4 ms·

He's turned the US stock market into the same model as China's - the entire up/down rests on the leaders words. Which makes them fairly uninvestable.

j_maffe 2y ago
Idk Xi is much more consistent with the CCP than Trump is with anything.
- netsharc 2y ago
  It's amazing what Trump's accomplished for the US, isn't it.. he's dragged the country so fast downhill that China is looking more and more the better business partner.
ronsor 2y ago
This isn't a good example because a lot investors are (or were) looking at China recently.
- abirch 2y ago
  You can look at China; however, if you invest in China you're assuming counterparty risk with Xi, as he can destroy any Chines company that he wants.
  - nonethewiser 2y ago
    You also cant actually legally own most Chinese stock. IE "internet" stocks. What you can buy is an instrument intended to track them. Its called a VIE. That Alibaba stock you have? No, its a share from a seperate company setup in the Cayman Islands which should track the Alibaba stock. They are circumventing a Chinese law that makes foreign investment in Chinese companies illegal. It's a bad idea to own these.
    - cbhl 2y ago
      That doesn't stop people from trying -- according to Yahoo Finance, FXI (iShares China Large-Cap ETF) was one of the most-traded (by volume) ETFs yesterday.
  - ronsor 2y ago
    I'm well aware--not saying it's a good idea to invest in China, but many investors are trying it now thanks to the success of companies like DeepSeek. I have a feeling many of them will be eating large losses in the not-so-distant future.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  The Chinese stock market...is not a fun place. It hasn't done very well in the last 5 years (unlike the US stock market) and is still way too subject to insider trading to be very accessible to most people. You can go with an emerging markets fund, but I would only do that as a hedge.
benjiro 2y ago
Very sure that he (or family members) are shorting stocks and then rebuying. This really feels like somebody deliberately creating market reactions, to benefit from them.
cjbgkagh 2y ago
The markets were already like that but with federal reserve dot plots.
nonethewiser 2y ago
There are structural differences between the US and Chinese stock markets that remain unchanged. The policy changed but the relationship between the President and the stock market did not change.
- shortrounddev2 2y ago
  Legally no, but normatively, yes. It was previously expected that the president wouldn't deliberately ruin the American economy for his own ego. That can no longer be expected.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
clodushid 2y ago
US is the biggest consumer market, the most dynamic economy, and the wealthiest country in the world. No real world metric would ever implicate US as uninvestable. What this move is doing is making a few things very clear 1. US is decoupling full on from China. Any ally negotiating will have to show that they are not helping china to export, by putting up similar tariffs on China. Basically, declare your allegiance. And so far, no one has unexpectedly sided with China. 2. For the laggards who are waiting until the last seconds to move away from Chinese supply chain, trump is giving them more time but also telling them, hey it’s your last chance 3. Short squeeze for those who dare attack US economy 4. Navarros is the chief architect and his vision is aligned with trump to fully execute his plan. Just go read his book, he lays it all out
MaxHoppersGhost 2y ago
Despite the media tantrum the market only dropped back to early 2024 levels at the most.
- steveBK123 2y ago
  A president should not be essentially day trading the economy. The volatility levels are unseen since Covid and GFC. People’s livelihoods will be at stake soon enough.
  - coldpie 2y ago
    > A president should not be essentially day trading the economy. US voters disagree.
    - throw0101c 2y ago
      > US voters disagree. Some polls would disagree with your assessment: > A Wall Street Journal poll released Friday[1] found 52 percent disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy, compared to 44 percent who approve. The disapproval is 12 points higher than the 40 percent who said in October that they had an unfavorable view of Trump’s economic plans. > Pollsters found 54 percent said they oppose placing tariffs on imported goods, while the percentage who said tariffs will raise prices on consumer products rose from 68 percent in January to 75 percent in March. * https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5236712-trump-tariffs-economic-vulnerabilities/ https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5236712-trump-tariffs-... [1] "Americans Were Souring on Trump’s Economic Plans Even Before Tariff Bloodbath": * http://archive.is/https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/americans-were-souring-on-trumps-economic-plans-even-before-tariff-bloodbath-0571527e http://archive.is/https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/americ...
- dralley 2y ago
  >Despite the media tantrum the market only dropped back to early 2025 levels at the most. A) This is obviously wrong if you spend even 5 seconds looking it up, unless you misspelled "2024" B) You can't just ignore that they spent several days telling financial journalists it was just a negotiating tactic and leading them to believe this might be peeled back quickly.
trhway 2y ago
>He's turned the US stock market into the same model as China's - the entire up/down rests on the leaders words. Not only stock market. The whole "Project 2025" point is to turn everything from the "rule-based" approach to "unitary-executive's-really-a-King's-whim" approach. Just today - the export control or lack of it on specific Nvidia chips isn't really result of security needs of US, instead it is just a result of Jensen getting a dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Just like in Russia.
- dingnuts 2y ago
  I remember reading Unqualified Reservations ten years ago and thinking "this guy is a fucking nut!" and now his (Curtis Yarvin's) monarchist ideology seems to have walked right into the white house Trump 2 isn't Trump 1. These are uncharted waters indeed
tehjoker 2y ago
The Chinese stock market is flat while their GDP rises because their economy is not based around the stock market. US economic management is entirely based around pumping the stock market.

