Central planning is always a mistake, in the sense that it makes most people worse off. It is not a mistake for those who do the planning. The feds and their cronies get more money and more power.
Do you really not get it? Forcing consumers to accept higher local prices than can be achieved "across the river" is a tax on consumers, not the producers.
If you can point to an example in recorded history where centralised mandates to buy more expensive local products has led to prosperity I'm interested to hear.
But the reality is I suspect you're a communist in denial....
Trump is doing some positive things such as de-regulation and attempting to "drain the swamp ".
The impact of the tariff campaign is not so positive .We are seeing a diminishment of free trade ,an increase in costs and generally a chaotic situation in markets .My guess is that the World will end up poorer and the prosperity of the "Pax Americana " will erode .
You are correct that America is not the only culprit but it seems to me that during the post war era when the US was basically the "best" at everything the World bowed down and essentially said have your way with us .
Then in the 80's much of the developing world began to catch up [Japan and Germany specifically ] .America dissipated it's strength protecting cheap energy from the middle east .
America is still number one in economic power but in regards to producing things it is no longer the top dog in many areas [ship building and auto manufacturing are examples ] .
Will tariffs and trade wars re- energize American as the world's factory ?
What undermined US manufacturing is greedy executive suites. We habitually under invested in our industries. Our semiconductor industry fired talent and stopped investing in their business. This gave rise to the Japanese semiconductor business who kept talent and continued to invest during downturns. This is the pattern of all of our industries. US Steel had habitually unfunded obligations to its Union workforce. Eventually it all caught with them. GM did the same, there was a period of time the first $1500 of every car sold went to the pensioners. IBM bought so much of its own stock they couldn't fund any of their industrial efforts (printers, copiers, semiconductors, network gear, etc). We are still the same!!
A more interesting question is who paid for the outsourcing. I have a nagging feeling that the US taxpayer did. I think corporations run by founders have a more balanced view.
Alleged, trade has not been free since Woodrow Wilson enacted the Federal Reserve Banking system. Nixon enslaved the planet with a fake World's reserve currency. I believe media forced Nixon into his fateful decision. What has become a downward spiral for Americans. How can Americans believe they are the richest nation on the planet when our money is smoke and mirrors? Akin to opening first class up to those traveling in steerage with an open bar and free food, hobnobbing with the Astors on the maiden voyage of the Titanic.
Here we go again - VAT's, aka GST's are a consumption tax, charged on an item, irrespective of whether it is imported or domestic.
Restrictions depend on whether an imported item doesn't meet the standards of the receiving country - the USA, like other countries, doesn't allow imported items to be crap, bypassing the regulations imposed to protect domestic consumers.
Do you have any real life examples of Trump "draining the swamp" or deregulating more than he's regulating? Tariffs are the exact opposite of deregulation.
I love the idea of the 35% tariff on Swiss imports because of a $28 billion "imbalance". The Swiss sell America chocolate, luxury goods, watches and gold bullion, all of which the US are crap at producing. Trying to force the Swiss to buy shit American cars and Americans to eat shit American chocolate is the stuff of communist wank fantasy.
But not yet. The guy paid the tariff "to be safe". Safe? Meaning having something to sell. He didn't say whether or not he passed along the tariff, whether or not he passed along 50%, or whether or not his margin in the steel is sufficient to allow him to "eat" the tariff. This is the essence of the problem: when a consumer needs/wants to buy, he has to make the decision to go ahead or decline at the price of the transaction at the TIME of his move. The variables involved are often not known to those not involved in the transactions. I remember during the COVID nonsense, people would have paid anything for a roll of toilet paper or paper towels, but they were simply not often available. I agree with you in principle: tariffs are targeted taxation, and I hate taxation. Taxation is what drove me from the investment market/game. Sooner or later, taxation kills commerce, profits, incentive, and ultimately, freedom. In the short run, however, it may not impede anything. We are probably still in the nuisance/adaptation stage. Best always. PM
I certainly agree with your view of Democrat policies. But not to pick nits, you dodged my question. And, a case can be made that Bush 1 was certainly no conservative. DC UniParty. We read his lips, and saw what that got us.
Bonner won’t reply. But since everything he preaches is intended to preserve and to make wealth, he would not be a fit for any Democratic Administration
Bonner loved to talk about how “apolitical” his newsletter is, and under Obiden I’d say that was mostly true. Anything but with Trump; thus, not hard to connect those dots.
