friends with tariffs. It is important to keep in mind that over 1/4 of th exports in trade balance is made up of services and over 50% of the Tech sectors revenue is from outside US.
www.wired.com
Trump’s Aggression Sours Europe on US Cloud Giants
Companies in the EU are starting to look for ways to ditch Amazon, Google, and Microsoft cloud services amid fears of rising security risks from the US. But cutting ties won’t be easy.
thebestusernamesaretaken
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2021
- Messages
- 498
You appear to be relinquishing responsibility for your thoughts and your actions. You appear to believe in and trust in trump. Everyone can see these disastrous decisions but they think that he is clever and understands this situation more than you do so you relinquish the decision making and critical thinking to whatever the lunatics' are saying on either side. Giving over that type of faith should perhaps be left in the church.
Many refuse to believe what they repeatedly hear and what they see for themselves; as this fella has folks infested with ideas that everyone but him is lying to you. We have lost critical thinking skills.
Someone said if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck - it may be a freaking duck. Humans are fallible by nature and this one has shown you over and over again that he wouldn't qualify to have your jobs let alone the one that was given to him.
However, Let's assume that the U.S. imports $474 Billion dollars worth of automotive products and $220 billion in cars. (I believe that was actually more like $235B but let's go with the Reuters article).
A 25% tariff would raise that number to about $275B or an addition of $55 billons' dollars per year. The simple person would say well, move your factory to the US and start building cars to save on tariffs.
The automotive industry would take a minimum of 2-3 years to build a factory. That's about $165B worth in tariffs over that time period if it's on schedule and they drop the shovel tonight. (That being said, companies have already started the planning processes and working on collaborative agreements to bring more production to the U.S. They have been talking about that and picking locations for a while now).
The cost to put a plant together would be about $1-2B.
However, what do you think would unify all those auto manufacturers? Those $165 billion extra dollars in tariffs could put together a pretty good war chest in political ads campaigns against the GOP if they wanted. This could end up being a huge shift of pollical finance going away from the GOP to anyone else if they are not careful. They would save money, push out the GOP in the midyear and stall for more time without spending crazy money.
That way everyone's hunting truck wouldn't go from $75k to $100k.
Attachments
Last edited:
