7 ms·

The difference is that a powerful group of people is enacting policies that have triggered recession/depression in the past and no good historical precedent/aca

The difference is that a powerful group of people is enacting policies that have triggered recession/depression in the past and no good historical precedent/academic support for working. It's seems kind of crazy to me we're ignoring that part. We're starting trade wars on multiple fronts, exiting or weakening multilateral alliances (and simultaneous giving an advantage to our global adversaries), and weakening the balance sheet of the federal government (during a business cycle peak). Of course this is going to end terribly.

shams93 8y ago
Ultimately they're not raising tariffs on end products, they're raising it on parts, but that will still cause inflation plus unemployment because tariffs on parts will drive production out of the US where it gets taxed on the way back in, so you'll both lose exiting US jobs while driving up the cost of products coming back in as you both make it impossible to produce in the US and also drive up prices.
- throwaway5752 8y ago
  What reason do you have for expecting current tariffs to not escalate into broader and more destructive tariffs in this ongoing trade war? Are you basing this on rational choice theory? Because I have some disappointing news for you in that case.
  - amluto 8y ago
    If I were in charge of a country subject to new tariffs, I would consider playing it differently. Rather than applying punitive tariffs back, I would consider trying to get US manufacturers that are affected to the tariffs to move to my country and export finished products to the US. After all, the nonsensical structure of Trump’s tariffs may be more harmful to the US than to anyone else.
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
      The problem with that is timing. Politically, people demand action now - like, this week. Getting a business to move takes months to years.
- jonknee 8y ago
  Currently it's devolving into tariffs on everything. Like Europe's 25% tariff on Harley motorcycles. They're getting hit on both ends too because their inputs are also hit (steel being the big one). Tariff in and tariff out, it's ridiculous.
  - briandear 8y ago
    Actually the tariff is 31%. An increase of 25% over the existing 6% tariff. If Europe is so concerned about tariffs, then why did they have a 6% tariff in the first place? That’s the point of this “trade war” — countries already have tariffs. It’s disingenuous to complain about American tariffs when the EU has built their protectionist model around doing just that. France has a bunch of “protected” industries and they have the nerve to complain when others retaliate? For the record, I am opposed to all tariffs and subsidies. But framing this as a Trump-caused issue is intellectually dishonest. He’s just attacking the status quo (wrongly or rightly.)
    - s2g 8y ago
      Can you really not see the difference between the reasonable protectionism practiced by every country and the current trade war?
      - briandear 8y ago
        There is no such thing as “reasonable protectionism” unless you are dealing with dumping. Harley could hardly be accused of dumping. So why a 6% tariff in the first place? EU clothing tariffs already average 12% in many other categories it ranges from 4-36%. So is the EU protecting nearly every industry? Isn’t that the point of this “trade war” — the EU has been applying tariffs to almost everything for a long time. Doesn’t the US have a right to retaliate? French milk is already better than most American milk, yet France puts a 36% tax on dairy imports in addition to heavily subsidizing dairy. So the effective tariff is much higher. And European consumers end up losing because they have to spend more of their money on dairy — all to protect a fairly small industry when measured as a percentage of GDP. Yet every time reforms are attempted, farmers literally riot. Why should a country accept their goods being taxed without being able to respond in kind? This is tit-for-tat to be sure, but the tit didn’t start with the Trump tariffs.
akhilcacharya 8y ago
>Of course this is going to end terribly. It is basically guaranteed to do so unless the business cycle has stopped for good (unlikely). The question in my mind is who the scapegoat is going to be, and how much denial there's going to be if the real effects of slowing growth start becoming apparent.
- ttul 8y ago
  With any luck (sorry), the crash happens just prior to Election Day.
  - williesleg 8y ago
    Not likely. All the new jobs and lower taxes will keep it boosted for a long time.
    - perl4ever 8y ago
      Recent history shows that the Fed starts raising interest rates and then goes just a bit too far. They're like a driver who won't stop rhythmically pressing and releasing the gas pedal, until the passengers get motion sick. In my opinion, the tax cut that has been benefiting the economy is the move away from zero percent interest rates. Lending to banks at below inflation is like a tax that goes directly to them. But when we keep on raising short term rates above inflation, that's going to be like a tax too, and I expect we will promptly get whiplash since the Fed doesn't know when to stop. Maybe I am becoming a crank, because I feel Cassandra-ish, like major macroeconomic problems are so simple but nobody gets it. Feel free to explain why I am totally wrong.
    - pacerwpg 8y ago
      Job growth in the US hasn't really changed considerably since the recession leveled out. It's been painfully steady. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=ne...
    - ttul 8y ago
forapurpose 8y ago
> We're starting trade wars on multiple fronts, exiting or weakening multilateral alliances (and simultaneous giving an advantage to our global adversaries), and weakening the balance sheet of the federal government (during a business cycle peak). Of course this is going to end terribly. I'll add the embrace of nationalism. Many of the leaders through WWI and WWII, including Churchill, put significant blame on nationalism for the wars, which is why they supported internationalism including the EU (or the beginnings of it at the time), UN, World Bank, IMF, etc. Here's Churchill talking about it: http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance, there would be no limit to the happiness, to the prosperity and glory which its three or four hundred million people would enjoy. Yet it is from Europe that have sprung that series of frightful nationalistic quarrels, originated by the Teutonic nations, which we have seen even in this twentieth century and in our own lifetime, wreck the peace and mar the prospects of all mankind. ... What is this sovereign remedy? It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe. ... And why should there not be a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this turbulent and mighty continent and why should it not take its rightful place with other great groupings in shaping the destinies of men?
panarky 8y ago
Economic growth is strong, wages are rising, unemployment is low, and people are protesting in the streets. Imagine what happens if the economy gets rekt. We could be in for some dark and nonlinear times.
- Johnny555 8y ago
  What is "rekt"?
  - fao_ 8y ago
    The illiterate (i.e. 'l33t') form of 'wrecked', I believe.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - bcuzDonvotes 8y ago
      Also, a memetic allusion to shock/gore imagery and videos, especially those where people are horrifically mutilated by accidents or violence. Emerging into common use across and throughout The Internet circa 2014.
      - RikNieu 8y ago
        Thank you, Commander Data.

shams93 8y ago

Ultimately they're not raising tariffs on end products, they're raising it on parts, but that will still cause inflation plus unemployment because tariffs on parts will drive production out of the US where it gets taxed on the way back in, so you'll both lose exiting US jobs while driving up the cost of products coming back in as you both make it impossible to produce in the US and also drive up prices.

throwaway5752 8y ago
What reason do you have for expecting current tariffs to not escalate into broader and more destructive tariffs in this ongoing trade war? Are you basing this on rational choice theory? Because I have some disappointing news for you in that case.
- amluto 8y ago
  If I were in charge of a country subject to new tariffs, I would consider playing it differently. Rather than applying punitive tariffs back, I would consider trying to get US manufacturers that are affected to the tariffs to move to my country and export finished products to the US. After all, the nonsensical structure of Trump’s tariffs may be more harmful to the US than to anyone else.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    The problem with that is timing. Politically, people demand action now - like, this week. Getting a business to move takes months to years.
jonknee 8y ago
Currently it's devolving into tariffs on everything. Like Europe's 25% tariff on Harley motorcycles. They're getting hit on both ends too because their inputs are also hit (steel being the big one). Tariff in and tariff out, it's ridiculous.
- briandear 8y ago
  Actually the tariff is 31%. An increase of 25% over the existing 6% tariff. If Europe is so concerned about tariffs, then why did they have a 6% tariff in the first place? That’s the point of this “trade war” — countries already have tariffs. It’s disingenuous to complain about American tariffs when the EU has built their protectionist model around doing just that. France has a bunch of “protected” industries and they have the nerve to complain when others retaliate? For the record, I am opposed to all tariffs and subsidies. But framing this as a Trump-caused issue is intellectually dishonest. He’s just attacking the status quo (wrongly or rightly.)
  - s2g 8y ago
    Can you really not see the difference between the reasonable protectionism practiced by every country and the current trade war?
    - briandear 8y ago
      There is no such thing as “reasonable protectionism” unless you are dealing with dumping. Harley could hardly be accused of dumping. So why a 6% tariff in the first place? EU clothing tariffs already average 12% in many other categories it ranges from 4-36%. So is the EU protecting nearly every industry? Isn’t that the point of this “trade war” — the EU has been applying tariffs to almost everything for a long time. Doesn’t the US have a right to retaliate? French milk is already better than most American milk, yet France puts a 36% tax on dairy imports in addition to heavily subsidizing dairy. So the effective tariff is much higher. And European consumers end up losing because they have to spend more of their money on dairy — all to protect a fairly small industry when measured as a percentage of GDP. Yet every time reforms are attempted, farmers literally riot. Why should a country accept their goods being taxed without being able to respond in kind? This is tit-for-tat to be sure, but the tit didn’t start with the Trump tariffs.