Interesting one Bill. I've always been against central planning as during the housing crisis. It seemed rather clear that proving everyone with an affordable home was at first a great idea until it wasn't.
This is the sane claptrap heard in the Great White North and I allways replied; yes, yes, I know, everyone is sitting on a street corner waiting for a house to be built.
More of the "fairness" problem, and it's a problem, because fairness doesn't exist in the universe. Whenever we begin to think we can legislate fairness is when everything goes to hell. The argument here is not "central planning". The argument is wise allocation of scarce resources. We have one very scarce resource among all the players in the world market: we have a vast consumer market that has money to spend. Right now, it is to our immediate advantage to parlay that resource to maximum profitability. That's what Mr. Trump understands, and, evidently, comparatively few do. Sure, tariffs are a tax and are despicable. They are not an asset; they are a liability, but sometimes nothing can be a pretty cool hand. Mr. Trump is busy trying to keep Mr. Bonner's BIG LOSS at bay. Best always. PM
The Trump administration is trying a bold move of deleveraging China. China's economy is smoke and mirrors held only together with a constant flow of USD most of which produces short lived electronic components. Cash flow is king, and with a slave labor force to produce most of it's products business is booming for the 6% of Chinese citizens born from the right gene pool.
It all seems insane and impractical flipping the economy on its head with tariffs. However, America has been bled dry by the world and especially the Chinese. Terrible ever cheaper products along with over regulation of American manufacturing has been a terrible idea in America. America has become a throw away society to such a high degree, mechanical systems I used to repair for 30 years or more are now replaced on an 8-12 year schedule. This all the while Americans actually have come to believe doing so is living sustainably and green while filling landfills with last years electronics and cars 3-5 years old. As I gaze out at my neighbors going on their forth high efficiency cooling system in 35 years. They wonder how my 1980 system is still in place. Just think, how much money I have saved, my carbon footprint and impact on the environment is 4 times less.
It might be high time Hank Readon starts producing steel in Philadelphia again, while Dagny Taggart builds out the rail system. While the American people put an end to government meddling in the economy by auditing the Federal Reserve Bank and jailing the bankers for high treason. We need a temporary dictator and maybe we have one.
As we approach the edge of the jungle, we hear the bongos - very faintly at first, then louder, then frantic, bongolidizing every aspect of thoughts, actions, and policies of the hated "Big Man" administration. As we creep up to the edge, we see a bonfire raging with MMT and Keynesian economic junglarians dancing around the leader, who is frantically banging the bongos into submission with the message - TDS, TDS! And the messenger is none other than Bongo Bill, high priest of the TDS cult! The message - Trump is totally incapable of doing anything right and here's a little story to prove it.
One common factor of central planning is that the majority of the population will end up with straighter backs from that "beautiful" shaft we receive. Hopefully, having some form of gold (mining/royalty stocks or coin) will at least make it tolerable.
OK, so here's the plan we need to make you happy, BB: Since we in the US are too expensive, outsource to anywhere else in the world (and EVERYWHERE else in the world)! Then all those people still living in the US can simply stop working and have the Federal gov't put everyone on "the dole". What could be easier??? No more work for anyone in the US because no one is willing to do any REAL work - NOT!
Globalism as practiced by the U.S. since the early 90s was central planning on steroids: Washington picking winners and losers (more and more based on fomenting climate alarmism), nation building to make the world safe for “democracy,” and becoming the world’s policeman to keep the MIC fat and happy.
It took me X number of posts by Bill to finally "get it." I understood that tariffs were really just a tax on importers. That the government wants them to use domestic suppliers. Of whatever. Instead.
But Bill's latest missive got me to understand something I'd been missing all along. The government is simply inserting itself into these transactions. As a middle man. A parasitic one. That no one invited.
Let me tell you something. What you’re looking at right now, CFEN2, tariffs, economic panic, rising bread prices, total confusion, it ain’t a crisis. It’s a fire sale. And guess what? You’re invited.
See, here in the States, we’ve decided to shake things up. Tariffs? That’s just us taxing ourselves and pretending we’re punishing other people. Makes no sense. Genius, right? Meanwhile, I’m watching the stock market swell like a hot-air balloon full of fertilizer. I give it a little poke, boom, Wall Street’s crying, the Fed’s stuttering, and the average guy’s retirement plan is basically a scratch-off ticket at this point.”
But here’s the beautiful part, Vlady: while the market’s gasping for air, I’m sitting comfy in crypto. That’s right. I ride Bitcoin up to 500K, ka-ching!, and just when the world thinks I’m the digital dollar daddy, I pull the plug, crash it like a Lada off a Siberian cliff, and pour all that sweet liquidity back into U.S. stocks, which, by then, are on clearance like it’s Black Friday at a Montana gun show.”
Now why am I telling you this? Simple Buddy. I want you in on the ground floor. I’ve got infrastructure kits, energy deals, steel alternatives, even tariff insurance. You name it, I can sell it. You like chaos? I’ll license it to you. You want in on American decline? You can franchise it. I’m not just rebuilding the market, I’m monetizing the collapse. So let’s skip the old Cold War nonsense, the spies and sanctions. You want a piece of the future? I’m selling the firewood from the old world order, and you, my friend, can be first in line when we light the match.”
We’re not just talking deals, Vlady., We’re talking destiny, with a return on investment that’ll make the Romanovs jealous. 😂
Angry-Bergs, Thank you kindly for your comment. It’s always heartwarming to hear that someone, somewhere, is “elated” by tariffs, sort of like celebrating the first drop of rain during a dust storm. But let’s not forget, in all of American history, only three presidents ever made tariffs their prize pony: William McKinley, Herbert Hoover, and Donald J. Trump. And spoiler alert, two of the three rode that pony straight off a cliff. Hoover’s Smoot-Hawley Tariff was meant to “level the playing field” too… and it did, by leveling the entire global economy into a decade-long depression.
Hoover figured if you just jack up tariffs high enough, the world would buy American, or at least learn to appreciate their stubbornness. Instead, over 25 countries slapped us back with tariffs of their own, and global trade fell harder than a drunk cowboy in a saloon brawl. Exports dried up, farmers lost their shirts, and international cooperation went out the window like last night’s poker chips.
Now, I’m not saying the government wants to punish anyone, but good intentions don’t patch up a busted economy. If history’s taught us anything, it’s that when presidents get starry-eyed over tariffs, the fallout usually involves trade wars, price hikes, and a whole lotta international finger-pointing. So while the phrase “level the playing field” sounds mighty noble, let’s just be honest, that field tends to end up scorched, fenced off, and covered in IOUs.
Mr. Solomon... perhaps you are parroting rather than researching...
-
The tariff's during McKinley's Presidency allowed the U.S economy to grow at an unprecedented 7% rate.
Mckinely took office in1897, in July congress passed the Dingley tariff (more restrictive than McKinley's) that continued for 12 years.
-
By 1890 railroad's overbuilt (they comprised 80% of the stock market);
Agriculture was twice the size of Industrials.
Gov't meddling devalued silver.
The Mckinely tariff targeted only manufactured goods (enacted during Benjiman Harrison's tenure).
The Act removed tariffs on most staple items (sugar, wheat, hides) intending to secure reciprocal trade agreements.
-
The 1893 panic was the result of ongoing economic events prior to the 1890 tariff.
Farmers (low-income folks) blamed the tariffs, but the problems manifested in the non-tariffed Ag sectors and RR's; eventually banks.
-
Tariffs were enacted after the 1929 crash.
They compounded problems of on-going politically restrictive and depressed global trade still reeling after WWI, but they were not the cause.
-
By the early 1930s, many countries were unable to even meet their original WWI debt obligations, let alone consider paying additional tariffs.
-
The U.S. government faced significant challenges in collecting these debts, leading to defaults by several nations.
Ultimately, many of the debts were either canceled or restructured.
-
Tariffs did not significantly impact the global economic demise.
The world was already fiscally underwater prior to the tariffs, and most tariffs were never collected.
And again, low-income folks blamed the tariffs.
-
In 1990's when globalization became all the rage, it was "fashionable" to outsource, almost bragging rights stealing American jobs and shipping them over- seas.
Most Americans think they made out buying cheaper foreign goods.
Meanwhile the U.S. lost sovereignty and security having to rely upon adversaries for essentials.
-
How would Mr. Solomon suggest returning resource sovereignty?
Or does Mr. Solomon believe the U.S. should just suck it up and implode?
That was one hell of a tumbleweed tirade you just let loose, but bless your heart, it reads more like a scrambled Wikipedia speed-run than an argument grounded in clarity.
You’re mixing McKinley with Harrison, railroads with silver, and tossing in the 1990s like it’s a casserole of historical confusion, hoping nobody notices the dates don’t line up and the logic don’t land. You accuse folks of parroting, but then regurgitate a mess of cherry-picked half-facts with the confidence of a man who just discovered C-SPAN and thinks he cracked the code. Tariffs weren’t the messiah then, and they ain’t now, they’re a political tool, not a divine plan. If you’re so worried about resource sovereignty, maybe start by asking why corporate oligarchs you probably admire shipped every damn factory outta town while politicians on both sides greased the wheels.
Egypt wrote: "only three presidents ever made tariffs their prize pony: William McKinley, Herbert Hoover, and Donald J. Trump. And spoiler alert, two of the three rode that pony straight off a cliff."
-
1.) George Washington's tariffs were imperative.
2.) Lincoln's tariffs saved the Union.
-
Congressman Mckinely's tariff was said to be too much at 50%
Republicans lost to Democrats.
However, it was a combination of other factors that ended up reversing the tariff, as proved by the successful Dingley tariff that followed.
-
Four short years later Republicans were back in business with a majority Congress.
3.) The Dingley tariff 1897 was enacted soon after the Mckinely was inaugurated.
It allowed the U.S. to grow at a record 7%+ rate.
It lasted 12 years and was the most restrictive of all U.S. tariffs.
-
4.) Hoover's tariff was truly ill timed... the world was already in recession/depression.
5.) Trump... ?
That's 5 Presidents, of which only one tariff can be asserted as damaging
-
I do this for my own edification, because I prefer to know the accepted historical version rather than the parroted ones...
If you disagree with my research, please be specific...
"𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘴 𝘣𝘳𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘮𝘦 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 135%, 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦."
Poor guy. If only there were Steel Manufacturers and/or a Secondary/Recycled Steel Market here in the USA that this gentleman could use.
*Insert Eye-Roll Here...
OMG brother, you took the words right off my keyboard!
Do you really not get it? Forcing consumers to accept higher local prices than can be achieved "across the river" is a tax on consumers, not the producers.
If you can point to an example in recorded history where centralised mandates to buy more expensive local products has led to prosperity I'm interested to hear.
But the reality is I suspect you're a communist in denial....
Trump is doing some positive things such as de-regulation and attempting to "drain the swamp ".
The impact of the tariff campaign is not so positive .We are seeing a diminishment of free trade ,an increase in costs and generally a chaotic situation in markets .My guess is that the World will end up poorer and the prosperity of the "Pax Americana " will erode .
... funny, with every foreign country adding regulatory tariffs VATs and restrictions, here you think U.S. tariffs might be a problem?
Alleged "free" trade got us into this mess...
You are correct that America is not the only culprit but it seems to me that during the post war era when the US was basically the "best" at everything the World bowed down and essentially said have your way with us .
Then in the 80's much of the developing world began to catch up [Japan and Germany specifically ] .America dissipated it's strength protecting cheap energy from the middle east .
America is still number one in economic power but in regards to producing things it is no longer the top dog in many areas [ship building and auto manufacturing are examples ] .
Will tariffs and trade wars re- energize American as the world's factory ?
Perhaps but I have my doubts .
Regards John
John Wayne wrote:
"America dissipated it's strength protecting cheap energy from the middle east."
I respectfully disagree...
Onasis only paid a paltry $7 million fine and lived to age 69.
(also stuck it to the U.S. by marrying Jackie...bwahahaha)
-
Globalization is what undermined U.S. manufacturing.
The U.S. is a globe unto itself.
The 50 States import less than 30% foreign goods.
Most countries import 60%-70% foreign goods.
-
Bonners analogy does not reflect the actual problem...
both sides make the SAME thing... (chickens).
One side (of the river) makes it substantially cheaper, with the aid of collective farming (gov't subsidies).
When everyone buys from the cheap side, the other side is out of business.
-
The gov't/media/ corporate "globalization" ruse that began in the late 1990's essentially killed our chickens...
-
I don't see that we have an option but to re-energize America...
What undermined US manufacturing is greedy executive suites. We habitually under invested in our industries. Our semiconductor industry fired talent and stopped investing in their business. This gave rise to the Japanese semiconductor business who kept talent and continued to invest during downturns. This is the pattern of all of our industries. US Steel had habitually unfunded obligations to its Union workforce. Eventually it all caught with them. GM did the same, there was a period of time the first $1500 of every car sold went to the pensioners. IBM bought so much of its own stock they couldn't fund any of their industrial efforts (printers, copiers, semiconductors, network gear, etc). We are still the same!!
... I don't think the U.S. has a monopoly on greed.
To your point, "outsourcing" (the globalization fad) basically; the moral licensing of greed.
A more interesting question is who paid for the outsourcing. I have a nagging feeling that the US taxpayer did. I think corporations run by founders have a more balanced view.
Competition is what undermined U.S. manufacturing .
Some of the competition was unfair but a lot of it was because of doing a better job .
Becoming competitive again is achievable but beating up your friends does not seem like the best strategy .
With Respect John
... I believe competition essential to capitalism.
Without it we call it monopoly.
Our "friends" are/were beating us up!
-
Perhaps what you are referring to is equal trade.
The U.S. consumer has enjoyed lower foreign pricing.
This also has put the U.S. trade in deficit...
Alleged, trade has not been free since Woodrow Wilson enacted the Federal Reserve Banking system. Nixon enslaved the planet with a fake World's reserve currency. I believe media forced Nixon into his fateful decision. What has become a downward spiral for Americans. How can Americans believe they are the richest nation on the planet when our money is smoke and mirrors? Akin to opening first class up to those traveling in steerage with an open bar and free food, hobnobbing with the Astors on the maiden voyage of the Titanic.
Here we go again - VAT's, aka GST's are a consumption tax, charged on an item, irrespective of whether it is imported or domestic.
Restrictions depend on whether an imported item doesn't meet the standards of the receiving country - the USA, like other countries, doesn't allow imported items to be crap, bypassing the regulations imposed to protect domestic consumers.
Do you have any real life examples of Trump "draining the swamp" or deregulating more than he's regulating? Tariffs are the exact opposite of deregulation.
I love the idea of the 35% tariff on Swiss imports because of a $28 billion "imbalance". The Swiss sell America chocolate, luxury goods, watches and gold bullion, all of which the US are crap at producing. Trying to force the Swiss to buy shit American cars and Americans to eat shit American chocolate is the stuff of communist wank fantasy.
The more something is taxed, the more costly it becomes and the less it's purchased. Economic slowdown a-coming
But not yet. The guy paid the tariff "to be safe". Safe? Meaning having something to sell. He didn't say whether or not he passed along the tariff, whether or not he passed along 50%, or whether or not his margin in the steel is sufficient to allow him to "eat" the tariff. This is the essence of the problem: when a consumer needs/wants to buy, he has to make the decision to go ahead or decline at the price of the transaction at the TIME of his move. The variables involved are often not known to those not involved in the transactions. I remember during the COVID nonsense, people would have paid anything for a roll of toilet paper or paper towels, but they were simply not often available. I agree with you in principle: tariffs are targeted taxation, and I hate taxation. Taxation is what drove me from the investment market/game. Sooner or later, taxation kills commerce, profits, incentive, and ultimately, freedom. In the short run, however, it may not impede anything. We are probably still in the nuisance/adaptation stage. Best always. PM
True - but that seed was planted and watered long ago. Trump is just adding a bit of fertilizer, but he'll surely get ALL the blame.
Meanwhile, people like you will ignore the actions of the Traitor O'Blowme and Puddin'Head Joe....
SE have you copyrighted O’blowme? I would like to use it 😁
Go for it, brother.
I recently saw the traitor referred to as "O'hammed" - I like the ring of Truth in that as well....
That's absolutely genius...and wonderful. Best always. PM
Jim, have you voted for Democrats?
I served in the Bush 1 administration.
My take on Democrats is their policies are wealth-taking
Wow. Interesting! In what capacity did you serve?
I certainly agree with your view of Democrat policies. But not to pick nits, you dodged my question. And, a case can be made that Bush 1 was certainly no conservative. DC UniParty. We read his lips, and saw what that got us.
Same question for Mr. Bonner.
Bonner won’t reply. But since everything he preaches is intended to preserve and to make wealth, he would not be a fit for any Democratic Administration
Doesn’t mean he doesn’t vote Democrat.
