All Forum Categories
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback
All Forum Posts by: V.G Jason
V.G Jason has started 15 posts and replied 3162 times.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Quote from @Nicholas L.:
good post, concise statements! I think I agree with... some to most of it?
"everyone else needs the USA more than we need them" - I have no idea how to validate that. maybe it is true. how would you measure it?
I think the US is a more desirable place to live and do business than much of the rest of the world.
to your point 5, I do think there is a job shortage that is likely to persist... but i don't know if it's in the most exciting of fields. for example, i believe we will need hundreds of thousands or potentially even millions of home health care aides.
the people telling us that AI is going to AI everything are the people selling AI.
We assume that....but just ask around or think about it deeply. WHo else would be in the #1 position? Some people might say China....but their economy is a 'house of cards' as we hear over and over, plus a totalitarian Communist regime is not likely to be trusted, so not them. The EU? Too fragmented and diverse to be powerful enough. They can't even protect themselves without the US, hence NATO. So not them. India? Nope, lol....
It's really just us.
the people telling us that AI is going to AI everything are the people selling AI.
So true, right? And AI will always have a huge trust factor.
America is FAR from being the "trusted" person on the international stage. At least, not trusted in a good way.
Yes, I would say China and even Rusia are far more "trusted" internationally than USA.
The USA has a long history of stabbing people in the back. Or meddling in foreign nations affairs and only ever making things far worse.
Example, Iran. The Iran we have today, that USA hates, that so many hate, is all thanks to USA. Many are probably just a bit too young to remember it all. We really f'd that country up.
There is a long list of countries the USA has used, abused, and the people don't forget.
China does not have that history. Nor even Russia. USA is king-Con on the international stage.
This is why our allies don't ever even fully trust us, because they've seen us F so many others and we just say "yeah, but, were like buddies n all, we wouldn't do that to you...." until we do.
Afghanistan is another. In 80's we made so many great promises, and Osama was our operative. We trained and funded them. And then when they did the job we gave them, when they achieved all the goals, we f'd em hard. So hard, that they never forgot it. And what happened, something far worse came in and took over and there we are back again many years later to deal with a mess we could have avoided if we had just honored our promises.
And than we did it AGAIN......
If you think the world is in some love-fest with USA, that's because you havn't been out around the world. Most places in the world have a very negative perception of USA and Americans.
And fact is USA earned that. Only way to change it is to hold self accountable and stop the BS. Stop "nation building" which is code word for nation imploding given its trackrecord.
China is HUGE in Africa. There taking over and Africa is THE resources powerhouse. What's USA doing, saber rattling about making Gaza a damn resort..... wtf.....
China builds roads, hospitals, infrastructure, is taking over a continent with there smiles and gifts. USA could learn a thing or 12 from them.
We can't even keep Russia in check who is a laughing stock compared to China.
The world does not need the USA, they simply are happy to use the USA if and when it suits them. NATO, China, all great examples of this. USA is #1 at being used, because we like the ego-stroke. Europe giggles and says they'll happily let USA enjoy the ego and let them enjoy the wealth. There not dumb.
Get out there, travel the world, find out for yourself. The reality is far different than the domestic propaganda.
The world does need the USA. We're still the absolute super power, but absolutely losing the lead. If we don't buy, as the largest consumer there's a material shift in all inputs & outputs globally. Enough to cause a hard drop. We really want the world, but ideally it's why we create our own capabilities to not need them. This goes back to lowest cost versus self sustainable. I digress though.
Besides Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and maybe a few others there's not one that trusts China or Russia more than America.
America ruined Iran in the 1970s, and yes America has done some terrible stuff. That's usually the case to be the superpower.
China's infiltration of the Africa infrastructure is even more predatory, one could argue. They literally are usurping their energy, ports, etc. and if anytime thinks this is light. It's like a quiet takeover, a non hostile war.
They will proliferate and dominate one of the most resources rich continents, not country. Continent think about that. While they're already ahead of us in tech, they're literally owning via debt & equity the most valuable parts of Africa.
Making a deal with China has two outcomes--they win, or you lose.
And the world knows that.
Most of what Bruce said is true, but I will tap on the recession part. Trump can use his levers as he wishes, he can't guarantee something doesn't break. The basis in the bond market almost snapped. If the liquidation from hedge funds got crunched on that we would've seen a legitimate crash.
Like I said in another post, something will break. Where or what? I don't know. Keep playing with fire and we will get burned.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Quote from @Alan F.:
Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @Alan F.:
Quote from @Greg Miller:
Quote from @Alan F.:
Quote from @Greg Miller:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @Alan F.:
https://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_nafta01_impac...
An EPI article from 2001
Now compare the loss of those jobs to the money consumers saved and tell us whether NAFTA was better or worse over all.
Besides some effects on jobs created by competition, what metric are you using to suggest NAFTA has been overall bad? GDP in the US surged after NAFTA. Thats new business and old business becoming more successful. People tend to scream that china is stealing the manufacturing jobs which NAFTA obviously doesn't cover.
