15 ms·
U.S. Economy Contracts at 0.3% Rate in First Quarter
- zdragnar 1y agoFirst I hear that the CPI, inflation, gas, food and medical costs are all down, and new employment exceed expectations by 100k. Now I hear the GDP contacted? So many mixed signals.
- apples_oranges 1y agoWell, I assume if economic activity is reduced, oil gets cheaper due to less demand, and this can have positive effect on some indicators.
- tonetheman 1y ago[dead]
- seanmcdirmid 1y agoOil prices are usually correlated with economic health. The better the economy, the higher oil prices. Trump saying he would lower oil prices sounded more like a threat to me during the campaign: yes, the price of oil went negative during his first term, but mix that wasn’t a good thing at all.
- roxolotl 1y agoYea the funny thing about oil prices is that if they go too low there's no longer a reason to pump. The US was the world's largest oil producer in 2024 but prices below about $60 a barrel mean most of that pumping isn't worth doing. It's very rare that prices going down is good. It usually results in a spiral that is negatively self reinforcing. Price stability is what you generally want.
- semiquaver 1y ago> It usually results in a spiral that is negatively self reinforcing In the case of oil, suppliers would stop pumping when it was no longer economically viable to do so, contracting supply and thus raising the price until it reached equilibrium. The same should be true of other goods. Why do you think that decreasing prices tends to create a downward spiral? The price signal cannot function if it can only move in one direction.
- breakyerself 1y agoI think you're both right. Prices going low means less incentive to pump, which leads to decreased supply and prices stabilize. Also prices going low means companies fold, people get laid off, the economy gets weaker, so demand goes down some more. These things are going to feedback until equilibrium is reached.
- WorldMaker 1y agoA related factor is what part of the ratchet we are in. In the 1800s the ratchet was "ever upward" and if economic factors shutdown some pumps there were plenty of incentives to keep that shutdown temporary and through more capital investment at it to bring back when market forces shifted again. In the 2000s we may truly be in the "downward spiral" ratchet where enough pumping shuts down, those shutdowns are permanent. There's far more competition from increasingly cheap solar and wind and other renewable energy sources than there ever was. Eventually permanently decreased supply can also drive prices back upward, sometimes faster, as less competition means more supply-side bargaining power. (Permanently decreased suppliers of oil may be a win for the planet in the long run, hopefully, but breaking the entire economy is perhaps the dumbest way to try to do that.)
- mint2 1y agoDeflationary spirals are possible. Why would a consumer buy goods today if they’ll be cheaper tomorrow?
- XorNot 1y agoNegative prices at all points are market failures of one form or another. They're never good.
- adverbly 1y agoIf prices go down, doesn't that mean GDP also goes down assuming that that the quantity of items purchased doesn't change?
- victorbjorklund 1y agoPrices affect peoples and companies buying decision. If an Iphone is 1000 dollars instead of 4000 dollars more Iphones will be sold.
- margalabargala 1y agoSure, but 4x more?
- selectodude 1y agoNot really. if consumption stayed the same while prices changed, real GDP would not change. That would just be deflation.
- anovikov 1y agoIt's quite natural that if economy contracts, prices go down. It happens (almost) all of the time - the only big exception was 1973-1979 because of Arab oil embargo - only time when GDP was falling AND prices rising faster than usual. Every other recession was accompanied with falling prices, or at the very least, falling inflation. That's why fiat money exists - to prevent it from becoming a self-perpetuating vicious cycle.
- this_user 1y agoAll these data are backward looking. The employment numbers were for March before "Liberation Day". The real impact of all of this will only become apparent in the full Q2 data.
- surgical_fire 1y agoActually Q3. In Q2 companies will be offloading all the things they imported ahead of tarriffs kick in.
- slashdev 1y agoThe labor market is the most lagging of all economic indicators. It doesn't turn over until we're really in the recession. Leading indicators, like housing and manufacturing, are not looking promising.