Bonner loved to talk about how “apolitical” his newsletter is, and under Obiden I’d say that was mostly true. Anything but with Trump; thus, not hard to connect those dots.
Trump is a pseudo Republican. Foremost, he’s a self-centered opportunist whose ethics are situational.
He is responsible for the largest fiscal deficit in our history, a debt so large that it’s highly improbable it will ever be paid
Compare him to Bush 1, a WW2 decorated combat Naval aviator
He expelled the Iraqi army from Kuwait at no cost to US taxpayers.
No one is questioning or impugning Bush1’s service record. As a former carrier naval aviator myself, I have the utmost respect for it.
That said, Bush1 was a horrible president. The consummate DC UniParty RINO. The fact that he was a one-termer attests to that.
So, were you his tax policy advisor? Speech writer? “Read my lips. No new taxes” writer?
And, I ask, again, have you ever voted for a Democrat? Simple yes or no answer.
Interesting one Bill. I've always been against central planning as during the housing crisis. It seemed rather clear that proving everyone with an affordable home was at first a great idea until it wasn't.
..."we have a housing crisis" is gov't speak for "we need the revenue".
The "housing crisis" is another manufactured fear propagation that ultimately only serves to reduce the American standard of living.
The propagated California "Housing Crisis" does not include hospitals, supermarkets, schools and other essential ancillaries.
There has always been less housing than population.
The distinction?
Now it's a problem.
-
According to the media the U.S. is short some 5- 7 million homes...
Perhaps allowing over 10 million illegals entry wasn't such a good idea.....
This is the sane claptrap heard in the Great White North and I allways replied; yes, yes, I know, everyone is sitting on a street corner waiting for a house to be built.
More of the "fairness" problem, and it's a problem, because fairness doesn't exist in the universe. Whenever we begin to think we can legislate fairness is when everything goes to hell. The argument here is not "central planning". The argument is wise allocation of scarce resources. We have one very scarce resource among all the players in the world market: we have a vast consumer market that has money to spend. Right now, it is to our immediate advantage to parlay that resource to maximum profitability. That's what Mr. Trump understands, and, evidently, comparatively few do. Sure, tariffs are a tax and are despicable. They are not an asset; they are a liability, but sometimes nothing can be a pretty cool hand. Mr. Trump is busy trying to keep Mr. Bonner's BIG LOSS at bay. Best always. PM
The Trump administration is trying a bold move of deleveraging China. China's economy is smoke and mirrors held only together with a constant flow of USD most of which produces short lived electronic components. Cash flow is king, and with a slave labor force to produce most of it's products business is booming for the 6% of Chinese citizens born from the right gene pool.
It all seems insane and impractical flipping the economy on its head with tariffs. However, America has been bled dry by the world and especially the Chinese. Terrible ever cheaper products along with over regulation of American manufacturing has been a terrible idea in America. America has become a throw away society to such a high degree, mechanical systems I used to repair for 30 years or more are now replaced on an 8-12 year schedule. This all the while Americans actually have come to believe doing so is living sustainably and green while filling landfills with last years electronics and cars 3-5 years old. As I gaze out at my neighbors going on their forth high efficiency cooling system in 35 years. They wonder how my 1980 system is still in place. Just think, how much money I have saved, my carbon footprint and impact on the environment is 4 times less.
It might be high time Hank Readon starts producing steel in Philadelphia again, while Dagny Taggart builds out the rail system. While the American people put an end to government meddling in the economy by auditing the Federal Reserve Bank and jailing the bankers for high treason. We need a temporary dictator and maybe we have one.
As we approach the edge of the jungle, we hear the bongos - very faintly at first, then louder, then frantic, bongolidizing every aspect of thoughts, actions, and policies of the hated "Big Man" administration. As we creep up to the edge, we see a bonfire raging with MMT and Keynesian economic junglarians dancing around the leader, who is frantically banging the bongos into submission with the message - TDS, TDS! And the messenger is none other than Bongo Bill, high priest of the TDS cult! The message - Trump is totally incapable of doing anything right and here's a little story to prove it.
One common factor of central planning is that the majority of the population will end up with straighter backs from that "beautiful" shaft we receive. Hopefully, having some form of gold (mining/royalty stocks or coin) will at least make it tolerable.
…but Mr. Bonner… both sides of the river were raising chickens.
The other side of the river’s living standards are half those of this side.
This side of the river simply stopped raising chickens.
