Tariffs work!

It’s irrational to say that a President can fix an economy in less than two months. It is impractical to undo the damage of the previous administration in less than 2 months. Are you people really going to equate 2 months to 4 years? In fact, it isn’t the job of a President to fix an economy. However, the policies of the left can deliberately destroy the value of the currency by giving financial support to illegal immigrants and sending billions to Ukraine. And of course, all the fraud that DOGE found. In other words, fuck up the economy for the middle class. That is their goal.

Furthermore, Day 1 of Trump’s Presidency is the first day that he is on the job. Logically, do you expect him to accomplish his goal to lower prices on the first day or begin the process to lower them? Obviously, if you have any logic in your brain, then you would think the latter.

This post was edited by Malignanttumor666 on Mar 6 2025 10:36am

And yet he made this irrational promise and people were stupid enough to believe him.

I am aware the president cannot fix these issues overnight. But I am also keenly aware that everything Trump is doing in regards to our economy is making us worse off, in the short term, and potentially in the long term.

He did not make an irrational promise. This is a false narrative by the left.
They are very good at that. The American people are not as dumb as the left thought. The people proved they are smart by voting for Trump.

You're acting like he can fix these issues overnight.

Do your research.

Great things are coming and fantastic orders are in place to start moving in the right direction.

If you want things to get better, this is it. You want it worse? Vote democrat next time. You should see by now the democrats are after the destruction of the country.

Nope, know exactly what you’re getting at with this but it’s wrong. My initial inclination is that this may be a bad faith comment, but incase you don’t understand why deflation is not necessary to reduce the price of eggs let me elaborate a bit.

Economists know deflation is awful, and significantly more harmful than inflation. It sends a signal loop to consumers to tighten their purse strings and not stimulate their economy.

If you wanted to lower prices across an entire macroeconomic sector then yes, that would require either inorganic pricing and subsidies, or organic deflation.

To decrease the cost of a singular good such as eggs there are several types of investment and production ramp ups you can undergo to lower their price via shifting their aggregate demand and supply curve to a lower price point equilibrium through the introduction of additional supply.

Hence, egg prices can be lowered without requiring deflation.

But we both know the real problem behind the egg crisis was never partisan anyways, it was H5N1, but now, that problem is going to be compounded massively by us effectively cutting off good faith trading with the large majority of the world.

I’ve seen the statistics on % of net exports for Canada and Mexico from the US versus the inverse and at face value it seems like this deal stands to massively disproportionately impact those two nations, until we realize that the goods being tariffed and no longer purchased can still be sent to their other viable trade partner, and while their overall costs will obviously increase to some degree, the net opportunity cost is mitigated quite a bit by being able to sell those same exports at a similar price, and having the only real economic impact be the implicit costs in setting up those new trade agreements, and the presumed small delta in price.

America as a whole may be well insulated by their wide breadth of countries looking to import to us and engage in trade, but after having recently completely cleared out all of our goodwill (I am using this term in the literal sense, as in the intangible asset that would be assigned a finite value in real life instances such as business acquisitions), if we can’t source our products from a viable alternative, we now take on the full brunt of those losses, rather than merely the slim margin between our previous and new net profit.

When you have a $40 whiskey bottle that you have to sell to a different trade partner for $35, it hurts in the short term, but it hurts much less than not being able to sell your $30 bottle for anything.

If there’s any typos or anything it’s probably because I typed this out on mobile. 🤷‍♂️

This post was edited by Jacobbc2 on Mar 7 2025 02:52am

Then why isn't china printing up money and 'dispersing it from helicopters (Rich people)' to combat inflation?
Xi Xinpings literal statement on the matter was "Don't people like cheaper stuff?"

This is such a ridiculous question but you know what, i’ll go ahead and answer it for you, if you want the honest-to-god, man-behind-the-curtain, truth.

The real reason Xi isn’t printing money and hurling it out of the side of his helicopter to shower down upon his constituents is because













his printer ran out of ink

So you got no honest-to-god answer then.
The rest of Asia didn't print up money like we did in 2008 when they had their financial crisis in the 1990's.
All our economists were telling Asian countries at the time not to, then when the financial crisis happened in America all that went out the window.
Curious how that is, anyways shill me some more of your best Keynesian garbage takes.

This post was edited by PapaPsych on Mar 7 2025 03:17am

I’ll be honest, and it might be my current acute sleep deprivation, I perceived your comment as a non-sequitur and responded in similarly flippant fashion (primarily because I can’t really ascertain what parallel you’re attempting to draw).

Perhaps it’s a lack of knowledge on the state of geopolitical affairs in 90s China that’s obfuscating my view. I am on the younger side and older historical conflicts are not always within my purview.

As far as the decision for the Fed reserve to begin pumping out more fiat back in 2008, I don’t think it was a decision that anyone wanted to make. Most people knew the futility of the decision but it was a desperate stop gap measure to try to stave off what we now know was an unavoidable fiscal calamity largely due to banks not doing their due diligence and giving out sub-prime loans that people should never have been eligible for.

I don’t think anyone with above a room temp IQ has ever earnestly suggested “just print more” as a feasible fiscal policy.

I feel compelled to tell you in this circumstance (if nothing more than for comedic levity), I truly cannot tell what your comment has to do with the price of tea in China.


This post was edited by Jacobbc2 on Mar 7 2025 03:33am