"It will bring down the price of new cars by about $2,400 per vehicle," Fotouhi said. "This is designed to prevent auto manufacturers from building cars that people don't want and restoring consumer choice on the car lot so that people can pick the vehicles that work best for their families."Uh huh...and I have a bridge for sale too...
Cue the sad trombone: Hedge fund billionaire John Paulson — a major Trump donor and advocate of tariffs — is shuttering his Ohio brass instrument plant and offshoring work to China, according to a new report.https://news.yahoo.com/news/finance/...212204669.html
Paulson’s company Conn Selmer, the nation's top maker of orchestral and brass instruments, notified employees it will shift most of its East Lake plant operations to Asia by July, triggering about 150 layoffs,
“The people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined,”https://libertystreeteconomics.newyo...5-u-s-tariffs/
“They’ve put out a conclusion which has created a lot of news that’s highly partisan, based on analysis that wouldn’t be accepted in a first semester econ class.”Yet Hassett tries to make this claim of cause and effect.
“Real wages were up $1,400 on average last year, which means that consumers were made better off by the tariffs,”Independent BLS data shows that real average hourly and weekly earnings did rise over the 12-month period ending in mid-2025, but the percentage gain was relatively modest (around 1.0–1.4 percent depending on the measure).
THE UNITED STATES TRADE DEFICIT HAS BEEN REDUCED BY 78% BECAUSE OF THE TARIFFS BEING CHARGED TO OTHER COMPANIES AND COUNTRIES. IT WILL GO INTO POSITIVE TERRITORY DURING THIS YEAR, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MANY DECADES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!Where/who is Trump's data coming from?
The data released Thursday by the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis also provided an annual tally for 2025 of $901.5 billion. The total for 2024 was $903.5 billion.And still the fairy tale of "other companies and countries"...
White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett doesn't want us to know the real story of who is bearing the cost of tariffs...
Threatens New York Federal Reserve with punishment...
https://libertystreeteconomics.newyo...5-u-s-tariffs/
Claims the Fed study is flawed
Yet Hassett tries to make this claim of cause and effect.
Independent BLS data shows that real average hourly and weekly earnings did rise over the 12-month period ending in mid-2025, but the percentage gain was relatively modest (around 1.0–1.4 percent depending on the measure). Originally Posted by RX792P
In a recent interview with Fortune, Smetters held forth on what he said was his long-held view that broad-based tariffs are a “dirty VAT” (value-added tax)—a policy he believes is significantly more damaging to the U.S. economy than traditional tax increases.
"What word have you not heard over the last two weeks? Affordability. Because I've won. I've won affordability. I had to go out and talk about it."DOW at 50,000...well almost...
The overall yearly inflation rate in January was 2.4%, down from 2.7% in December. But food inflation was almost 3% over the past year, meaning Americans are paying more for grocery staples, while housing costs have also risen.Wow...Trump's even starting to lose Newsmax...
Job creation under Trump has also slowed substantially, and surveys show Americans are increasingly pessimistic about job prospects and job security.
Also figure out a way to combat billionaires just borrowing against their assets instead of ever having to pay capital gains taxes. Originally Posted by Turner2099I overlooked this one. Where do these ideas come from? You have to be some kind of authoritarian, radical redistributionist Social Justice Warrior hell-bent on destroying the economy to support it.
I overlooked this one. Where do these ideas come from? You have to be some kind of authoritarian, radical redistributionist Social Justice Warrior hell-bent on destroying the economy to support it.I don't believe I said billionaires borrowing against their assets was a way to avoid paying estate taxes. It's a way for them to avoid paying taxes while still alive. For example, Elan Musk's compensation is in stock and stock options rather than cash, so he pays no income, Medicare, or Social Security tax. Compensation in stock and stock options is not an uncommon tactic.
If you have built up equity in your home, and you want to use it to take out a home-improvement loan, should you not be allowed to do that?
Business owners borrow against their assets all the time. They use the proceeds to expand production, hire more workers, acquire or start up new businesses - many, many things that keep the economy growing. Why would anyone want to stop this? Do some people resent the rich so much that they would destroy the engine of capitalism, tank the economy and make everyone poorer just so they can feel less resentment? Being able to borrow against the assets you own is something that makes all of us prosperous.
And don't say you only want to stop the billionaires from doing it. You can't discriminate like that. Level playing field for all. Small businesses make small bets, big ones make bigger bets, but they all play by the same rules. It's not a loophole to avoid estate taxes. On the federal level, those taxes kick in at $13 million and thus already apply to even modest estates. Meanwhile, it's been shown in this thread that eliminating the step-up in basis would generate no more than a drop in the bucket of new federal tax revenues. But hey, if it would make Bernie, Liz and AOC feel better, we should do it anyway, right? Originally Posted by lustylad
If you have built up equity in your home, and you want to use it to take out a home-improvement loan, should you not be allowed to do that? Originally Posted by lustyladYou pay this loan back while you're alive, right? I am not aware of any terms that last until you die.
