They're literally shaking right now. Lol
Trump’s tariffs, cuts may well put tech in a chokehold, say analysts
It's been less than two weeks since Donald Trump returned to the White House, and the effect the administration may have on the global tech industry is still far from clear. A recent Forrester report highlights two potential economic paths under the new administration. One scenario sees import tariffs driving up costs – …
COMMENTS
-
-
-
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 04:44 GMT Jr4162
Re: Free ride
The only reason Canada has a trade surplus with the US is because of the amount of crude oil they import from Canada.
Funny thing is the other oil sources in the US are a different consistency than the Canadian imported oil. This would require expensive and time consuming modifications to their refineries.
-
-
-
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 23:57 GMT Yet Another Anonymous coward
Re: Shaking
There weren't any farming subsidies. Subsidies are socialist and unnecessary in a vibrant dynamic American economy.
it was just that China failed to pay the tariffs, as they should, and so the American government volunteered to make up for the shortfall out of the goodness of their hearts.
-
-
-
-
Friday 31st January 2025 21:48 GMT steviebuk
Re: Shaking
For you as you, assuming American, will be the one that pays the tariff. No matter how much you believe in what comes out of the orange idiots old gob, YOU will pay the tariff.
So the bullshit "I'll lower prices really quickly" isn't going to happen. It will put all prices up. The idiot bankrupted two casino.
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 07:35 GMT Fruit and Nutcase
Re: Shaking
You are somewhat behind the
Time[Truss]https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/21/truss_reg_standards/
The unit was defined around 18 Truss ago in October 2022.
She's not issued a cease and desist notice to The Register, yet.
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 03:54 GMT ReggieRegReg
Re: Shaking
Well Democrats were pretty quiet about Bidenflation, ignoring the fact that the burst in oil and gas prices were driven by Biden giving up energy independence in the US (which gave Russia an unexpected windfall). He literally turned off the taps as he turned up in office, combined with the weak/botched withdrawal from Afghanistan and the "limited incursion" comment about Ukraine. Plus the lack of action under Obama/Biden when Putin took Crimea - surprise, surprise Russia invades Ukraine. Then Biden begs the Saudi's to pump oil a couple of weeks after canning an arms deal with them, so they gave him the finger and cozied up with China instead. Three Biden-related reasons for the global energy price explosion which lead to inflation well above the fairytale indexes. Add on top of that the inflation causing "inflation busting" infrastructure bill - and a trillion dollars worth (replacement cost) of strategic oil reserves burned for reasons directly caused by Biden's geopolitics - still nothin' to see here... Trump's the problem.
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 09:21 GMT collinsl
Re: Shaking
You realise Trump planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan right? But then didn't have time to see it through (since he left it so late in his term) so he left Biden carrying the can for his bad planning? Great political move, awful for US and allied troops and the Afghani population.
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 11:19 GMT codejunky
Re: Shaking
@collinsl
"You realise Trump planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan right? But then didn't have time to see it through (since he left it so late in his term) so he left Biden carrying the can for his bad planning?"
That is very wrong. Trump planned the withdrawal, Biden campaigned on withdrawing and became President. Biden changed the withdrawal date to make his own plans and that resulted in the terrible withdrawal that left the taliban all that fancy new kit and killed soldiers and civilians
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 31st January 2025 22:48 GMT DS999
Re: Shaking
The free ride is over
Yep. It is going to cost a lot more to build a house now, with lumber prices going up 25%. Oh, you didn't realize that the US imports almost all its lumber from Canada?
You think that's going to lead to a bunch of American lumber being produced? Sorry but that's unlikely. It takes a while to grow trees, and even if Trump decides to let them log old growth forests the US owns that's not the kind of lumber anyone is going to use to build houses (except for stuff like flooring where quality lumber matters) Even if they could, they'll just pass on the costs to consumers and know the orange moron will last only four years at most. If he's still around at this time in 2029 then he's become a dictator and lumber costs will be the least of anyone's problems. The biggest problem will be the brain drain of a lot of us educated people fleeing the US, and letting the anti-science choosing winners by who kisses Trump's ass rather than merit formerly great US fall into ruin while we look at it and laugh from across an ocean.
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 21:29 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Shaking
IIRC from the last major go-around about softwood lumber ~20ish years ago there were very literally *not enough (loggable?) trees in the US* to support projected consumption by housing construction. 20 years is just barely enough to grow a tree to barely loggable size - and I can't imagine the US forestry industry just sat back and rested their chainsaws all this time.
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 01:56 GMT ReggieRegReg
Re: Shaking
The biggest damage to the US dollar as a reserve currency in the last 100 years was thanks to India (a supposed ally) China, Russia and Saudi Arabia trading oil outside the petrodollar - this would have been war in times gone by, but they knew Biden is weak and went ahead with it - Biden and his lapdog press ignored it as they expected. The president has now been set for the demise of the petrodollar.
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:29 GMT James Anderson
Re: Shaking
Given India's long history of warrior culture the USA would almost certainly suffer an embarrassing defeat in a war with India. Pakistan and China were both easily seen off in the twentieth century.
The good old British empire took control of India by subterfuge and exploiting divisions between the various small kingdoms. They were quick to appreciate the military prowess and promptly coopted the various Indian forces into the British army.
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 00:02 GMT Yet Another Anonymous coward
Re: Shaking
>The good old British empire took control of India by subterfuge
I think it would be fairer to say that Britain took control of India by accident.
"The Maharajah of X has fallen and it's threatening our market", we better send a "police" force to organise things until we can decide which prince to support.
Repeat 500 times over a century
Oh fsck we've got an Empire - now what do we do ?
-
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 09:58 GMT collinsl
Re: Shaking
Exactly - the (dis)Honourable East India Company. They were founded to trade with the East Indies in the late 1500s/early 1600s under Elizabeth I (at the time we imported our spices and silks and luxury oriental goods from the Arabs who traded directly with China) once shipping technology got juuust good enough to reliably sail around the Horn of Africa to trade directly with China (and to get back home again with the goods). India was kind of "in the way" and had loads of goods of it's own to trade (salt, cloth, spices, nuts, jewels, fine carvings, figurines etc etc). Plus we had to do it because the Portuguese and then the Dutch were doing it and we didn't want to have to buy from those filthy degenerates (or worse still the Catholics in Spain or France).
Thanks to the state of the seas and shipping technology at the time there would be roughly a yearly treasure fleet leaving the UK for India carrying goods, silver, gold etc for trade which would take 5 months or to to arrive, and would then load up with the goods collected in the manufactories and head home. Naturally these ships were a target for pirates, other nations you were at war with, and just anyone who thought they could steal your goods, so they were convoyed by the Navy (as much as possible at the time anyway) so you'd basically have one way in and one way out each year. This meant that you had to be able to support yourself locally in the 11 months the fleet wasn't there, which meant having good relations with the local rulers.
So the HEIC set up trading relationships with various Indian rulers (they weren't all Maharajahs - India at the time had a complex web of inter-depending rulers much like the Anglo-Saxon period in Europe where you had princes and sub-Kings and Kings and Overkings etc) and started establishing relationships to try and get better deals and access to local goods for trade, in competition with other Europeans who were trying to get similar deals elsewhere in India. This led to the introduction of "manufactories" which despite their name were trading posts under HEIC ownership which were also in some areas permitted to be fortified and defended by HEIC soldiers to protect them from raids by neighbouring Indian rulers who may be in conflict with the local ruler, or from Europeans who just wanted to chance their arm and nick the collected goods to put on their own fleets.
The HEIC often overplayed it's hand with local rulers, leading to conflict, which saw quite a few posts wiped out. They'd also often not be able to defend themselves against outside aggressors, again leading to loss of life and goods. They therefore worked with the local rulers to integrate themselves into the Indian system of rule - they would pay taxes to the local ruler, who in turn would pay taxes to their area ruler, who would pay taxes up the chain, and so on and so on until it got up to the Mughal Emperor. And as long as the HEIC paid their taxes, the local ruler would try and defend them, provide them troops to that end, and would allow them to own land and the people who lived on that land to work for them to make goods for trade.
As the HEIC got larger they naturally came into more conflict with local rulers who saw them as a political threat - once they owned enough land and had a large enough army they could in theory take over from the local ruler, and were thus a threat. So they mollified them, and pushed themselves gently into their courts, giving them gifts and paying respect to them and getting in return governmental posts in the local official structure, which they could then subvert internally to their own ends - as long as they kept paying the ruler then they had free range.
They also then had access increasingly to the next layer of the political structure, the area rulers, who they could start bribing and ingratiating themselves unto, and in turn could work their way into their courts. It didn't work with everyone, but it worked sufficiently that they got access to the Mughal Emperor and his court, which they then by the end of the 1700s were also working hard on subverting to their ends. By the 1820s they had effectively taken over the entire country and were running it as a massive export warehouse, with regular trade shipments to the UK, control of the military forces in India, their own Navy to protect their trade fleets, and they were expanding outside India into trade with other Asian states, notably China - they were growing Opium in India to sell illicitly to the Chinese for silver, which they then paid back to the Chinese officially for Chinese goods, since officially China didn't want any of the goods the UK had to offer, and they only accepted Silver in exchange for their products for the UK - the big interest being tea, which the Chinese guarded carefully, not letting the plants get outside the country so that it could never be grown elsewhere.
This led in the 1800s to the various Opium wars between the HEIC and China (or later the UK and China), but that's another topic in itself.
In the 1830s and 1840s the Indian populace was becoming increasingly dissatisfied with HEIC rule, leading in 1857 to a mutiny of various HEIC regiments in the country who massacred their officers and then went on to kill any Europeans they could find. The HEIC so bungled the response to this (in addition to their years of misrule) that the British Government felt they had to step in and take over and to this end nationalised all of the HEIC holdings in India, their military units, and seized most of their goods and monies as well. The HEIC continued to exist, but in limited form for a few years until it was wound up with basically nothing left.
-
-
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:23 GMT James Anderson
Re: Shaking
The petro dollar was a convent unit for trading oil. When it became less convenient and it was easier to trade in the recipients currency then they did so. Also it was an accounting fiction no actual dollars changed hands.
Are you saying that the USA has the right to designate the currency other countries trade in?
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 21:14 GMT DS999
Re: Shaking
Do you mean the US dollar's status as a reserve currency?
That can't be threatened, because it requires another currency that's better to appear. The only real competition is the yuan, but so long as it is loosely linked to the dollar by China yuan reserves are effectively dollar reserves (and vice versa, which is why China maintains that linkage)
I'm sure some cryptobro will claim that bitcoin will take over, but it fails all three requirements for a reserve currency:
1. accepted in trade almost everywhere
2. highly liquid market
3. slow/minimal fluctuations in value
The US dollar may slowly have a smaller percentage of overall foreign reserves but that's not really a problem. Even if everyone decided to dump their dollar reserves it wouldn't have nearly the impact some suggest (or hope) it would, because the overwhelming majority of US debt is held internally. For all the talk about "China has the US by the balls because if they dump their T-bills then the dollar is done" China holds about 2% of the total of T-bills, so dumping them would have little effect. Probably about the same effect as if the Fed increased interest rates when the market wasn't expecting or asking for it.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 01:16 GMT DJO
Re: Shaking
1. accepted in trade almost everywhere
2. highly liquid market
3. slow/minimal fluctuations in value
You seem to be describing the Euro, which is the second most widely held international reserve currency after the U.S. Dollar. It wouldn't take much for it to trump the Dollar. (pun very much intended).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 31st January 2025 20:43 GMT Jellied Eel
Re: That's the point
Get yo money OUT. Pull it out of the banks. Stop using their products. Stop investing in their scams.
Yep. Especially out of Forrester. This part amused me-
"The jobs most at risk from a slowdown of the green economy are in installation, maintenance, and repair; computer and mathematical occupations,"
Lots of repair work needed because 'green economy' garbage is so vulnerable to weather effects. Computer & mathematical occupations? Seriously? Other than producing countless reports trying to justify the 'green economy', it still runs into the same reality problems, like dealing with the vagueries of the weather. We knew this when we abandoned the 'Age of Sail', and even Bezos's yacht has diesel engines. Putting the money into nuclear would create far more, and more productive jobs. Neo-luddites could still spread FUD, but they'd have to use their own money to fund their lobbying.
