Tariffs and Potential Inflation

[88man]

In the decade before covid, Uncle Sam ran very large deficits and carried a ton of accumulated debt. Inflation was very tame for the period.

Friedman, like nearly every economist, was right sometimes and wrong at other times.

imo, the recent inflationary period was a mixture of broken supply chains, government stimulus money, and pent up demand coming out of covid. How you want to split up the blame, that's subject to each person's perspective, likely.

You forgot to mention energy costs increased 20 to 50 % . Once energy went up with the attack on fossil fuels in this country all costs increased across the board.

 

[406dn]

You forgot to mention energy costs increased 20 to 50 % . Once energy went up with the attack on fossil fuels in this country all costs increased across the board.

Two things.

If you remember crude prices were below zero as covid took hold. There was literally no spare room in storage for the crude, as the demand crashed for gas and diesel. That led to oil producers reducing production as much as was feasible. I'll include that in the broken supply chain problems the world faced.

Presently we are producing more crude and natural gas than at any time in our history. It is one of the things most responsible for the US's more robust recovery from covid than most any other country. The price for diesel today in the small town I live in was 3.28/gallon this morning. That price is more or less what it was pre covid. One could argue it is less, since the dollar is worth less than pre covid.

 

[Bonasababy]

No one wants to wait until Thanksgiving to find out who won the election. Probably exaggerating, but long drawn out vote counting plants the seeds of distrust in our elections.

That distrust ship has long ago sailed. People can't be persuaded by facts on it anymore.

 

[Bonasababy]

When you have a runoff, the candidates throw more money out to get elected. Happens often in Georgia.

search.app

Still not understanding you, but maybe we aren't talking apples to apples. There is NO second election in the instant runoff system. The election has been held already--once--all that's left is the counting of votes until a winner is declared. So maybe you are talking about something else?

As others have pointed out this process DOES take longer to produce a winner. From what I understand that might add a day or two though, not weeks--but perhaps those in the few states that have it can enlighten me on that.

Edit--slow on the draw--I see you used the Warnock election a few years back (I think) as an example. That's different, again the instant in instant run off stands for one election--votes keep getting counted until a winner is declared. There is no second election--unless by some miracle a winner is never declared. Seems unlikely!

 

[mevertsen]

Two things.

If you remember crude prices were below zero as covid took hold. There was literally no spare room in storage for the crude, as the demand crashed for gas and diesel. That led to oil producers reducing production as much as was feasible. I'll include that in the broken supply chain problems the world faced.

Presently we are producing more crude and natural gas than at any time in our history. It is one of the things most responsible for the US's more robust recovery from covid than most any other country. The price for diesel today in the small town I live in was 3.28/gallon this morning. That price is more or less what it was pre covid. One could argue it is less, since the dollar is worth less than pre covid.

Fuel prices have been dropping steadily here in Northeastern Nevada over the last couple weeks as well.

Agree certainly cheaper than pre- covid on a dollar value basis.

Diesel at $3.15. Regular at $3.01 to $3.11.

 

[Bonasababy]

I got swamp rat friends across the spectrum. It’s nice to avoid anyone’s bubble.

Me too--but those on one side are "quislings" or "RINO's" these days. They consider themselves still hopeful spectrum members but the party has ostracized them.

Helps to know some who have been there for all the changes in norms in recent decades.

 

[Bonasababy]

Fuel prices have been dropping steadily here in Northeastern Nevada over the last couple weeks as well.

Agree certainly cheaper than pre- covid on a dollar value basis.

Diesel at $3.15. Regular at $3.01 to $3.11.

Regular down into the 2.50's at Costco by me recently.

 

[Sytes]

Person #1: "So who did you vote for?"
Person #2: " Not your business".

Person #2 on public forums...

 

[BigHornRam]

Still not understanding you, but maybe we aren't talking apples to apples. There is NO second election in the instant runoff system. The election has been held already--once--all that's left is the counting of votes until a winner is declared. So maybe you are talking about something else?

As others have pointed out this process DOES take longer to produce a winner. From what I understand that might add a day or two though, not weeks--but perhaps those in the few states that have it can enlighten me on that.

Edit--slow on the draw--I see you used the Warnock election a few years back (I think) as an example. That's different, again the instant in instant run off stands for one election--votes keep getting counted until a winner is declared. There is no second election--unless by some miracle a winner is never declared. Seems unlikely!

The discussion started with me mentioning Montana CI 126 and CI 127 went down in flames this election cycle. Apparently you do not know much about these initiatives. Here is a snippet to help inform you.