j_maffe 2y ago

Idk Xi is much more consistent with the CCP than Trump is with anything.

netsharc 2y ago
It's amazing what Trump's accomplished for the US, isn't it.. he's dragged the country so fast downhill that China is looking more and more the better business partner.

ronsor 2y ago

This isn't a good example because a lot investors are (or were) looking at China recently.

abirch 2y ago
You can look at China; however, if you invest in China you're assuming counterparty risk with Xi, as he can destroy any Chines company that he wants.
- nonethewiser 2y ago
  You also cant actually legally own most Chinese stock. IE "internet" stocks. What you can buy is an instrument intended to track them. Its called a VIE. That Alibaba stock you have? No, its a share from a seperate company setup in the Cayman Islands which should track the Alibaba stock. They are circumventing a Chinese law that makes foreign investment in Chinese companies illegal. It's a bad idea to own these.
  - cbhl 2y ago
    That doesn't stop people from trying -- according to Yahoo Finance, FXI (iShares China Large-Cap ETF) was one of the most-traded (by volume) ETFs yesterday.
- ronsor 2y ago
  I'm well aware--not saying it's a good idea to invest in China, but many investors are trying it now thanks to the success of companies like DeepSeek. I have a feeling many of them will be eating large losses in the not-so-distant future.
seanmcdirmid 2y ago
The Chinese stock market...is not a fun place. It hasn't done very well in the last 5 years (unlike the US stock market) and is still way too subject to insider trading to be very accessible to most people. You can go with an emerging markets fund, but I would only do that as a hedge.

benjiro 2y ago

Very sure that he (or family members) are shorting stocks and then rebuying. This really feels like somebody deliberately creating market reactions, to benefit from them.

cjbgkagh 2y ago

The markets were already like that but with federal reserve dot plots.

nonethewiser 2y ago

There are structural differences between the US and Chinese stock markets that remain unchanged. The policy changed but the relationship between the President and the stock market did not change.

shortrounddev2 2y ago
Legally no, but normatively, yes. It was previously expected that the president wouldn't deliberately ruin the American economy for his own ego. That can no longer be expected.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

clodushid 2y ago

US is the biggest consumer market, the most dynamic economy, and the wealthiest country in the world. No real world metric would ever implicate US as uninvestable. What this move is doing is making a few things very clear 1. US is decoupling full on from China. Any ally negotiating will have to show that they are not helping china to export, by putting up similar tariffs on China. Basically, declare your allegiance. And so far, no one has unexpectedly sided with China. 2. For the laggards who are waiting until the last seconds to move away from Chinese supply chain, trump is giving them more time but also telling them, hey it’s your last chance 3. Short squeeze for those who dare attack US economy 4. Navarros is the chief architect and his vision is aligned with trump to fully execute his plan. Just go read his book, he lays it all out

MaxHoppersGhost 2y ago

Despite the media tantrum the market only dropped back to early 2024 levels at the most.

steveBK123 2y ago
A president should not be essentially day trading the economy. The volatility levels are unseen since Covid and GFC. People’s livelihoods will be at stake soon enough.
- coldpie 2y ago
  > A president should not be essentially day trading the economy. US voters disagree.
  - throw0101c 2y ago
    > US voters disagree. Some polls would disagree with your assessment: > A Wall Street Journal poll released Friday[1] found 52 percent disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy, compared to 44 percent who approve. The disapproval is 12 points higher than the 40 percent who said in October that they had an unfavorable view of Trump’s economic plans. > Pollsters found 54 percent said they oppose placing tariffs on imported goods, while the percentage who said tariffs will raise prices on consumer products rose from 68 percent in January to 75 percent in March. * https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5236712-trump-tariffs-economic-vulnerabilities/ https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5236712-trump-tariffs-... [1] "Americans Were Souring on Trump’s Economic Plans Even Before Tariff Bloodbath": * http://archive.is/https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/americans-were-souring-on-trumps-economic-plans-even-before-tariff-bloodbath-0571527e http://archive.is/https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/americ...
dralley 2y ago
>Despite the media tantrum the market only dropped back to early 2025 levels at the most. A) This is obviously wrong if you spend even 5 seconds looking it up, unless you misspelled "2024" B) You can't just ignore that they spent several days telling financial journalists it was just a negotiating tactic and leading them to believe this might be peeled back quickly.

trhway 2y ago

>He's turned the US stock market into the same model as China's - the entire up/down rests on the leaders words. Not only stock market. The whole "Project 2025" point is to turn everything from the "rule-based" approach to "unitary-executive's-really-a-King's-whim" approach. Just today - the export control or lack of it on specific Nvidia chips isn't really result of security needs of US, instead it is just a result of Jensen getting a dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Just like in Russia.

dingnuts 2y ago
I remember reading Unqualified Reservations ten years ago and thinking "this guy is a fucking nut!" and now his (Curtis Yarvin's) monarchist ideology seems to have walked right into the white house Trump 2 isn't Trump 1. These are uncharted waters indeed

tehjoker 2y ago

The Chinese stock market is flat while their GDP rises because their economy is not based around the stock market. US economic management is entirely based around pumping the stock market.