And one side of the river has the largest Wheat-buying market in the world - by a mile. But surely that has no effect on Bill's fable....
... climate change will enable Siberia to thaw.
Therefore, it is imperative to eliminate the Russia before climate change takes full effect or the U.S. stands to lose its wheat superiority. (sarc)
OK, so here's the plan we need to make you happy, BB: Since we in the US are too expensive, outsource to anywhere else in the world (and EVERYWHERE else in the world)! Then all those people still living in the US can simply stop working and have the Federal gov't put everyone on "the dole". What could be easier??? No more work for anyone in the US because no one is willing to do any REAL work - NOT!
That was the plan all along, ever since Bretton Woods I in 1913. Best always. PM
^^^THIS^^^
Globalism as practiced by the U.S. since the early 90s was central planning on steroids: Washington picking winners and losers (more and more based on fomenting climate alarmism), nation building to make the world safe for “democracy,” and becoming the world’s policeman to keep the MIC fat and happy.
It took me X number of posts by Bill to finally "get it." I understood that tariffs were really just a tax on importers. That the government wants them to use domestic suppliers. Of whatever. Instead.
But Bill's latest missive got me to understand something I'd been missing all along. The government is simply inserting itself into these transactions. As a middle man. A parasitic one. That no one invited.
https://lucaskandia.substack.com/p/the-tick-that-trade-never-wanted
Martin has some interesting points about historical tariffs...
https://www.tbwns.com/2025/08/04/the-bears-lair-welcome-to-the-old-world-order/
So you have 15 mos to fix it. I will await your response.
An imaginary Transcript: 😂
Vlady, Buddy … can I call you Vlady?
Let me tell you something. What you’re looking at right now, CFEN2, tariffs, economic panic, rising bread prices, total confusion, it ain’t a crisis. It’s a fire sale. And guess what? You’re invited.
See, here in the States, we’ve decided to shake things up. Tariffs? That’s just us taxing ourselves and pretending we’re punishing other people. Makes no sense. Genius, right? Meanwhile, I’m watching the stock market swell like a hot-air balloon full of fertilizer. I give it a little poke, boom, Wall Street’s crying, the Fed’s stuttering, and the average guy’s retirement plan is basically a scratch-off ticket at this point.”
But here’s the beautiful part, Vlady: while the market’s gasping for air, I’m sitting comfy in crypto. That’s right. I ride Bitcoin up to 500K, ka-ching!, and just when the world thinks I’m the digital dollar daddy, I pull the plug, crash it like a Lada off a Siberian cliff, and pour all that sweet liquidity back into U.S. stocks, which, by then, are on clearance like it’s Black Friday at a Montana gun show.”
Now why am I telling you this? Simple Buddy. I want you in on the ground floor. I’ve got infrastructure kits, energy deals, steel alternatives, even tariff insurance. You name it, I can sell it. You like chaos? I’ll license it to you. You want in on American decline? You can franchise it. I’m not just rebuilding the market, I’m monetizing the collapse. So let’s skip the old Cold War nonsense, the spies and sanctions. You want a piece of the future? I’m selling the firewood from the old world order, and you, my friend, can be first in line when we light the match.”
We’re not just talking deals, Vlady., We’re talking destiny, with a return on investment that’ll make the Romanovs jealous. 😂
...Mr. Solomon, you too fail to acknowledge the tariffs do not apply to everyone and everything.
U.S. exporters and domestic manufacturers are elated!
Why is it you think gov't "wants" to punish others?
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say our gov't wants to level the playing field.
Angry-Bergs, Thank you kindly for your comment. It’s always heartwarming to hear that someone, somewhere, is “elated” by tariffs, sort of like celebrating the first drop of rain during a dust storm. But let’s not forget, in all of American history, only three presidents ever made tariffs their prize pony: William McKinley, Herbert Hoover, and Donald J. Trump. And spoiler alert, two of the three rode that pony straight off a cliff. Hoover’s Smoot-Hawley Tariff was meant to “level the playing field” too… and it did, by leveling the entire global economy into a decade-long depression.
Hoover figured if you just jack up tariffs high enough, the world would buy American, or at least learn to appreciate their stubbornness. Instead, over 25 countries slapped us back with tariffs of their own, and global trade fell harder than a drunk cowboy in a saloon brawl. Exports dried up, farmers lost their shirts, and international cooperation went out the window like last night’s poker chips.
