How did the Tech & Finance Leaders fall for this during the election? Amazing lack of foresight.
But see how even WSB idiots could see this coming and they are making a lot of money on shorts. And the premiums are sky high, meaning the big players are shorting like crazy. Easiest money to be made in decades for the Wall Street sharks.
I don't believe it's the case, but what if Trump and friends are just wishing to play the markets and he will back off with tarrifs? We will see a massive short squeeze and lots of people taking huge losses.
Most trading professionals would not call it gambling if you have positive expectation and a process.
Positive expectation properly and repeatedly executed over time is a business.
Would you say a casino is gambling by offering table games to customers?
Most gamblers have a positive expectation and a process.
You don't know if there will be a u-turn. There's no logic at all to this administration, they could just announce the "Biden correction" is over and that the tariffs have now worked, plus the government is buying stocks.
Any fantasy scenario is possible.
The confidence is gone. The risk is high whatever happens. The lowest risk strategy is now betting on market failure.
That does paint a pretty grim picture wrt potential stock growth, if this finally triggers the correction back to a more sane stock price (last I read about it, you'd have to hold the stock for 65 years for the investment to break even).
The current stock valuations are essentially based purely on the same mechanic that makes Ponzi schemes to successful... At least short term.
This stupids-in-charge administration might just have brutally popped the AI bubble.
There is an opinion that making them (a big business, and overseas players too), crying for audience is a way to make them loyal to a regime. So they come to the audience, they kiss the ring, they get some preference, and the regime becomes even stronger. I'd not name Trump crazy as some do, but simply a person presenting and promoting the interests of a certain entity. I won't name my guesses about the possible entity.
It's not a lack of foresight, it's just that they do not believe him or believe that someone will stop him. People have just misread Donald Trump and his intentions.
Also, it's hard for people to understand that someone in power might just not understand why their decisions are a terrible, terrible idea (see politicians and backdooring encryption for a tech example of this).
This time he picked based on loyalty, so it's pretty much whatever he wants (apparently tariffs).
However the report says this is assuming the tariffs won't go into effect. The flagship policy Trump just announced after going on about how the most beautiful word is "tariff" for four decades.
If they go into effect it goes higher. But why assume that the President of the USA will actually do what he just said he'd do in a big speech with giant printed props.
To be fair, it makes sense that if his…plan… is going to work, he needs to get in it quickly. 4 years isn’t a long period of time and if the country doesn’t recover economically before then the next president will absolutely just undo whatever he did.
Even the midterms are a time limit. If things are bad enough then it would absolutely get people to vote for those that’ll take the power of tariffs back out of the president’s hands and back into congress’s.
It’s actually kind of a big flaw with our system as a whole. Countries like China can do more long-term plans without worrying about silly things like electability. In this case, in theory I think Trump is right to wave our big economic stick around. In reality it won’t work because everyone can just wait for his time to be up. Even if countries negotiate there’s no reason to think they won’t reneg in 5 years.
Technically the President is not allowed to dictate financial policy. The current actions are done in the name of “emergency”, bypassing the Senate.
I understand the national security reasons for having a domestic commercial manufacturing base. However, there is ZERO economic reasons to bring back manufacturing jobs.
That doesn't work for ever. And Trump was voted by the blue collars. So he wants to create more blue collar jobs.
Furthermore, those kinds of jobs are not long for this world. They're inevitably going to be automated away and the replacement jobs robotics maintainers are not ever going to be in numbers great enough to replace those manufacturing jobs. It's beyond stupid especially when you consider that the labor market was already incredibly strong at ~5% unemployment.
I don't doubt part of making America great in their minds includes bringing debtor prisons back too.
With gig work you get none of that.
In what way are you quantifying this? Would you agree that the quality of life has improved significantly compared to the 1980s or whatever period you want to compare to?
You now have enormous piles of debt, obesity, millions hooked on drugs, a blossoming private prison industry and a nation without a future?
I quote from Wikipedia: ‘In 2013, George Friedman, the head of Stratfor, wrote that the middle class' standard of living was declining, and that "If we move to a system where half of the country is either stagnant or losing ground while the other half is surging, the social fabric of the United States is at risk, and with it the massive global power the United States has accumulated."[54]’
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_living_in_the_Un...
Looks like most of the gains since the 80s have been concentrated to the top.
Isn't this what happened because companies moved their manufacturing to other countries?
That's really a decision each person should make for themselves, and it was a big part of the reason Trump won the election. Most people don't think their QoL has improved.
Obviously the perspective here is different due to the success of the US software industry, but that industry only employs a tiny fraction of the population.
China always does long term and very long term plans and executes them. US, on the other hand, is much more agile and reacts very fast to changes and opportunities.
Probably the best strategy is a mix of both, have long term plans but be able to react fast when needed.
In the late 1930s the queen of the Netherlands asked her prime minister if he had read a certain book written by the German leader. He had not.
Stop saying "nobody". People predicted this. The people who are blindsided by this dismissed the people who predicted it as crazy, hyperbolic doom casters. Yet today, when their predictions come to fruition, they don't even exist.
Here's a wild idea: let's start listening to the people who had the foresight to predict this instead of pretending they don't exist because it soothes our own egos for having missed this.