akhilcacharya 8y ago

>Of course this is going to end terribly. It is basically guaranteed to do so unless the business cycle has stopped for good (unlikely). The question in my mind is who the scapegoat is going to be, and how much denial there's going to be if the real effects of slowing growth start becoming apparent.

ttul 8y ago
With any luck (sorry), the crash happens just prior to Election Day.
- williesleg 8y ago
  Not likely. All the new jobs and lower taxes will keep it boosted for a long time.
  - perl4ever 8y ago
    Recent history shows that the Fed starts raising interest rates and then goes just a bit too far. They're like a driver who won't stop rhythmically pressing and releasing the gas pedal, until the passengers get motion sick. In my opinion, the tax cut that has been benefiting the economy is the move away from zero percent interest rates. Lending to banks at below inflation is like a tax that goes directly to them. But when we keep on raising short term rates above inflation, that's going to be like a tax too, and I expect we will promptly get whiplash since the Fed doesn't know when to stop. Maybe I am becoming a crank, because I feel Cassandra-ish, like major macroeconomic problems are so simple but nobody gets it. Feel free to explain why I am totally wrong.
  - pacerwpg 8y ago
    Job growth in the US hasn't really changed considerably since the recession leveled out. It's been painfully steady. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=ne...
  - ttul 8y ago

forapurpose 8y ago

> We're starting trade wars on multiple fronts, exiting or weakening multilateral alliances (and simultaneous giving an advantage to our global adversaries), and weakening the balance sheet of the federal government (during a business cycle peak). Of course this is going to end terribly. I'll add the embrace of nationalism. Many of the leaders through WWI and WWII, including Churchill, put significant blame on nationalism for the wars, which is why they supported internationalism including the EU (or the beginnings of it at the time), UN, World Bank, IMF, etc. Here's Churchill talking about it: http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance, there would be no limit to the happiness, to the prosperity and glory which its three or four hundred million people would enjoy. Yet it is from Europe that have sprung that series of frightful nationalistic quarrels, originated by the Teutonic nations, which we have seen even in this twentieth century and in our own lifetime, wreck the peace and mar the prospects of all mankind. ... What is this sovereign remedy? It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe. ... And why should there not be a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this turbulent and mighty continent and why should it not take its rightful place with other great groupings in shaping the destinies of men?

panarky 8y ago

Economic growth is strong, wages are rising, unemployment is low, and people are protesting in the streets. Imagine what happens if the economy gets rekt. We could be in for some dark and nonlinear times.

Johnny555 8y ago
What is "rekt"?
- fao_ 8y ago
  The illiterate (i.e. 'l33t') form of 'wrecked', I believe.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - bcuzDonvotes 8y ago
    Also, a memetic allusion to shock/gore imagery and videos, especially those where people are horrifically mutilated by accidents or violence. Emerging into common use across and throughout The Internet circa 2014.
    - RikNieu 8y ago
      Thank you, Commander Data.