But I think the more interesting announcement was the threats, bluster and possibly bluffs around BRICS, and potential 100% tariffs on any nation that tried to use their own currency for trade. The use & abuse of sanctions have already provided every incentive not to rely on US dominated systems, and this will almost certainly accelerate. Might cause some pain in the short term, but if the US (and EU) keep thinking that they can dictate terms, they're probably in for a rude awakening.
-
Friday 31st January 2025 20:57 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: That's the point
The banks is a good point. The Trump deregulation of financial services means that the US financial sector is accelerating towards a brick wall called Financial Crisis. It will probably look slightly different from the GFC of 2008 (and may be mostly domestic in the US instead of global because elsewhere the guardrails aren't removed) because each crisis always looks different from the last because many (but not all) people have learned from the previous financial crisis.
We have seen a US mini banking crisis with the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank in quick succession in 2023. Perhaps it will be more of those.
Or perhaps it will be chickens coming home to roost with regards to the insanely high debt levels of many US corporates and it will be big companies suddenly being squeezed to death by banks.
Or perhaps it's mortgages, again.
Or, the insurance sector struggling to insure climate disasters (insuring a house in Florida was already neigh on impossible due to climate change, I expect living in wooded areas like those on the West Coast that keep burning will no longer be insured.) and retracting from parts of the market before it topples them.
Or it's power companies squeezed till breaking point between banks and insurers.They are in the firing line because they have ageing and creaking infrastructure, have been blamed for causing some of the forest fires, and do not have the capital to lift their infrastructure into the 21th century. They are in a tight spot.
It's probably going to be at least one or two of the above within the next 24 months.
-
Friday 31st January 2025 21:57 GMT Omnipresent
Re: That's the point
All you have to do is look at his history. He has bankrupted and burned to ashes everything he has ever touched, then writes off the losses so the tax payers have to cover him. For some ridiculous reason banks have continued to give him loans (I have my guesses - evil).
What happens when you bankrupt a country and the tax payers can't cover it?
We are about to find out.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 10:10 GMT frankvw
Re: That's the point
"What happens when you bankrupt a country and the tax payers can't cover it? We are about to find out."
What will happen is what always happens:
1. The next administration will be Democrat.
2. The Dems will inherit an economy from the previous Republican administration that is on the verge of collapse.
3. For four years they will work successfully at fixing said economy. But because the mess is so great the voters will feel the pain and blame it on the incumbent Democrat administration instead of realizing that the problem actually lies with the previous Republican administration.
4. The next administration will be Republican and will set out to undo all the fixing the Dems did.
5. Rinse and repeat.
As I see it, the biggest problem the US have is the two party system. It's not quite as bad as a one party system, but not by all that much.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 15:48 GMT Omnipresent
Re: That's the point
They will print new money, and the value of the dollar collapses. Then they push trumpcoin as the new standard, backed by russian gold through institutions known for dealing with oligarchs and criminals like Deutsche Bank.
This is all spelled out for you, you have just been listening to too much putin propaganda to know right and wrong anymore.
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 16:32 GMT Omnipresent
Re: That's the point
"Inflation is a great way to melt away debts."
This is the only thing you said correct. This is why America had high interest rates through the Biden years. To pay back Trump's world breaking debt from last time.
Anyone that had any cents (intended) threw their money in a high interest savings account, and did well.
The cult is just too stupid and brainwashed to understand what was happening to them.
You can really take this back to letting Murdoch into the country. He's been a treasonous piece of shit from day one. I think he might have known that America hasn't actually executed anyone for treason since the civil war, and he would get away with it.
russian propaganda has been extremely effective on America unfortunately, and I'm beginning to think Australia is the smartest continent on the planet for ousting him, and cutting off these tech bros. The reason we have laws and regulations is because you are not smart enough to figure it out yourselves. You simply can't handle yourselves. You all think you are living in a movie or music video.
Earth needs to be renamed "monkey island".
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 20:35 GMT Omnipresent
Re: That's the point
Did 4chan or fox tell you that? I can't tell anymore.
Unfortunately for russian bots, Biden had some very smart people around him, that did some very smart things. One of the last things Biden did was hand over all the tens of billions of dollars of confiscated russian assets to Ukraine, and told them to "invest wisely". Then, he opened them up to private arms dealers right before he left.
Ohhh, I'm afraid Ukraine will be a "fully armed and operational battlestation" for quite some time.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 21:59 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: That's the point
"Biden had some very smart people around him, that did some very smart things"
Hard to be dumber than Biden... well, there were a couple.
"fully armed and operational battlestation"
Doesn't seem to be working out for them. If Biden hadn't been so weak and hadn't been surrounded by warmongers then tens of thousands of people would still be alive and Ukraine would have an intact dam and buildings without big holes in them.
-
-
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 16:15 GMT containerizer
Re: That's the point
> For some ridiculous reason banks have continued to give him loans (I have my guesses - evil).
After his string of casino bankruptcies, the banks stopped lending him money. That's why he had to go to the Russians. Eric Trump admitted this in an interview some time ago.
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 20:01 GMT Jellied Eel
Re: That's the point
The chickens will not come home to roost because they will be dead, killed by avian flu.
Nah, they'll be dead because health officials ordered them all killed, just in case they might have avian flu. And then just to be sure, dumping all the eggs as well. I've been struggling to find any decent evidence to show that avian flu can transfer to chicken to egg to human. Plus as wiki puts it-
Humans can become infected by the avian flu if they are in close contact with infected birds. Symptoms vary from mild to severe (including death), but as of December 2024 there have been no observed instances of sustained human-human transmission.
But that's the Peter.. I mean precautionary principle for you..
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 09:39 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Avian flu
'Humans can become infected by the avian flu if they are in close contact with infected birds."
You forget that bird flu is circulating in American cows now. Some 40 humans catched bird flu from dairy cows in the US.