- tzs 1y agoAs far as gas and food goes if you hear something like that you really need to check to see where they got their data. There have been some high ranking government officials giving out numbers that are questionable which might be reported uncritically by some sources. For example at least 4 times the President said a couple weeks ago that gas in 3 states hit $1.98/gal, and he also said a couple weeks ago that egg prices are down 93% since he took office. No one has been able to find out where that cheap gas and those cheap eggs are, and so some people are beginning to suspect that the President may have been mistaken.
- zdragnar 1y agoEgg prices by me are half of their recent peak, at least. Just bought a dozen for under $5 when they were almost $10. I suppose you could say they were 93% more expensive back then. Gas, on the other hand, is a bit cheaper, but maybe only by about 10% at most.
- os2warpman 1y agoThe primer button on this contraction machine has only just been pressed, baby. This is just us pulling an initial vacuum, drawing the real contraction in.
- this_user 1y agoThis was the expected result. The economy does not like uncertainty, and it is almost impossible to plan ahead until there is some clarity how and when the current trade war situation will resolve. The longer that takes, the worse the damage to the real economy will get.
- duxup 1y agoI'm a little surprised by how much lag there has been, but I suspect a lot of organizations where holding out for some form of "maybe he will change his mind", but as it is Trump and his own people aren't even on the same page about IF they're even negotiating with China or not... The mantra of some folks response to his more reckless statements has always been "it's just talk", but it seems to not be talk.
- raverbashing 1y agoI bet a lot of people in Wall Street are in denial or just playing chicken
- iamtheworstdev 1y agoit's beginning to look a lot like... 2008
- xnx 1y agoKind of, but I don't think there's any precedent for the world's most powerful economy performing seppuku.
- WorldMaker 1y agoThe Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 [1], where a Republican majority enacted extreme tariffs against President Hoover's almost veto, is sometimes considered one of the smoking guns for how the Great Depression got so bad. That's quite a precedent to be concerned about here. (Though this version is dumber with the President trying to do it through EOs, which is probably illegal and Congress should probably be much more upset their powers to be stupid are being usurped before their eyes.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Ac...
- jqpabc123 1y agoNot to worry, the emperor will fix it --- by replacing the people who compile the numbers. Any disagreement is a "hostile and political" act subjecting you to deportation without due process.
- _heimdall 1y agoTo be fair, the government has a long history of changing how key metrics are measured to suit their needs. The CPI is pretty consistently changed to keep inflation rates roughly on target.
- goodtakes 1y agoI think that's far different that what's happening today. The other day Amazon was accused of being hostile and "political" for simply showing tariff costs in a price breakdown.
- Dumblydorr 1y ago“To be fair”, ok provide data. Do you have evidence that they consistently changed metrics to keep inflation on target? I only know of one change in the recent years and I don’t know if that even went through.
- John23832 1y agoExamples? There are definitely complaints about how CPI is calculated (particularly that it does not include housing), however it's not consistently changed.
- jmull 1y agoTo actually be fair, you'd assess the level of politicization of the numbers the government produces. While it's true that both 10 != 0 and 100 != 0, you are certainly off track trying to equate 10 and 100.
- kgwxd 1y agoI think this might be my favorite comment of all time.
- ty6853 1y agoUnfortunately housing will still not get cheaper because nearly the entire supply is locked into 30 year loans at near 0%, even a fool would starve, default their car note, and sell their every last valuable before giving that up.
- slashdev 1y agoIn general yes, but in practice housing prices are down big in a lot of areas and still falling. Decisions happen at the margin, which means it's the marginal home owner who lost their job and has to sell, which pushes up supply at a time when demand is very weak - and that's your lower prices. But it's very regional. Some areas will continue to see rising or stable prices.
- FinnLobsien 1y agoThat's the big problem. You can find cheap housing easily, but not where most people want to live. The problem could even get worse if there are fewer opportunities, but they remain concentrated in the Bay, NYC, etc.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- shortrounddev2 1y agoDifferent world post-covid. Lots of people are willing to live in the middle of nowhere to buy a house, they just couldn't before because they needed to live near major job markets. A lot more people are able to work remote now. I'd say that it changes the situation a little, but not everyone is able to work remote yet, so there's still the draw toward large city centers like you say. But personally I've met plenty of people who ditched their big city for the midwest as soon as they got approval to go remote. When their companies told them to go back to the office, they quit and found another job
- sambull 1y agoWe won't ever see a 2008 style price drop again. My house was going for $399K before I bought it in 2011 for $199K @ <4%. Unfortunately we got lucky, the big players in REO weren't ready to 'close' that many packages last time. My first devops role was at a company that was working with big players to make sure next time this exact scenario presented itself the big guys will be able to deploy their cash to gobble these things up.
- gymbeaux 1y ago[flagged]
- PLenz 1y agoI think about this line a lot when I read about what Trump and Musk are doing
- palmotea 1y ago>> “Some of you may die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make” - Shrek (2001) > I think about this line a lot when I read about what Trump and Musk are doing It's not just them though, but also their predecessors who created the conditions that led to Trump (e.g. pushing free trade even after the initial fairy tale that it would increase US manufacturing proved to be untrue). They were willing to sacrifice others' blue collar employment. It's would be kind interesting to see every politician's list of who should be prioritized and who they're willing to sacrifice, but they'll never be explicit about such things.
- twixfel 1y agoIt's mostly Trump though. Trump is responsible for his actions.
- goodtakes 1y agoThat's a very surface level analysis. You have to consider root causes... how did we get here? Not just "what symptom am I experiencing right now?"
- SpicyLemonZest 1y agoI actually do not have to. I care about developing opposition to the tariffs so that they’ll be removed, not sociological theories about why some particular politician came to support them. If the tariffs were popular among the general public, it might make sense to do a root cause analysis, but they aren’t.
- misja111 1y ago[flagged]
- readthenotes1 1y agoThe article is paywalled, so I cannot see if it mentions the controversy over the effect of all the gold that was brought into the US in 1Q. https://www.fisherinvestments.com/en-us/insights/market-commentary/gold-imports-tarnish-gdpnow https://www.fisherinvestments.com/en-us/insights/market-comm... Edit: here's a breakdown. It looks like imports (gold and tariff front running) were big negatives. https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/us-q1-gdp-contracts-record-imports-shrinking-govt-consumption-comes-stronger-expected https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/us-q1-gdp-contracts-reco...
- kasey_junk 1y agoGdpnow is a prediction model (that has an alternate model that accounts for the gold move). This is the actual calculation. The uncorrected gdpnow number was too pessimistic while the human consensus was too optimistic. The corrected gdpnow number was pretty close (though last week nosedived too much). The early April gdpnow corrected number was bang on.
- methuselah_in 1y agoI guess this was expected when someone thinks that he can do everyone else as he wishes.
- neogodless 1y agoI don't know if this has a typo, and I don't want to think about it too much.
- light_hue_1 1y agoThe Constitution says Congress sets tariffs. The law Trump is using to do this doesn't even contain the word tariff. Can we please stop this insanity? We had a great economy before this guy messed with it. This is why we keep economic policy in an independent agency instead of giving it to politicians.
- whalesalad 1y agoWe are only 100 days in. It’s going to absolutely get worse.
- ceejayoz 1y agoCongress lawfully delegated some decisions to the executive, in 1934 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_Tariff_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_Tariff_Act. They can undo that, if they want. I suspect they will, but only when it’s well beyond abundantly clear they need to.
- threeseed 1y agoCongress delegated almost all decisions to the Executive. That’s how the system works given that legislation is high-level, often vague and sometimes riddled with errors. Congress sets the goals and Executive i.e. public sector makes the decisions about how to implement it.
- whatever1 1y agoThe Congress has not challenged the president, and very likely would vote for the tariffs anyway as the majority would support anything the president would say. All the big corporations & big Money also have not challenged the president. This is People’s & Money’s will.