"Taken together, Constitutional Initiatives 126 and 127 would amend the Montana Constitution to alter the face of even-year elections from start to finish. CI-126 would jettison the state’s separate party June primaries in favor of a single multi-party primary ballot that would advance up to four candidates to November general elections, while CI-127 would require a majority vote of more than 50% to give a candidate a general election victory. The state Legislature would be responsible for adopting rules on how to handle a no-majority situation."

You still haven't answered who financed these initiatives.

 

[Beignet]

You still haven't answered who financed these initiatives.

You can go to a website called Open Secrets and look up the donors to a group Montanas for Election Reform. That was the organization behind these initiatives. The two groups who donated over $1m are called Article IV and the Unite America PAC. Both of which describe themselves as non or bipartisan. Both these groups, as well as Montanans for Election Reform have affiliate politicians from all political stripes.

Took me all of five minutes to track down this this info. It’s a real stinker of a canard to speculate that these initiatives are anything more than efforts steer the ship back toward the righteous center and keep quacks out of office (see what I did there).

 

[INMT]

You can go to a website called Open Secrets and look up the donors to a group Montanas for Election Reform. That was the organization behind these initiatives. The two groups who donated over $1m are called Article IV and the Unite America PAC. Both of which describe themselves as non or bipartisan. Both these groups, as well as Montanans for Election Reform have affiliate politicians from all political stripes.

Took me all of five minutes to track down this this info. It’s a real stinker of a canard to speculate that these initiatives are anything more than efforts steer the ship back toward the righteous center and keep quacks out of office (see what I did there).

Thanks for posting. I know one of the folks behind Montanans for Election Reform well. He is a lifelong Republican, just not the MAGA movement (I’m sure bighorn will call him a rino. Such bullchit.) Non partisan elections don’t even matter in MT, look at the recent judicial elections, everyone with half a brain knew how they tilted. I would’ve liked to see them pass, I’m not scared for one party to lose power like some are. I’m also not a “Conservative refugee” IMO the phuckin worst of the worst. Completely changing the electorate of Montana with a chit eating grin and absolutely no clue about the politics of the state.

 

[Beignet]

Thanks for posting. I know one of the folks behind Montanans for Election Reform well. He is a lifelong Republican, just not the MAGA movement (I’m sure bighorn will call him a rino. Such bullchit.) Non partisan elections don’t even matter in MT, look at the recent judicial elections, everyone with half a brain knew how they tilted. I would’ve liked to see them pass, I’m not scared for one party to lose power like some are. I’m also not a “Conservative refugee” IMO the phuckin worst of the worst. Completely changing the electorate of Montana with a chit eating grin and absolutely no clue about the politics of the state.

From what I understood these initiatives were primarily driven by old guard Montana Republicans. I don’t believe the goal was to even shift the balance from one party to another. I’m of the opinion that these initiatives would have tempered candidates toward the center, given voters higher quality candidates, and a little more agency in the vote than having to choose whoever has the letter they like next to their name.

And yeah, it’s always funny that there’s this myth that hoards of latte & yoga pants people in Missoula and Bozeman have some deeply organized plot to impart an exhaustive change to the politics of the state. I don’t think it’s those folks what done it.

 

[Sytes]

Interesting correlation between USA and Russia of the 80's and USA and China of current.
Before the unnamed misrepresent my comment as comparing nuc war with tariff war... my comments relate to the "chess game" ( ) between Reagan and Gromyko with extreme nuc tension then, that of Reagan and Gorbachev.
The verbal match with tariff power plays of Trump, Biden, and renewed Trump vs China's, Jinping.

Unlike Reagan and the Russian leaders who kept dieing on him (Reagan's comment) Gorbachev was key to the release of that tension valve of nuc escalation pressure.

Gorbachev, wanted out of the arms race. He sought to halt the staggering 25% GDP Russian arms race and return that to farming, etc to feed Russian families. U.S., I believe was around 5%.

Forward to today.

We have both USA and China escalating the first economic war between two world powers. Yes, yes, we had the tariff wars with Japan, U.K. and Netherlands. However two world super powers duking it out.

Trump had it right, Biden had it right... Trump of current, just as Reagan pumping the rhetoric, upping the proverbial ante.

As I shared before the adverse affects the U.S. tariffs and Trump's elevated tariff posturing on China (Reuters article) has caused challenges on China's economy.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/why-chinas-economy-is-more-vulnerable-trump-tariffs-this-time-2024-11-06/

Now, we recently had Jinping, President of China, comment to Biden in Peru;
"China's goal of a stable, healthy and sustainable China-U.S. relationship remains unchanged" after Trump's election, Xi said as he met Biden, acknowledging "ups and downs" between the countries. "China is ready to work with the new U.S. administration to maintain communication, expand cooperation and manage differences."