But eradicating bird flu in poultry is important as it is deadly for the birds. A national epidemic could wipe out the industry.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 12:41 GMT Jellied Eel
Re: Avian flu
You forget that bird flu is circulating in American cows now. Some 40 humans catched bird flu from dairy cows in the US
Nope, per wiki-
A number of humans who had been in contact with cows tested positive for the virus, with mild symptoms. According to CDC, 7% of 115 dairy workers had evidence of recent infection in a study from Michigan and Colorado from June to August 2024 – half of them asymptomatic.
So per CDC, that's 8 dairy workers and 4 asymptomatic. Of course that could change, and AFAIK CDC is increasing surveillance of dairy & poultry workers to monitor. But so far it doesn't seem to be that much of a threat to humans. Especially since it's been endemic in wild birds since discovered in 1878.
But eradicating bird flu in poultry is important as it is deadly for the birds. A national epidemic could wipe out the industry.
Sure, and when detected, birds have been culled. It's whether response measures are reasonable and proportionate, because that could also wipe out the industry. Or just increase the price of eggs and egg shortages. And Panicdemic2.0 has also lead to crackdowns on raw milk which were probably unjustified, and limits Americans ability to experience real cheese. But the drug dealers have vaccines to sell. Plus most of the media attention has been around vectoring from bird->cattle->human, and glossing over cats as a vector. But suggesting culls of cats probably wouldn't be a vote winner, or that could just be another market for the drug dealers.
But on the plus side, Doctor Death, aka Fauci is no longer in charge of the NIH, and so (hopefully) the NIH is no longer sponsoring bioweapon development and illegal gain-of-function research that could make bird flu more lethal. On the downside, having seen what is possible with a pretty benign coronavirus, other labs might be looking at doing just that.. And thanks to technology, slicing, dicing and splicing DNA has never been easier. Of course the other downside is thanks to Biden's generous pardon, Fauci can't be prosecuted and jailed for his part in unleashing a WMD.
-
-
-
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 19:20 GMT ReggieRegReg
Re: That's the point
What we saw in Trump's original fourth year is already happening immediately - the globalist system kicking into action to run the anti-globalist out of office - they cannot risk Trump + two terms of Vance trying to bring production back to the west - if the west crashes and burns - so be it - the project must survive. This isn't about money - the billionaire globalists can print their own - it's about power and control. We have been fooled into giving our means of production away, so our well-being is no long the super-riches' concern - they don't need us - we have turned ourselves into useless eaters handing total control over to them.
-
-
-
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 22:57 GMT ReggieRegReg
Re: You better stop ...
Putin had better use Trump's arrival as an excuse to end the war - if his armed forces become any weaker and more stretched they'd have to start looking south. China would love its own oil reserves - and the west would stupidly sit back gleefully watching the Ruski's taking a kicking - the worst mistake we'd ever make. China + guaranteed oil supply would be the end of the west - and it will certainly be the end of the 1% who think they control China - they are the biggest threat who the CCP would take out first.
-
-
-
Friday 31st January 2025 20:41 GMT doublelayer
It does open several actions, but in general, they can all fall under the category of trade war. Tariffs are just one category of that, and you can use regulations of various types as proxy tariffs as many countries do. They can use other diplomatic levers, and Mexico probably has more of them than Canada does because they run a lot of things intended to reduce immigration to the US and that is also something the current administration cares a lot about. Even if their first move is not tariffs*, you can pretty much guarantee that the response from the US will be more tariffs. Not only are these considered by Trump to be good in their own right, they are considered punishments and the new diplomacy from the US seems to be based on doling out lots of punishments. Having no trade war would be better for all three of them, but the current US administration really likes tariffs, so a trade war is what you're going to get.
* The first move, however, will be tariffs after all. Canada and Mexico have both said this. They may be hoping that these will work as well as they did the last time. However, last time, they worked because those tariffs negatively affected politicians who supported Trump and were able to convince him to back down on some of his actions. Time will tell if that pipeline still exists and works as before.
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 16:21 GMT containerizer
As things stand, neither party has this kind of coherent discipline. They don't have the same culture of whips/party line that we do. Heck they had to get George Clooney in to get Biden to step down.
I think it's because the US is so geographically distributed. It also has had, until recently, a culture of slowing the workings of politicians and political institutions. In addition, the party's elected representatives have limited control over who gets nominated for the presidency, which is why Trump (historically a registered Democrat) was able to mount what was effectively a reverse takeover of the Republican Party. His takeover was so complete that he didn't even bother going through the motions of campaigning to be the presidential nominee.
If there is any justice, what follows will be a rout of the Republican Party which will lock them out of power for several decades. This happened in the 1930s following the Great Depression.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:48 GMT Anonymous Coward
"His takeover was so complete that he didn't even bother going through the motions of campaigning to be the presidential nominee."
You mean like the debates he wasn't invited to?
The people voted in the various primaries and voted for Trump. This is democracy in action. If they wanted someone else they could have voted for someone else.
Its not like the RNC just decided that Trump is the candidate and it doesn't matter what the party at large wanted. I mean, something like that would NEVER happen with the DNC now would it? *cough* Hillary *cough* Harris *cough*. Heaven forbid the party ruling elite just pick who they want!
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 22:08 GMT containerizer
> You mean like the debates he wasn't invited to?
No, I mean the debates he could have attended if he signed up to the conditions of the debate. Which he refused to do.
> The people voted in the various primaries and voted for Trump. This is democracy in action. If they wanted someone else they could have voted for someone else.
Thank you for explaining the concepts of democracy and the party nomination process to me, but I was already aware.
> Its not like the RNC just decided that Trump is the candidate and it doesn't matter what the party at large wanted
I didn't say the RNC decided anything. I said that Trump mounted a reverse takeover of the GOP and ended up dominating it to such an extent that he thumbed his nose at their own nomination process and still won.
> I mean, something like that would NEVER happen with the DNC now would it? *cough* Hillary *cough* Harris *cough*. Heaven forbid the party ruling elite just pick who they want!
I think you are confusing me with someone who is defending the Democrats.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 22:34 GMT Anonymous Coward
"Which he refused to do."
As they were openly hostile to him and were desperate to try and get the party at large to vote for some uniparty warmonger hack.