Now, I’m not saying the government wants to punish anyone, but good intentions don’t patch up a busted economy. If history’s taught us anything, it’s that when presidents get starry-eyed over tariffs, the fallout usually involves trade wars, price hikes, and a whole lotta international finger-pointing. So while the phrase “level the playing field” sounds mighty noble, let’s just be honest, that field tends to end up scorched, fenced off, and covered in IOUs.
Mr. Solomon... perhaps you are parroting rather than researching...
-
The tariff's during McKinley's Presidency allowed the U.S economy to grow at an unprecedented 7% rate.
Mckinely took office in1897, in July congress passed the Dingley tariff (more restrictive than McKinley's) that continued for 12 years.
-
By 1890 railroad's overbuilt (they comprised 80% of the stock market);
Agriculture was twice the size of Industrials.
Gov't meddling devalued silver.
The Mckinely tariff targeted only manufactured goods (enacted during Benjiman Harrison's tenure).
The Act removed tariffs on most staple items (sugar, wheat, hides) intending to secure reciprocal trade agreements.
-
The 1893 panic was the result of ongoing economic events prior to the 1890 tariff.
Farmers (low-income folks) blamed the tariffs, but the problems manifested in the non-tariffed Ag sectors and RR's; eventually banks.
-
Tariffs were enacted after the 1929 crash.
They compounded problems of on-going politically restrictive and depressed global trade still reeling after WWI, but they were not the cause.
-
By the early 1930s, many countries were unable to even meet their original WWI debt obligations, let alone consider paying additional tariffs.
-
The U.S. government faced significant challenges in collecting these debts, leading to defaults by several nations.
Ultimately, many of the debts were either canceled or restructured.
-
Tariffs did not significantly impact the global economic demise.
The world was already fiscally underwater prior to the tariffs, and most tariffs were never collected.
And again, low-income folks blamed the tariffs.
-
In 1990's when globalization became all the rage, it was "fashionable" to outsource, almost bragging rights stealing American jobs and shipping them over- seas.
Most Americans think they made out buying cheaper foreign goods.
Meanwhile the U.S. lost sovereignty and security having to rely upon adversaries for essentials.
-
How would Mr. Solomon suggest returning resource sovereignty?
Or does Mr. Solomon believe the U.S. should just suck it up and implode?
That was one hell of a tumbleweed tirade you just let loose, but bless your heart, it reads more like a scrambled Wikipedia speed-run than an argument grounded in clarity.
You’re mixing McKinley with Harrison, railroads with silver, and tossing in the 1990s like it’s a casserole of historical confusion, hoping nobody notices the dates don’t line up and the logic don’t land. You accuse folks of parroting, but then regurgitate a mess of cherry-picked half-facts with the confidence of a man who just discovered C-SPAN and thinks he cracked the code. Tariffs weren’t the messiah then, and they ain’t now, they’re a political tool, not a divine plan. If you’re so worried about resource sovereignty, maybe start by asking why corporate oligarchs you probably admire shipped every damn factory outta town while politicians on both sides greased the wheels.
Egypt wrote: "only three presidents ever made tariffs their prize pony: William McKinley, Herbert Hoover, and Donald J. Trump. And spoiler alert, two of the three rode that pony straight off a cliff."
-
1.) George Washington's tariffs were imperative.
2.) Lincoln's tariffs saved the Union.
-
Congressman Mckinely's tariff was said to be too much at 50%
Republicans lost to Democrats.
However, it was a combination of other factors that ended up reversing the tariff, as proved by the successful Dingley tariff that followed.
-
Four short years later Republicans were back in business with a majority Congress.
3.) The Dingley tariff 1897 was enacted soon after the Mckinely was inaugurated.
It allowed the U.S. to grow at a record 7%+ rate.
It lasted 12 years and was the most restrictive of all U.S. tariffs.
-
4.) Hoover's tariff was truly ill timed... the world was already in recession/depression.
5.) Trump... ?
That's 5 Presidents, of which only one tariff can be asserted as damaging
-
I do this for my own edification, because I prefer to know the accepted historical version rather than the parroted ones...
If you disagree with my research, please be specific...
“But in this world of winners, on our side of the river we pay 30% more for bread. “
Not really. We pay 30% more for wheat. That does not directly translate to 30% more for bread.