- fads_go 1y ago> very likely would vote for the tariffs anyway as the majority would support anything the president would say. Very true, however, 1) it does slow the process somewhat and therefore also reduces total throughput, this keeps government more stable and also gives more time to respond. Slow and stable may or may not be the best way to run a company, but the government is not a company. 2) It would put the individual congresspeople on record, and they are somewhat more dependent on/accountable to their local population. If for example all the farmers realized that the tariffs would destroy the farmer's livelihood, we could see Iowa withdrawing suport. The US goverment was set up the way it is for reasons.
- roter 1y agohttp://archive.today/dalBp http://archive.today/dalBp
- amazingamazing 1y agoThis is nothing. Wait until China figures out AI and India finishes taking the Software Engineering jobs.
- pyb 1y ago...and the new policies haven't really taken effect yet.
- pknerd 1y agoIt was already a bubble. It is correcting now, knowing the facts that US gave away all jobs to China.
- Mr_Eri_Atlov 1y agoStatistically, the best business decision anyone could make in this time of great uncertainty is to await regime collapse.
- seydor 1y ago[flagged]
- FollowingTheDao 1y agoAnd of course, right on cue... Trump blames Biden ‘overhang’ after GDP shrinks in first quarter, says growth will ‘take a while’ https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/30/trump-gdp-tariffs-biden-overhang.html https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/30/trump-gdp-tariffs-biden-over... Funny, I did not hear him talk about how the economy would tank and people would have to "sacrifice" or growth would "take a while" when he was running for president.
- lvl155 1y agoAnd just as inflation was down to a level where the Fed would be comfortable enough to start cutting rates, this administration came into foil all of that. Even if you really believe in these policies, which is highly controversial, one has to wonder why they timed it so soon basically forcing the Fed into a corner. It's as if this administration has a mandate to destroy the US economy.
- chasd00 1y ago[flagged]
- Dumblydorr 1y agoWhat are you spouting? They’re trying to achieve a soft landing, who wants a recession at the fed?
- thehumanmeat 1y agoThere never was rampant inflation (in the sense of the term of expanding money supply). It was all driven by the increased prices supply shock driven "inflation". The solution to high prices ("inflation") is high prices, not increased interest rates.
- twixfel 1y agoInflation isn’t high prices, it’s rising prices. You don’t know what inflation is it appears so I can scarcely take your proposed solutions seriously.
- aprilthird2021 1y agoThis is the level of the average American voter that got us into this mess.
- jsbisviewtiful 1y agoThe amount MAGA apologists spouting off bs on HN in the last 2 years has been disappointing. I've been on HN for about 8 years now and lately the pervasive brain rot has made a home even here. Truly disappointing.
- phkahler 1y agoI'm starting to think current measures of "the economy" are bogus. It can't grow indefinitely - that's probably just inflation. If you measure productivity in hours rather than dollars, inflation gets a more direct measure: how many hours do I need to work to buy food? Making a better product than last year is also a strange way to claim growth. What would be a better measure?
- rthomas6 1y agoYou can look at per capita GDP in inflation-adjusted dollars
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoGDP was always a horseshit measure (the inventor of GDP essentially says so *in the paper in which he invented it). But it should still be extremely worrying when ~every possible indicator points toward bad.
- sillyreason 1y agoWhy do you think the economy can't grow indefinitely? Living standards have skyrocketed in the last 200 years. Most people no longer die of appendicitis or dysentary in the USA. We have a/c now. And unlimited access to free information. To your measure of food and work hours, here's 70 years of progress in less work buying more food-- https://cepr.net/publications/in-the-good-old-days-one-fourth-of-income-went-to-food/ https://cepr.net/publications/in-the-good-old-days-one-fourt...
