Trump will win again

LhrVf5X.jpeg
 
aeon said:
LhrVf5X.jpeg
Click to expand...

Drumpf was in "Aurora" today lol.
Basically he stepped outside the Denver airport and went to a massive hotel complex nearby. Technically Aurora, but very far from central Aurora.
 
 
aeon said:
Click to expand...

This guy also doesn't know what he's talking about (fully).

Tariffs are just a way of switching consumer preferences from foreign to domestic. China does pay in a sense that their exports to US would drop. US consumers would pay higher prices. So in 101 economic theory both are bad outcomes, but of course it can work if it creates more domestic jobs and gives preferential treatment to domestic manufacturing and re-shoring. I think the idea is good but since US consumers are already feeling the pressure of inflation, it would not be popular. It would take years for this re-shoring to come into effect and reap the benefit.

An interesting idea would be imposing tariffs but at the other hand reduce VAT tax or other taxes, so it perhaps evens out as a final cost to consumer.
 
philostam said:
This guy also doesn't know what he's talking about (fully).

Tariffs are just a way of switching consumer preferences from foreign to domestic. China does pay in a sense that their exports to US would drop. US consumers would pay higher prices. So in 101 economic theory both are bad outcomes, but of course it can work if it creates more domestic jobs and gives preferential treatment to domestic manufacturing and re-shoring. I think the idea is good but since US consumers are already feeling the pressure of inflation, it would not be popular. It would take years for this re-shoring to come into effect and reap the benefit.

An interesting idea would be imposing tariffs but at the other hand reduce VAT tax or other taxes, so it perhaps evens out as a final cost to consumer.
Click to expand...
Your more full-bodied explanation is appreciated.

That said, you saying “This guy also doesn't know what he's talking about (fully),” doesn’t acknowledge the most important part.

What he said is both correct and true.

Cheers,
Ian
 
As a MMT stan I support the notion of increasing taxed to reduce the money supply to curb inflation, but not the notion of regressive taxation. A more effective strategy (IMO) would be to nationalize excess billionaire assets in the US and limit (when necessary) bankers ability to inflate the amount of currency in circulation. (does that qualify me as a guy that does not know what he is talking about?)
 
Free speech, yo?

sIpLzH7.jpeg
 
SlowUpTake said:
As a MMT stan I support the notion of increasing taxed to reduce the money supply to curb inflation, but not the notion of regressive taxation. A more effective strategy (IMO) would be to nationalize excess billionaire assets in the US and limit (when necessary) bankers ability to inflate the amount of currency in circulation. (does that qualify me as a guy that does not know what he is talking about?)
Click to expand...

No, talking about MMT and nationalizing assets makes you far, far worse, it makes you dangerous 😜

I looked into MMT like 5 years ago and just laughed. It's a pure fairy tale and a Rube Goldberg machine. If only government pulls this and that lever, then all of the deficits and money printing will not matter. And look, we can always seize assets if inflation goes too much out of control.

But I must thank MMT for pumping assets. Markets would not be so high without irresponsible MMT policies. Everyone with any salt on Wall Street laughs at MMT.

Again, knowing some history would help. MMTers think they're geniuses that discovered how to debase currency without consequences. Emperor Nero would be a MMT stan for sure. Unfortunately, you cannot bend the nature of reality with lies and cheating and stealing.
 
Last edited:
8VUgKlp.jpeg
 
H1WeLKC.jpeg
 
SlowUpTake said:
www.nytimes.com

Modern Monetary Theory Finds an Embrace in an Unexpected Place: Wall Street (Published 2019)

M.M.T.’s fans include Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders — and financial analysts at Goldman Sachs, Nomura and GMO.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
Click to expand...

Stanley Druckenmiller, one of the best investors of all time, was on record multiple times saying that everything the FED and Treasury was doing since 2008 just helped people like him become richer and middle class become poorer. I'll take his word over some random economists, academics and politicians. Like I said, everyone who invests should be happy that MMTers exist to pump their bags (while impoverishing the middle class).

 
SlowUpTake said:
Click to expand...

There is really no point of arguing, if you have a view it's better to express it via positioning in the market. I don't really care what NYT say or don't say.

My view is that all of this money creation by the Fed and the Treasury finds the way into the system.

If you give money to the middle and lower classes with higher propensity to spend, you'll likely get mainstreet inflation. Because when a normal person gets a stimulus check, they go and buy goods and services.

If you give a stimulus to the rich with lower propensity to spend and higher propensity to save/invest, you'll get inflation in the asset markets. This is a logical consequence of MMT. And this is why we've been getting increasing income inequality in the last 15 years and especially after Covid where we got both mainstreet inflation and even bigger asset price inflation.
 
kpFmWbJ.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top