Business owners borrow against their assets all the time. They use the proceeds to expand production Originally Posted by lustyladFrom what I understand, businesses pay these loans back or are subject to losing the assets they borrowed against.
Under the "buy, borrow, die" strategy, loans are generally repaid after death by the estate or beneficiaries using proceeds from selling the inherited, highly appreciated assets. Because the assets receive a "step-up in basis" to fair market value upon death, the sale covers the debt without triggering capital gains taxes.
While the principal is repaid upon death, interest-only payments are often required during the borrower's lifetime, which can be covered by dividends or rental income.
Level playing field for all. Originally Posted by lustyladAgreed. That's my point. I don't believe you or I can use the "Buy, Borrow, Die" strategy.
Meanwhile, it's been shown in this thread that eliminating the step-up in basis would generate no more than a drop in the bucket of new federal tax revenues. Originally Posted by lustyladThat was me.
If Trump gets Warsh as Fed head and they drop interest rates 2 more times we may see DOW at 60K but remember that Main St. is rusting while Wall St. is thriving in this environment. A fake prosperity for the masses. Politicians on both sides of the aisle lining their pockets with gold & silver what could go wrong?
DOW at 50,000...well almost...
Nearly 4 in 10, or 37% of adults, have no direct or indirect stake in the stock market.
Wow...Trump's even starting to lose Newsmax...
Oh yeah, manufacturing employment has steadily dropped in the US in 2025. Originally Posted by RX792P
Already addressed that.I'm not concerned with 1957 as Americans were not allowed to own physical gold in bar or coin form. But if it was allowed gold would probably still be higher. 1973 is the better date to use when gold was still pegged at $42.22 and then became unpegged with the collapsing Bretton Woods system. In 1974 Americans were once again allowed to own physical gold.
I'll restate, anybody can exceed the normal growth of an asset if they continually watch the trends. See my paperclip comment.
To throw the $$$ into two different places and watch them, it is 4/4 that sez the one far outpaces the other.
Now, you got 3 other people to argue that with. Especially with donny tauting the market of late. Originally Posted by Precious_b
The Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) released its advance estimate for fourth quarter gross domestic product (GDP), which found the U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 1.4% in the fourth quarter, which runs from October through December.https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/...my-gdp-q4-2025
Economists surveyed by LSEG had expected the economy to grow at a 3% rate in the quarter. The fourth quarter's 1.4% growth was slower than the 4.4% GDP growth recorded in the third quarter.
Taken together with the 0.6% GDP contraction in the first quarter of 2025 and the 3.8% increase in second quarter GDP, the U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 2.25% in 2025. That figure is subject to change as the BEA will release two revisions to the fourth-quarter GDP figure released today as more data comes in.
Already addressed that.
I'll restate, anybody can exceed the normal growth of an asset if they continually watch the trends. See my paperclip comment.
To throw the $$$ into two different places and watch them, it is 4/4 that sez the one far outpaces the other. Now, you got 3 other people to argue that with. Especially with donny tauting the market of late. Originally Posted by Precious_b
I'm not concerned with 1957 as Americans were not allowed to own physical gold in bar or coin form. But if it was allowed gold would probably still be higher. 1973 is the better date to use when gold was still pegged at $42.22 and then became unpegged with the collapsing Bretton Woods system. In 1974 Americans were once again allowed to own physical gold.*sigh*
Current price of S&P 500 right now is 6909, the average price of the S&P in 1973 was $107. 6909/107 = 64X return no dividends
Current spot price of 1 oz. Gold right now is $5165 (without premium added), the pegged price of gold in 1973 was $42. 5165/42 = 122X return
Gold wins everytime. If you change the date and add in dividends it changes the numbers but that is irrelevant in the end result. Gold will be the last thing standing when the stock exchanges burn down and the currency collapses in any society. It always ends up on TOP going back to ancient Greece. America is no different than Greece or Rome but the American Empire resembles those past empires. The bad thing about living in the present is that collapse will happen at the speed of light as news travels at the speed of light.
Donald Trump is the best President America has ever had for gold. That could be interpreted as being a bad or good thing depending on how someone views it. Trump's just doing what any other President would do whether Democrat or Republican, choosing inflation (destroying the dollar) to keep the stock market looking good.
The thing that is odd is how complacent Americans seem to be when undermining a serious threat with Iran and how a potential war with Iran will impact financial markets and a society of people of whom many have their backs up against the wall. If Americans want to stock pile toilet paper in an Iranian crisis like they did during Covid it's on them. Originally Posted by CPT Savajo