- mclau157 1y agoThe backbone of what you are saying is planned obsolescence and other predatory practices
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- mclau157 1y agoFew people are concerned about growing indefinitely, more people are concerned about can it grow until they retire
- fabian2k 1y agoThis is Trump's reaction to this on Truth Social: > This is Biden’s Stock Market, not Trump’s. I didn’t take over until January 20th. Tariffs will soon start kicking in, and companies are starting to move into the USA in record numbers. Our Country will boom, but we have to get rid of the Biden “Overhang.” This will take a while, has NOTHING TO DO WITH TARIFFS, only that he left us with bad numbers, but when the boom begins, it will be like no other. BE PATIENT!!! I'm curious how long he will get away with denying reality like this. The economical situation is likely to have much more immediate effects on people that almost every other topic. It should be much harder for him to do his usual thing once the economy really crashes, but who knows how his supporters will actually react.
- vixen99 1y agoNo comment on Trump's view but meanwhile what going to happen to the 1$trillion trade deficit? How long can that reality be denied? Is that a sustainable position? I'm an economic ignoramus so I just curious as what knowledgeable people think about this.
- tomrod 1y agoPeople are certainly aware of the trade deficit. A trade deficit is not a bad thing. - A growing trade deficit can reflect a robust economy. As U.S. consumers and businesses increase spending, imports rise, leading to a higher trade deficit. Simultaneously, higher U.S. interest rates attract foreign investment, strengthening the dollar and making imports more affordable. - The U.S. trade deficit is counterbalanced by a capital account surplus, meaning foreign entities invest heavily in U.S. assets. This influx of capital supports economic growth, funds government debt, and contributes to job creation, particularly in sectors like manufacturing. - Trade deficits allow U.S. consumers access to a wide array of affordable foreign goods. This access enhances purchasing power and living standards. Moreover, U.S. firms benefit from importing competitively priced intermediate goods, boosting productivity and innovation. - While the U.S. often has a goods trade deficit, it maintains a surplus in services, including finance, education, and technology. This surplus offsets the goods deficit and underscores the U.S.'s competitive advantage in high-value service sectors. Wikipedia - The U.S. dollar's status as the world's primary reserve currency enables the country to run trade deficits without immediate financial repercussions. Foreign nations hold dollars to facilitate international trade, which supports U.S. borrowing and spending capabilities. - Concerns that trade deficits lead to job losses, especially in manufacturing, are often overstated. Research indicates that factors like automation and technological advancements have a more significant impact on employment trends than trade deficits. - Trade deficits foster global economic interdependence, which can enhance diplomatic relations and geopolitical stability. By being a major importer, the U.S. strengthens its ties with exporting countries, promoting mutual economic interests. While trade deficits can present challenges, they also offer benefits that contribute to the U.S. economy's dynamism and resilience. It's essential to consider the broader economic context rather than viewing trade deficits in isolation.
- sillyreason 1y agoThis is just common sense. Resist the urge of confirmatory bias. Imports surged in q1 to front-run tariffs. Imports are subtracted from GDP. Therefore GDP shrank. C + I + G + NX = GDP https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2020-04/GDP-Education-by-BEA.pdf https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2020-04/GDP-Education-by-BE... https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2025-04/gdp1q25-adv.pdf https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2025-04/gdp1q25-adv....
- timerol 1y agoImports do not subtract from GDP. Reasoning about the economy from an accounting identity does not lead to useful knowledge. Historically times of increasing imports are also times of increasing GDP. https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/imports-do-not-subtract-from-gdp https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/imports-do-not-subtract-from-g... A reasonable question here is "did companies spend down petty cash to import goods in Q1" (no change to GDP), or "did companies stop investing and producing domestically in order to afford to import more goods in Q1" (reduced GDP).
- jeffbee 1y agoImporting into inventories absolutely does decrease GDP. If you look at the Q1 stats some of them are normal, but imports and inventories had huge weird effects and government contribution was negative for the first time in a while. Noah Smith is a galaxy-scale idiot, by the way.
