pull down to refresh

26 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 OP 9m \ parent \ on: The WSJ (kinda) covers the Mar-a-Lago Accords plus Miran's Incredible Speech econ
From the New York Times yesterday:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/09/business/economy/bonds-tariffs-safe-haven.html
Well I mean if countries using the Dollar and Treasuries is such a burden for the United States... then they could just use something else problem solved
If something is unlimited in supply, requires no energy to make, and its sole use is speculation its value is...
I don't think it's about Bitcoin dude.... It's about trade negotiations, which is really currency negotiations to bring back manufacturing jobs and sell 100-year bonds
When Trump "taxes China" (or any country for that matter) he's not really taxing the other country.
He's taxing Americans who are being held hostage by government. How does this help anyone???
Now that China has played the game mostly by the rules set by the USA, and won, Trump abruptly sets out to smash the rules USA put in place and reset the global trade rules to suit USA. This is not free trade or good faith bargaining- this is a fucking bully sore loser throwing a tantrum.
100% Agree. Btw... are you familiar with the Mar a Lago Accords of late?
The idea literally is to bully other countries... to buy 100 year "century bonds" at zero coupon and "accept tariffs" for military "protection" while buying US goods...
If they don't they get "the tariff" and "no protection". Yikes
In summary... 2 very different schools of thought.
-
The 'free market' school: government intervention is bad, every action has an opposite reaction, and there is no 'cheap and easy' 'trick' to prosperity. Productivity, technology, and the increase in wages is almost always tied to better goods and services. Either you offer the 'best good' (or service) for the 'lowest price'... or you get left behind this is the eventual outcome of almost any market given enough time.
-
The Trump/Tariff school: government intervention is good. There is a 'free lunch' through currency manipulation, government deals, and coercive bargains... and "manufacturing" IE getting other countries to "buy your goods" no matter what is the end goal. Subsidize the "working class" and promise them jobs & security... because their support at the end of the day and their goods and manufacturing should be the # 1 priority of government. Their support is everything.
A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System (AKA Mar a Lago Accords)
In the apparent guiding document for this administration, "volatility" is mentioned 44 times.
particularly in economies looking to bypass the dollar and reduce exposure to U.S.-led financial systems.
Why would they want to do that? It's not like the United States is trying to bully them into buying 100 year 'century bonds' and accept tariffs or otherwise... lose "protection". Because that would be crazy
/s