"Trump mounted a reverse takeover of the GOP and ended up dominating it to such an extent that he thumbed his nose at their own nomination process and still won"
You fail to understand a lot. He didn't 'dominate' the GOP. The party high ups f-ing HATE him! Look at how Moscow Mitch has done his level best to sabotage Trump. However the GOP nomination process didn't get overridden like in 2016 when Bernie got the heave-ho and HRC was put in as candidate as her best mate also ran the DNC. Trump's message resonated with the voting public and they came out to vote for him. The same public that is utterly fed up of the same old political crap that comes from every aspect of the establishment. Just look at how many votes Reform got in the UK, LePen got in France, AfD will hopefully get later this month, its a long list.
The everyday people are sick and tired of being ruled from on high by the billionaire bankster class, the life long politicians who are in their pockets and their cronies.
-
Friday 7th February 2025 14:46 GMT containerizer
OK, so we've established that you lied about Trump not being invited and now you've pivoted to the idea that the party whose nomination he sought and won was "hostile".
> Look at how Moscow Mitch has done his level best to sabotage Trump.
Yup, refused to lead his party to convict him in the Senate following his impeachment, and cleared the way for his Supreme Court picks. Sabotage takes many forms, it seems.
> The everyday people are sick and tired of being ruled from on high by the billionaire bankster class, the life long politicians who are in their pockets and their cronies.
You're defending a billionaire who appointed several other billionaires to his administration. Is it too much to ask that you are at least consistent ?
-
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 09:04 GMT Mikerahl
US achilles heel is intellectual property
The US has an achilles heel in that Canada can, if NAFTA is scrapped, nationalize virtually every US tech and pharmaceutical patent and probably most of their software copyright as well. And then use those technologies (often produced by Canadian universities in part or in whole) to sell services, copy software, produce Teslas (calling them Theslas or something like that) and all forms of medication produced in the US, without paying so much as a cent to the rights holders. It could easily devastate 10-20% of the US economy. Then there's severing US access to critical minerals from Canada. We can develop industries and sell those resources to, say, China, Korea, Japan, the Eu, etc., and cut the US access off. Finally there's water. Canada can cut a huge amount of the water the US desperately needs from the Colorado by simply "turning off the taps" (as Trump would put it), shrivelling the US Western 1/3 of the country like a dried out prune within weeks. If the US tries to seize the water, Canada simply poisons it with nuclear waste since the water flows into the US, not back from the US
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:32 GMT doublelayer
Re: US achilles heel is intellectual property
Wishful thinking will not help you. Canada will not do most of those things.
For example, nationalizing or eliminating US intellectual property. Any country can do that, but no country tends to do it successfully. If they did, the US could do the same to any Canadian IP. Companies that intend to operate in both countries, or in any other country, would be cautious about using any of that because of the inevitable legal collisions. It is really not as easy as you think to do that.
But then you step up to deliberately releasing nuclear waste. Canada is not going to do that because Canada is not evil. If they did, that would likely start a full-scale war. It might be better if they just started with war. It violates several treaties, and that would cost Canada most of its allies.
Canada has a lot of economic and diplomatic approaches available to it and we will see them used. While they will not be as instantaneously successful as your ideas, they will also not start a war where both sides will suffer significantly more than any trade war would do.
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 10:40 GMT collinsl
Re: US achilles heel is intellectual property
But then you step up to deliberately releasing nuclear waste. Canada is not going to do that because Canada is not evil.
I would direct you to Canadian behaviour in WW1 (where they were viewed as the most aggressive troops the British Empire had, and were ruthless with prisoners) and WW2, and their treatment of their first peoples until recently (taking kids away from parents and forcing them to attend indoctrination schools, the police dumping first nations people in the snow far away from towns etc).
Not saying they are all awful people who deserve to be killed or anything, but they're no angels either.
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 15:22 GMT VicMortimer
It's cute that you think the tiny-fingered ferret-wearing cheeto-faced shitgibbon actually gives a shit about immigration. He hires undocumented immigrants to staff Mar-a-Lardo.
All the blather is about creating an enemy. It's the standard fascist playbook, you pick a group and blame problems on them. Right now it's brown people and trans people, next it's "the gays".
Everything about this is about grift for billionaires. And you have to remember that billionaires don't actually need more money, it's just a way to keep score, they care about power, their new grift is power, so making the poor even poorer and creating a class of undesirables to be disposed of is just as much of an accomplishment for them as actually getting richer.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 16:09 GMT Anonymous Coward
"It's the standard fascist playbook, you pick a group and blame problems on them"
Hmm.. didn't Biden and the media blame all the problems on the far right maga extremists? Yes, yes he did, multiple times. There was that one time he was flanked by the military and the backdrop was bathed in red. They threatened 'the very foundation of our republic'.
Picked a group, blamed the problems on them. Standard playbook you say, eh?
Oh and he called them garbage. No, there was no stutter or hidden apostrophe.
Harris rallies might as well have been named the two minutes of hate.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 16:39 GMT Anonymous Coward
MAGA are a people?
"blame all the problems on the far right maga extremists?"
You mean those invading congress trying to murder the vice president and Democratic politicians were not a danger to the nation? Or a MAGA supporter invading the home of a politician and almost attempting to murder her husband is not a "danger"?
Most were recently released and proclaimed to want to murder Democrats.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:29 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: MAGA are a people?
"proclaimed to want to murder Democrats."
Utter claptrap. Every word you typed. In your fever dreams maybe. A completely unarmed group of mostly FBI and police informants on Jan 6th.
The male escort caught with Paul Pelosi was a Canadian illegal immigrant hippy with major mental health issues.
People have been caught with guns near conservative SCOTUS judges houses multiple times. Many mobs have invaded the capitol and surrounding buildings over the years, one of them lead by AOC herself. Oh and a US border patrol officer murdered by someone linked to a left wing militant group in Vermont 2 weeks ago and an man armed with petrol bombs was arrested at the Capitol this week with the intention of killing Trump cabinet members.
The radical left is by far the greatest danger to 'our democracy' but you've convinced yourself that anyone who doesn't fit your worldview is sub human and as such a fair target.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:42 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: MAGA are a people?