- timerol 1y agoImporting into inventories counts as both investment and import, resulting in no net change to GDP. Consumers importing for themselves counts as both import and consumption, resulting in no net change to GDP
- boplicity 1y ago> Imports do not subtract from GDP. Whether or not that's true in reality, it is true in the report that caused the headline. From the article: > A logistical consideration makes Wednesday’s report difficult to interpret: Imports subtract from the Commerce Department’s calculation of GDP, since they represent spending on foreign-made goods and services.
- yalogin 1y agoWhy did snap not give second quarter projections? How will the economic uncertainty impact advertising? I thought that should be immune to an extent unlike Amazon or Walmart which are directly impacted.
- fosk 1y agoTwo questions for you: 1. Who pays for ads? 2. And if their business is being disrupted, what is the first budget that gets cut?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- lukashoff 1y agoPlay stupid games, win stupid prizes.
- isitsafeyet 1y agoI got my quarterly report from my RIA. I pay them 1% annually of my holdings which is about 50k. They basically said expect a lot more major portfolio strategy change if the tariffs aren’t lifted. Every paragraph said the current policy is dangerous, in a different way, without attacking trump directly. Been with them 15 years and they’ve never sounded this worried.
- aprilthird2021 1y agoIt's amazing how we were our own worst enemy all along. Nothing could stop the amazing American growth story except... Americans
- Jcampuzano2 1y agoTo be honest it seems all kinda by design. It seems Intentional to cause this much disruption that will primarily affect the lower and middle classes portfolios that can't withstand as long in long term economic droughts. It also leaves more with uncertainty so they get stuck at their current jobs for longer rather than leaving, giving more control back to employers. Everything implemented seems to be intentionally pushing even more economic inequality and divide between the top and the bottom, and to push the diminishing middle class even lower down on the totem pole.
- no_wizard 1y agoTrade wars are class wars. This is big business pushing back on labor gains made from the last few years. They can't let labor keep any power or gains because it means we might ask for more instead of continuing to defer to corporate power and the ultra rich. I expect a wave of bad economic news, followed by a wave of consolidation, all the while prices rising, and toward the end of all this, the tariffs will be fully removed, but the prices will not meaningfully (if at all) come down, and the consolidation will have only further entrenched power at the top
- ramesh31 1y agoI think you're crazy as an individual to be holding anything but bonds at this point. What growth, exactly, are you hoping to capture? I'm not living in this lunatic's fever dream world. It's exactly what he wants; for the first and last thoughts of your day to be about what he has done, hoping and praying that he undoes it.
- eagerpace 1y agoFear of a minor pain is not a good reason to not make a change. That’s how growth works.
- dayvigo 1y agoIf 1929 was a minor pain, then what's a major pain?
- nabla9 1y agoAtlanta Fed has GDPNow forecasting model provides a "nowcast" of the official estimate. It's currently -2.7 percent.
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoFor anyone else who wonders what that number means, it's a non-official estimate of what the final Q1 number will be. It's not a Q2 estimate.
- slantedview 1y ago[flagged]
- jmull 1y agoIt's going to get worse. This is actually buoyed by buying ahead of the tariffs, and the tariffs themselves haven't had a chance to take effect yet. The economic nosedive is just beginning.
- Jcampuzano2 1y agoTrump will still be blaming Biden for this all the way down to the bottom and until the last day of his presidency, and his cult will eat that shit up.
- tmountain 1y agoThe die hard supporters, yes, but his approval is already in decline across a bunch of key demographics (women, independents, hispanics). The only President that has been less popular in the first 100 days is... Trump (first term). The majority disapprove with the current handling of the Ukraine war, ending foreign aid programs, and immigration (his strong point). His approval on the economy has fallen 13 points since December, which should be alarming for his party, as that was a key factor in his re-election (Biden inflation concerns). He can blame Biden all he wants, but the majority of Americans identify current economy as belonging to Trump. It's hard to blame Biden when he's been so vocal and brazen about the tariffs.
- tim333 1y agoI think Trump 2 is polling lower than Trump 1. He of course is saying it's because the pollsters are criminals who should be investigated for fraud.
- mvdtnz 1y ago> The only President that has been less popular in the first 100 days is... Trump The same guy who got re-elected? Early term approval ratings mean less than nothing.
