Market Losses and Tariffs from the Military Industrial Complex

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eddiememphis

You sure read a lot into one sentence that wasn't there.

People buy foreign goods because they choose to, not because they’re forced to. That’s capitalism.

Tariffs, on the other hand, are closer to socialism. They interfere with the market by artificially raising prices on imports and narrowing consumer choice. That’s price control.

If we're serious about capitalism, we should focus on being competitive—not punishing consumers for making free choices.

---

Maybe I did. It sounded as if you were justifying an unlevel playing field simply because we are successful.

I very much disagree with government market controls. IE, better for everyone to have open trade. However, currently that is not what is going on. Nearly every country that trades with us (if not all of em) imposes price controls/tarriff/taxes whatever form, to provide their country with trade leverage over the US. We have taken it on the nose, kicked the dirt with our toe and said "shucks". Why are we not pushing back on that with at least equal veracity? Fear of making trade partners angry is not an adequate excuse. You dont combat socialist trade tactics by just being the nice guy. I dont think it reasonable to fund our over-bloated government spending on tarriffs, never gonna happen. But, using them to back off the unbalance created by other countries.... do it.

The company I work for is a regular target for lawsuits. Big enough to have somewhat deep pockets, small enough to not have a team of lawyers on staff. In the past, leadership felt it best to always settle lawsuits and never fight in court or even really push back, even on situations where we clearly had no part in the problem. What I observed, it simply made us a bigger target and the lawyers figured out how high a number they could propose for settlement that we would just pay. And the lawsuits kept coming. There comes a time when you have to draw a line and push back, even when it costs more to fight than it would to settle. Fortunately, leadership changed and lawsuit evaluation changed. Started fighting some, denying others and whaddya know, the number of suits (both in lawsuit rate and total dollars expended) dropped dramatically. If you dont somehow project that you arent an ATM, it never ends. Small discomforts early can bring improvements to the bigger picture. Trump is pushing back. Doesnt matter if I agree with his tactics, I am still glad someone is finally doing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .455_Hunter

Maybe I am just a simpleton, but I fully concur with Rubio's statements...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rub...ly-right-do-it

---

Seems simple enough, but it sure has a lot of people running around like their heads were cut off.Attachment 98563

At least I managed to get medication from an Asian country via eBay. A problem the Army lab diagnosed and the VA refused to treat. This infection has been going on too long. I got the medication cheaper than Walgreens too.
Seems silly to raise prices via tariffs when we are still recovering from the effects of COVID. Maybe we need a Department of Science? Science is based on truth.

Does Trump realize rich stock investors won't be able to afford his luxury hotels when their shares crash?

The end goal is no tariffs. You just have to use them to get to where you want... He's trying to reset the global economy and trade dynamics. Tough job to do.. I wouldn't want to do it.

Honestly, I'm looking at investing into the stock market. Now's the time to buy. When will it hit bottom, who knows? That's the hard part.

"Trade protectionism, like protectionism in general, is based on the idea that we can benefit ourselves by harming others. In reality, it works the other way around." Thomas Sowell, "Basic Economics, A Citizens Guide to the Economy"

This ^^^^

At the start of WWII, we were far from a superpower. By the end of it, we were a developing one. The actions and policies from 1946- are what cemented us as the leader in the global stage.

The Marshal Plan is what truly prevented, and lead to the partial defeat of communism.

Internal aid cemented the dollar as the global currency.

Trade policies lead to the US being the richest, economic leader of the world.

Departing from what is known to work, for certain things that historically are known not to work, is not particularily inspirational. I am not predicting the future, just stating that many of the strategies employed are ignoring hard earned lessions of the past.

I'm also not asserting there should be zero tarriffs across the board. Essentially knee-jerk reactions are usually not the best policy decisions.

For Trump's first term there was a lot of chaos in regardings to certain international trade. China for one. Now we are walking into that on the global stage. You can't threaten, walk back, impose, recisnd, and reimpose, and recisnd tarrifs, especially on allies, without permanent consequences. Nobody is beholden to us.

Certain personality types don't have the capacity to love, hate, or hold a gruge, if ego is satiated everything is great. For most other personalities, they will hold a gruge for years, occasionly to their dying breath. If you're going to do something, you better be consistent. The chaotic rubber banding WILL cause tremendous damage to the American brand. We are not the only game in town, and when people switch horses to escape chaos, they aren't coming back.

Trump trashed my investment. Trump trashed the stock market. Whoever had puts on the market made trillions. I worry the Russians have dirt on POTUS. E. Jean Carroll, Stormy Daniels, surely not a Muscovite too? My money is on that we have been compromised. Congress is going to want answers.

ATTACH=CONFIG]98576[/ATTACH]

The economy is getting stronger but, yes, the markets are in chaos.

This hurts my 401K significantly, in the short term. I suspect two things: 1. The markets will reset and come back strong fairly quickly once it begins, and 2. The chaos in the markets are manufactured by those the tariffs will hurt the most (also in the short to mid term).

While the tariffs are to help adjust for trade imbalances which sought to take advantage of our nations perceived wealth, they're also in place to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. For those who failed to see it during the COVID lockdowns, we rely too heavily on non-U.S. products. If foreign nations wanted to cripple us by denying us the needed products we currently have to import, they could do so (and did so to some degree during the COVID lockdowns).

We rely too heavily on computers these days. Be it as it may, given how we've developed this reliance, we NEED computers to do daily business, travel and provide for our national self defense. We found our reliance on predominantly Chinese (this includes Taiwan) microprocessors (aka "chips") harmed our ability to make and sell everything from home appliances, TV's, computers, and automobiles (and so much more). We found that a tremendous amount of our medications and medical supplies were made abroad. That's a very dangerous position to be in. If these tariffs are painful enough to cause manufacturers to come back to producing these items in the U.S., it strengthens us.

Will all of this be painful in the sort to mid term? Yep. Will it make us stronger in the long term? I absolutely believe it will.

I've been saying on Reddit and to my family more or less what Ginsue said here. The stock market and our investment portfolios are NOT the economy and have been used as surrogates for economic health for far too long.

In 2008, the financial markets tanked but Americans could largely do business and get along just fine. In 2021, the financial markets were healthy but people couldn't do business and people in all sectors were going bankrupt.

Trump hasn't been shy about wanting to bring production back to America and reducing dependence on global production even before he started running for political office.

I think Trump has 2 or 3 objectives with the tariffs:
1. Restoring the American industrial and production economy.
2. Restoring trade balances or at least setting a level playing field of zero or equal tariffs with trading partners.
3. Possibly shifting the financial base of the federal government back to 19th century standards with little-to-no taxes on income and more of an emphasis on importation taxes

Note that #3 also requires a drastic reduction in government expenditures and payroll, which fits the other track of DOGE reductions. Reduction in the size of government was something Reagan wanted to do but couldn't because he had to make choices and he chose to prioritize bringing down the Soviet Union and international communism. With the latter finally done, Trump is in a position to fix the American economy. Much as I detest him personally, he seems to be on the right track to do so even though it causes some initial chaos and pain.