"The male escort caught with Paul Pelosi was a Canadian illegal immigrant hippy with major mental health issues."
Right, but you leave out a few details.
Wikipedia
"DePape had a history of mental health issues and drug abuse; before the attack, he had embraced various far-right conspiracy theories, including QAnon, Pizzagate, and Donald Trump's false claims of a stolen election in 2020. Online, he made conspiratorial, racist, sexist, and antisemitic posts, and pushed COVID-19 vaccine misinformation. His blog also contained delusional thoughts."
In short, he looks like an ordinary MAGA supporter.
For your other baseless assertions. Those invading capitol hill were tried in court so we can all read who they were and what they wanted and did. They were not much different from DePape and all are honored MAGA cult members.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:56 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: MAGA are a people?
You believe wikipedia? The guy was a complete drugged out nut job who had been completely indoctrinated by the US mainstream Democrat supporting media.
Most of the so called 'MAGA cult members' were charged with misdemeanour trespass but the Enron clause was then incorrectly applied to make it into a felony. Or for crimes like 'stealing a flag'.
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 00:03 GMT Wang Cores
Re: MAGA are a people?
Homie they're trying to track down wikipedia editors who question the international rightist party line. LOL. Israel has a right to defend itself, but a few activist editors vandalizing a wiki page isn't a reason to go inquistion on the whole operation.
https://forward.com/news/686797/heritage-foundation-wikipedia-antisemitism/
-
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 23:15 GMT Anonymous Coward
Эй, русский. Мы все смеемся над вами, потому что вы живете в условиях диктатуры, и единственный способ, которым диктатура может выжить в долгосрочной перспективе (но никогда не навсегда), — это дестабилизировать свободные страны в надежде, что граждане России не захотят свободы для себя.
Американский епископ ошибался. Толерантность – это плохо.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 09:52 GMT Anonymous Coward
translation
Google Translate says this:
Hey, Russian. We're all laughing at you because you live in a dictatorship, and the only way a dictatorship can survive in the long run (but never forever) is to destabilize free countries in the hopes that Russian citizens won't want freedom for themselves.
The American bishop was wrong. Tolerance is bad.
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 05:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
Canda & Mexico should sign a free trade deal with China....
... and the EU, plus whoever else Trump is targeting.
Then just cut off oil supply to the US and sell it to China. Thing is, US refineries, by in large, are tuned for Canadian crud oil, not even US crud, which mostly gets exported.....
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 11:15 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Canda & Mexico should sign a free trade deal with China....
Putin et al. switched the Russian economy from industry to raw materials. The reason was that it is much easier to steal income from exporting fossil oil and gas than from industrial products.
And steal they did over the years. Estimates are around $1T stolen for a GDP of less than $2T. (Pre war).
That kind of money is what the bankrupter of casino's is after. And fossil fuels are the best road to that kind of loot.
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 14:05 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Canda & Mexico should sign a free trade deal with China....
"Nobody wants to buy Russian standard garbage, not even Russians."
Maybe, we'll never know. Poland went the industrial route and that went well. Reportedly, Putin et al. were afraid an industrial workforce might form a political force that would demand wages and industry is much less easy to loot.
Oil can be pumped up by foreigners (as it is), who will also invest the money to do so, and the income from exporting it can be routed directly into foreign bank accounts.
An easy choice.
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 21:38 GMT CowHorseFrog
Re: Canda & Mexico should sign a free trade deal with China....
Putin didnt switch industry to raw, the problem was nobody wanted to buy Russian made goods.
How many Russian ladas do you see driving around the world, at best maybe a few dozen here and there. When you manu thousands and millions, you cant survive by selling a few to collectors around the world. Even Russians stopped buying Ladas.
-
-
-
-
Friday 31st January 2025 21:01 GMT Anonymous Coward
Europe-US trade imbalance
When it comes to tech I'd say tech services is going to be the most interesting to watch. Europe sells far more goods (not just tech, also food, clothing, cars, aeroplanes, helicopters etc. etc.) to the US than vice versa. The US sells far more tech services to Europe than vice versa.
That means that if the US throws up trade barriers for European goods then a potential retaliation could be barriers for US tech services. For quite a lot of US tech companies Europe is their largest or second largest market. That could hurt.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 09:30 GMT abend0c4
Re: Europe-US trade imbalance
European governments seem largely to be trying to avoid confrontation at present. To my mind, that's a mistake, because confrontation is what Trump wants and he'll simply escalate until he achieves it.
However, Europe's dependence on US technical services is probably almost as big as problem as its dependence on US defence support in the event of US hostility. All these things take time, but ultimately Europe is going to have to on-shore its tech services as well as developing its military capability. That won't help US businesses and it might not even do much to reduce US defence spending - if European allies stop buying US weaponry.
But the full effect won't be seen until long after Trump is gone and, like Brexit, noone will admit to having voted for it to happen.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 17:05 GMT Doctor Syntax
Re: Europe-US trade imbalance
"All these things take time, but ultimately Europe is going to have to on-shore its tech services "
Building up tech services is likely to happen much more quickly than building up manufacturing, especially if the manufacturing has to be bootstrapped as a result of shooting oneself in the foot with tariffs (pauses to fret over mixed metaphor). Building up tech services will be even easier if there's a glut of H/W because of the footgun.
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 10:47 GMT collinsl
Re: Europe-US trade imbalance
European governments seem largely to be trying to avoid confrontation at present. To my mind, that's a mistake, because confrontation is what Trump wants and he'll simply escalate until he achieves it.
That's because the EU (which is in charge of trade and tariffs etc) moves at the speed of a sloth on sleeping pills smothered in sticky strips. Don't mistake lethargy for indecision or acceptance.
-
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 11:20 GMT collinsl
Well as they keep telling the UK government whenever they ask the tech companies to remove CSAM from their platforms "they are just providing a platform, they're not curators or editors".
So it must have been the general public putting that information on the platform - I wonder why they'd say such things? Oh, I dunno, perhaps because they're true?