- tmountain 1y ago
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- acdha 1y agoThis is just getting started, too, since the first half of Q1 was continuing to grow at the previous rates. Tge Atlanta Fed was projecting growth just under +2.5% until late February, and is now forecasting -2.7%: https://www.atlantafed.org/cqer/research/gdpnow https://www.atlantafed.org/cqer/research/gdpnow
- Gimpei 1y agoI’m curious if any Trump voters are starting to feel any buyer’s remorse. The pain from the tariffs is only going to get worse. Soon we will have Trumpflation and a Trumpcession. Meanwhile, auto manufacturers are laying off employees. We are seeing pain with no gain. There is no reindustrialization nor will there ever be through this policy. For every economist except for Navarro, this is quite the own goal. I’m guessing you all were expecting Trump 1. Any doubts creeping in yet?
- proof_by_vibes 1y agoNever underestimate the power of shame on the human psyche. Many would rather double down on the "reality distortion field" than to admit wrongdoing or poor judgement.
- wnevets 1y agoare you great again?
- dsign 1y agoSlightly meta, when looking from outside, reading here feels like having your friends in the much-bigger-than-the-Titanic ship comment on it while the ship that was the emblem of the world sinks. The worst part of it is that every person outside of US watching this have a little demon sitting on their shoulder repeating, "They voted for him. A second time! You can't pity them." But I will say it anyway: stay strong.
- gre 1y agoI mean, he kind of stole the election. https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/ https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
- sapiogram 1y agoAh, good to know the other side is now throwing out voter fraud accusations as well.
- laughingcurve 1y agoAs someone who voted against Donald Trump... Saying that is just hardcore cope and not relevant to the thread / original post.
- remich 1y agoYeah I don't get why so many people are willing to believe conspiracy theories when the actual theory that many people in this country just have shit for brains is much more persuasive.
- celsoazevedo 1y agoIt will be interesting to see what happens in Q2. I assume a lot of people bought stuff before they actually needed to just to avoid post tariff prices.
- praptak 1y agoPeter Navarro on CNBC reacts to the shrinking GDP number by insisting it's actually good news because if you strip out the effect of tariffs "you have 3 percent growth. So we really like where we're at now." [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/30/trump-trade-navarro-us-gdp-drop-tariffs-stock-market.html https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/30/trump-trade-navarro-us-gdp-d...
- sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago"We have always been at war with Eastasia."
- praptak 1y ago"If you strip the effects of having all limbs off, I'm actually well above the top fighting condition" -- the Black Knight
- aweiland 1y agoDid he get this math from Ron Vara?
- tim333 1y agoIt could actually make some sense - if Walmart spent their spare cash importing Chinese stuff before the tariffs rather than spending it on American stuff, I think that would have the effect of lowering GDP or domestic product. Presumably next month they'd stock up on American stuff which would cause a bounceback in the figures.
- iAMkenough 1y agoUnfortunately there's more nuance, as some materials to produce American stuff can't be sourced domestically or imported affordably. Realistically we'll see a few giants pivot to less quality materials, many large and medium size businesses reduce their offerings, and a large amount of small businesses dissolving or filling for bankruptcy after not being able to weather the abrupt, completely voluntary supply chain disruptions across various industries.
- philipallstar 1y agoThis 0.3% is the worst thing to happen to the US economy since Q1 2022, when it contracted by a much less reported-on 1.0%.
- pcurve 1y agoQ2 is going to be bad.
- user9999999999 1y ago"listen up liberal"
- user9999999999 1y agoliterally handed an economy which was recovering quicker than the rest of the world...
- amai 1y agoThis is good news. It could be much worse given the chaos regime in the US at the moment.
- EasyMark 1y agoI honestly thought it would be more like 0.8% to 1.0% . The Senate is voting on rejecting Trump's tyrannical taxes today. Let's hope they get some actual bravery to stand up to Trump and shame the House of Republicans.