Is Xi-Jinping walking Gorbachev's path? It's a start, as it was for Reagan.

As I shared in an above thread (#337) regarding the quality of action by the Biden Administration regarding maintaining Trump's original tariffs and expanding significantly upon them against China;

How Washington Learned to Stop Worrying and Embrace Protectionism

Biden’s embrace of Trump-era tariffs is emblematic of a broader change in U.S. thinking on trade—and toward China.

foreignpolicy.com

A long road ahead. A challenged setting though maybe, just maybe Xi-Jinping's understanding of the adverse affects on their country is moving towards the Gorbachev approach towards incoming Trump.

The difference? Whereas Reagan often sought understanding of subjects, I hope Trump's usual, "No one knows <insert topic> better than I." is his negotiating prowess. Not his first rodeo negotiating terms. He'll, he better not know my wife better than I!

I'm supportive of Trump's initial, Biden's increase of Trump's tariffs, and Trump's continued leverage to reduce and find mutual common price points away from the cheap Chinese goods that's been undermining American production.

Meh, history. Without such we learn nothing.

 

[BearFoot]

Most economic analysis I've read concluded that broad import tariffs can increase inflation.

Most analysis in many fields, are talking heads.
I like the Quote " well see"

 

[Bonasababy]

Most analysis in many fields, are talking heads.
I like the Quote " well see"

Yes...we'll see...what today's market reactions are to yesterday's straight from Trump announcement of 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Following a good day yesterday as the market reacted to a Treasury lead pick that was thought to actually be qualified and competent and would argue AGAINST tariffs.

 

[BigHornRam]

You can go to a website called Open Secrets and look up the donors to a group Montanas for Election Reform. That was the organization behind these initiatives. The two groups who donated over $1m are called Article IV and the Unite America PAC. Both of which describe themselves as non or bipartisan. Both these groups, as well as Montanans for Election Reform have affiliate politicians from all political stripes.

Took me all of five minutes to track down this this info. It’s a real stinker of a canard to speculate that these initiatives are anything more than efforts steer the ship back toward the righteous center and keep quacks out of office (see what I did there).

Article IV is a dark money non profit from Lubbock, Texas. They can be what ever stripe you want them to be apparently. They pissed away around 5 million dollars to wade into Montana politics only to lose. Matter of fact, " the righteous center" spent an embarrassingly large sum of money nationally on the 2024 election, only to have their tails handed to them.

Try a different strategy next time.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I don’t like tariffs as an economic tool, but don’t mind leveraging access to US marketplace to slow flow of drugs and illegal immigration.

(Note, I am on record here supporting increased volume legal immigration and that has not changed.)

 

[Bonasababy]

I don’t like tariffs as an economic tool, but don’t mind leveraging access to US marketplace to slow flow of drugs and illegal immigration.

(Note, I am on record here supporting increased volume legal immigration and that has not changed.)

Not sure that affecting drug flow will work but it's a reasonable reason for them at least.

Maybe republicans will finally vote for the immigration improvement bill that many of their members supported--esp. those in border states--before Trump ordered them not to vote for it? Goes partway towards improvements IMO.

The workplace demographics are stark. More immigration and incentives to have more kids both are needed if we want our country to stay as strong economically as it's been for all of our lives.

 

[brymoore]

Trump had it right, Biden had it right... Trump of current, just as Reagan pumping the rhetoric, upping the proverbial ante.

Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

Tariffs were a bad idea 8 years ago, 4 years ago and now.

Americans are the victims of this trade war with higher food prices along with other tariffed products.

There are other ways to address specific issues than broad, stupid economics.

 

[Sytes]

Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

Tariffs were a bad idea 8 years ago, 4 years ago and now.

Americans are the victims of this trade war with higher food prices along with other tariffed products.

There are other ways to address specific issues than broad, stupid economics.

Okay. However, when Janet Yellin, a former "free trade" advocate reverses gears, wrong, wrong, and wrong are interesting comments w/o alternative opinions shared.
"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better...."

An internet forum poster or those - both Democrat and Republicans (a rarity now days) in agreement for combating China's undercutting of American production.

I agree, prices will rise though those "prices" that rise are due to cheap labor borne goods that directly undercut our American goods. China's interest in their labor market is production many times over the employee. America's interest holds protections for our laborers. It costs more. We've accustomed ourselves to the labor of those in China for the prices we pay for their goods.

I would rather pay more for American goods via inflated values due to tariff to raise the foreign goods price and keep America competing with imports. We continue to let China undermine our American production because we like cheap Chinese products.