-
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 11:23 GMT collinsl
Re: The bigliest tariffs, the best tariffs, people love my tariffs
Right, but who pays those taxes? The people in the EU who have imported said goods. Trump seems to think that magically this ERS department will be able to collect taxes from the country doing the sending, rather than the person who ultimately buys the thing having to pay for the entire cost of the thing plus markups along the way.
-
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 13:56 GMT An_Old_Dog
I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
... what is this bullshit?
The other involves spending cuts driven by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, which aims to reduce oversight and deregulate industries; Forrester suggests this could slow economic growth
Business suffers without government oversight and regulation? Really?
Forrester also suggests grey aliens could pop out of my ass, but I wouldn't lay any bets on that happening.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 14:15 GMT Claude Yeller
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
"Business suffers without government oversight and regulation? Really?"
No, industry suffers from reduced government spending. Basic macro economics tells us that contracted spending causes the economy to contract.
As taxes for the not-wealthy will not be reduced by an equal amount, consumers will not increase their spending enough to compensate the reduction in government spending.
So, tariffs raise prices and budget cuts reduce consumption and demand. There is no internal production to increase to compete with the imported goods, and new production capacity cannot be build fast.
In economic terms, Chavez II.
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 18:36 GMT John Smith 19
"Which is why it's so deeply stupid that Venezuelan immigrants listening to his bullshit"
Indeed.
Folks on welfare were another group demonstrating that in fact (human) turkeys do vote for their own Christmas. *
Mid-terms in < 24 months.
*"We love the uneducated," is quite true. However the women and Muslim votes make way less sense.
-
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 12:05 GMT collinsl
Re: "Which is why it's so deeply stupid that Venezuelan immigrants listening to his bullshit"
So you'd rather the US Govt takes the welfare away from them so they have nothing, rather than them being given a helping hand towards gainful employment of their own? Or those who can't work just have nothing?
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 21:46 GMT Doctor Syntax
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
"There is no internal production to increase to compete with the imported goods, and new production capacity cannot be build fast."
From their own point of view internal producers won't need to add new capacity. It's far cheaper to simply take advantage of the tariffs on incoming goods and raise their own prices to match. Increased income with no outlay.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 15:07 GMT John Smith 19
"take advantage of the tariffs on incoming goods and raise their own prices"
Which AIUI was exactly what happened in Clown Show 1 with tariffs on washers, but not (for some reason) dryers.
BTW a little know element was a system whereby companies could ask not to have tariffs placed on them.
It turned out Republican donor companies were substantially more successful in this "appeals" process than others. Wheather they passed on those savings to the customers is another matter.
Public costs. Private profits.
Remember all you AC's who voted for the FOCF this is exactly what you voted for. A bit like these guys
Now let's see what happens to the price of groceries and mass deportations you were all sooooo keen on.
-
-
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 04:01 GMT Ianab
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
Most of the $$ spent by a Govt circulates back into the economy, it doesn't just vanish. It pays wages / rent / supplies / contractors etc, and so goes to support other areas of the economy, and much of it then comes back in various taxes.
While I'm sure there is some waste in the Govt that can be trimmed, but wholesale slashing of spending WILL affect the general economy in some way.
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 12:12 GMT willyslick
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
Indeed, income from tariffs will flow from the affected companies to the US government, with the US consumers paying higher prices which will get passed on to them due to the tariffs.
So this looks to me like just another redistribution of the welath towards the oligarchs.
With this in mind, its seems clear why Trump is such a fan of tariffs - that he will sink to any depths to grovel for a few more dollars in his pocket is certainly readily apparent to anyone following his career.
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 03:24 GMT Paul Hovnanian
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
"but wholesale slashing of spending WILL affect the general economy in some way."
True. There will be pain. But that's true of many fiscal and monetary policy changes. Raise the interest rates? People with debt scream and unemployment goes up. But sometimes one has to endure some pain to get from where you are to where you want to be.
Trump and his ilk want less government spending and interference in business and individuals lives. They also want the rest of the world to stand on its own two feet, build up their militaries and not depend on the USA as world cop to fix everything. Look at where he wants to be from where we are now and figure out his moves from there.
-
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 10:29 GMT Richard 12
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
Business only exists at all because of Government oversight and regulation.
Think about it. Who enforces contracts?
Who defines what the words on those contracts actually mean? Things like "deliver one tonne of class A coffee beans by next Thursday" rely on the Government regulating what "tonne", "Thursday", "class A", and even "coffee beans" means.
Additives, fillers and the like.
Take it away and your morning coffee has rather a lot more sawdust and cockroaches in it.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 11:13 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
Oh sweet child! Trade like this has been taking place outside of government control for millennia. I get the feeling you are one of those who needed instructions on how to wash your hands in 2020.
What we have now is a bloated bureaucracy where the makers of tasteless choice got their lobbyist to 'convince' the govt to change the regs for class A coffee so that it can now include 5% cockroaches and still be class A.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 15:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
"Trade like this has been taking place outside of government control for millennia."
Without a government markets are ruled by might is right. There are no free markets without a governing body.
Without a governing body that enforces free trade, trade requires armed protection and becomes very expensive.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 15:18 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
"Without a governing body that enforces free trade, trade requires armed protection and becomes very expensive."
Just what in the <dang I can't even come up with an expletive to describe how stupid this is> do you think a government is then?
The government IS the armed protection and it is INCREDIBLY expensive.
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 15:46 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
>"government IS the armed protection"
Yep, and free trade becomes a common good.
>"and it is INCREDIBLY expensive."
Cost benefit analysis. Governments are incredibly expensive and incredibly profitable. Non governments are expensive and unprofitable.
There have been and still are regions without anything resembling a government. They were and are invariably dirt poor and spectacularly unsafe.
-
-
-
Tuesday 4th February 2025 21:07 GMT Richard 12
Re: I'm Not a Fan of Tariffs, But
Oh you utter fool.
Trade has been regulated and facilitated by governments since before the dawn of recorded history. The regions with functioning government have been orders of magnitude wealthier than those without since before records began.
We can tell because we've found their stuff.
By the way, Ea-nāṣir would like a word about their copper ingots.
-
-
-
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 15:13 GMT F. Frederick Skitty
"The new administration will force companies to build chips domestically through the imposition of tariffs".
Wow, are Forrester really that crap at their job? Those fabs would take more than a decade and billions to build, even then they will have terrible yields for a long time since that's the nature of such facilities.
Trump's going to be long out of office and long dead before that would happen. So the US tech firms will sit out the next four years or move abroad instead, since why would they invest in US fabs that are never going to be able to compete with the likes of TSMC on quality or cost?
Then there's the problem of the lithographic tools such fabs depend on, all patented and made in a European Union that will see a great opportunity to screw the Yanks by banning their export to the US or only after adding eye watering export taxes to them.
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 16:31 GMT Boris the Cockroach
One thing
Canada could do is to raise the price of the power it supplies to the US.
Eg Canadian goods get a 25% tariff and a resulting drop in demand, so puts the electricity price up by 25% per megawatt to pay for the losses.
So all those northern swing states that voted for trump suddenly find their electrickery 25% more expensive.... (along with a host of other stuff...)
-
Saturday 1st February 2025 18:41 GMT John Smith 19
There are the "Non-tariff" barriers as well.
Back in the day France didn't like the number of video recorders furriers were shipping them.
So (IIRC) the required that all VCR's come through a single entry port.
Likewise Canada and Mexico could require significantly more details on where their products are going (if they are going to the US).
Both could then say "But we are not raising tariffs in retaliation as this is petty and small-minded"
But the supply chain (to the US only) still slows down to a crawl.
-
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 18:17 GMT John Smith 19
"And will be gone in four years anyway."
We hope he's gone in 4 years.
But already one of his toadies has floated a bill to make the Presidency 3 terms. And the rats nest that is Project 2025 will no doubt come up with all sorts of options for him to delay the process.
His diet should have given him a massive stroke/heart attack/diabetic coma decades ago but the FOCF remains, like some giant unflushible orange turd that simply won't go round the U bend of life.
*Someone who tried his "diet" for a week reckoned they put on 10lb.
-
-
Sunday 2nd February 2025 23:00 GMT ReggieRegReg
Trump is doing what he promised – putting US citizens first. These tariffs are not all about money – it’s about forcing countries to sort out borders, people smuggling, drug trafficking. Trump is saying enough is enough, stop abusing us or we’ll fight back. It’s also to change the behaviour of US companies. The tariffs on Mexico are not only drug and people trafficking related – its to stop what’s left of “Made in America” being pushed across the border it’s also become a proxy route for Chinese goods to escape tariffs by being assembled in Mexico.
Tariffs are vital whether you like it or not – you simply cannot compete with a country of a billion+ people happy to work for $5 per day – the western advantage was industry and tech – now the rich have given our secrets away for short term personal profit - how can the west compete? You have to hit the cheap labour countries with tariffs to give your industries any chance of survival. It’s that simple – or it become a living-standard race to the bottom.
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 03:33 GMT Paul Hovnanian
"Like Canada?"
We are currently having a bit of a spat over soft wood lumber. So the high tariffs could be a part of this. Also, the rather liberal Canadian government hasn't been a particular friend of the US right. And seeing as how it's about to tip over, if it does and some concessions on wood products follow, that could easily bring the rates down. And make a more center right government look like heros.
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 05:02 GMT Grunchy
“These tariffs are not all about money – it’s about forcing countries to sort out borders, people smuggling, drug trafficking. Trump is saying enough is enough, stop abusing us or we’ll fight back.”
I don’t mind the higher border security. We need WAY better drone technology anyway, you should see how they’re fighting modern war in Ukraine. I can see China put together 10e6 drones with explosive caps and send them off to “clear out” Vancouver, for instance. If you’ve ever seen one of those drone swarm shows at night, just imagine if each one had a firework rocket, except instead of a firework it’s a grenade, and they use one of those human ID algorithms, except they tell the drone to fly briskly toward the faces they find.
So, sure, time to upgrade our drone technology.
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 17:12 GMT Omnipresent
Re: King Frumpy
LMAO! Canada called his bluff and Mexico threatened to do the same, and king frumpy folded like a cheap lawn chair.
Said he's not going to tariff Mexico for now. This is how you deal with a bully. You punch back.
threaten their money and they all cower and tremble in a cold sweat. Bunch of bussy boys thinking they run the world.
-
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 08:48 GMT Omnipresent
Re: Putin said to do it
Impeachment is just a badge of honor for these felons. There are no consequences. It's another waste of money.
He's been impeached multiple times, then got elected emperor. It's a pointless waste. You are going to have to take their money away. That is how putin bestows power.
-
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 11:14 GMT codejunky
Hmm
"The other involves spending cuts driven by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, which aims to reduce oversight and deregulate industries; Forrester suggests this could slow economic growth"
If it is economic growth from the gov borrowing to spend then its not real growth. The gov will run out of borrowing capacity at some point (I am in the UK, we are watching the problems with our current government). Real economic growth is what pays the tax and increases confidence that the gov can borrow more. Less oversight and regulation frees up the private sector to do more.
"Trump moved quickly to scrap Biden-era orders promoting electric vehicles, EV infrastructure, alternative energy and other elements of the so-called Green New Deal.
The elimination of things like permits for wind energy projects and promotion of domestic fossil fuel production will slow the adoption of clean energy, EVs, solar panels and batteries"
And we look in envy as our idiots carry on wrecking our energy sector and pushing EV's.
The only real problem I can see here is the tariffs which make things more expensive for the US.
-
Monday 3rd February 2025 12:37 GMT Anonymous Coward
Garbage in, Garbage out
This is what the consumer gets when they vote in a malignant narcissist that claims be be a business expert, but history tells you he isn't.
I know some will argue that he's bounced back X times, but it's one thing to burn your business by bad decisions, but to burn your countries economy is quite another.
Nobody in the Orange circle dares to contradict him, they would be off the gravy train inside the day.
He seems to be running a slash and burn strategy. Letting Elon run riot with the DOGE team , hunting down agents that worked on the Jan 6th investigation, and it is clear that a revenge mission is his only goal.
I'm not Canadian, but it would be a shame if someone accidentally flipped a switch on energy conduits and nobody noticed for....oooh, a month ?
Lets see his pips squeak then.