I often hear that tariffs will bring all the jobs back and it reminds me of the Piano. Once the largest industry and virtually died when the radio came in. I'm sure there were people screaming about re-opening piano factories but the world moved on. Theres no company in the world opening a new factory today, or planing a new factory today that won't be 90% robots/technology/AI. They will not be employing a substantial amount of humans.
As for housing and rents, extra costs added to labor and materials will slow construction and affordability lowering supply coming online, this will likely push both up in the mid-term, not down.
Consumer spending is included with GDP
Wouldn't it be a good thing if the next generation of semi cons, bio tech, robotics, surgical robots et al was built here in the states?
The ancillary companies, employees etc could earn a living. Believe it or not the jobs aren't really that complicated. If folks another countries can do it, why not Americans?
So similar to the CHIPS act? Incentives vs tariffs. And still, factories would be built to be efficient from the get. Highly robotic with revenue going to the top and only few highly skilled labor with substancial tax breaks going to the corporations. So if you can afford to buy shares of the companies, GREAT! But it doesn't substantially help labor jobs. The infrastructure in asia is massive and has been built for decades on low labor, and just because America would be taking jobs away from china for instance, does not mean jobs are created in any meaningful way in America.
The CHIPS act is a subsidy and actually helped increase inflation, no I'm more in favor of not incentivizing companies to off shore.
I do agree that the genie can't wholly be put back in the bottle, but at least some of the manufacturing done back here.
Automation does not eliminate as many jobs as you portray, I've automated alot of facilities.
yes I'm awaew of the pacific rims role in tech manufacturing, I've worked overseas also.
to wit, j believe the largest emerging manufacturing hub will probably be India.
As with many things in life I I believe it's not either/or but rather somewhere in the middle.
FWIW I also believe Bessents policies play a role in rooting out the inflationary environment.
India becoming more of a threat past an emerging market will make Russia and China immediately go on the offense in trade war. Netherlands would remain only trading partner that wouldn't change up on them.
Yes, they can be a viable hub but it'll need to be more than just them.
For anyone that fights America bringing back jobs--we need to control our own supply chain because we need to be self sufficient. Covid exposed our lack of capabilities. If you disagree with that, then not sure what more to say.
I don't disagree at all, I'm a huge advocate of American manufacturing, tech manufacturing has been mu livelihood n passion for decades. I'm concerned if another administration goes against, and the world will need more than us. I think India has the emerging labor force in terms of volume. I think they're still a ways out, but who knows. I think America also needs manufacturing for National security, our support systems needed in event of war are weak.
India absolutely does. The issue remains is all countries want to be that country, but only one can remain the super power of it. Ideally, there's a balance. But country politics always leave this mechanism as zero sum & never shared.
It's why I push back on the USD being replaced. If so, who? It'll never be shared. Foreign Central banks are buying up gold for that intention. I can bet that foreign nations are less amicable with one another than they are with America. That lack of understanding in general Americans is present. For that, there's no unity even if it's solely anti-American. That's not synonymous with pro Indian or pro Chinese. That fight will be an independent one.
Right now, the 10% tariffs and escalation on Chinese means Trump wants to isolate China. Their economy will have to pursue stimulus, currency devaluation, change GDP expectations, etc. This may completely change the trajectory of China. India, by default, may come up on that. But you bet China will fight India now on that.
These trade wars are going to have an indirect output of the world fighting for postioning, which will devastate them more than the US. Our issue is managing the debt & the bonds got re priced to where DJT had to flinch.
Something will break in this market of unpredictability. The basis trade or some foreign currency spread, or something else. But it'll happen.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Tariff pause for 90 days on non-retaliating countries. Apparently, that's 75 countries and the tariff in place is the 10% threshold.
China retaliated, so they got escalated.
Pause was cause of the bond market. Make no mistake about that. This blew up in DJTs face, he could careless about equities but the bond market just priced America like an underlying unstable emerging market. That's devastating for the Treasury and for our trade war negotiations. He should've come out like I proposed not kamikaze.
Underlying issues in equities market still present. New headwinds if we do get pharma tariffs, and just general unpredictability. Pretty sure this 1 day rally is a farce. I say that without increasing my short, but carrying it. Going to continue to bet 10 year will go up; Bessent can try as hard as he may. Short term will go down, but you need a moderate slow bleed to get it down. Unfortunately, our debt levels can't absorb the wait given the situation Joe Biden put us in.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Quote from @Alan F.:
Quote from @Greg Miller:
Quote from @Alan F.:
Quote from @Greg Miller:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @Alan F.:
https://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_nafta01_impac...
An EPI article from 2001
Now compare the loss of those jobs to the money consumers saved and tell us whether NAFTA was better or worse over all.
Besides some effects on jobs created by competition, what metric are you using to suggest NAFTA has been overall bad? GDP in the US surged after NAFTA. Thats new business and old business becoming more successful. People tend to scream that china is stealing the manufacturing jobs which NAFTA obviously doesn't cover.
I often hear that tariffs will bring all the jobs back and it reminds me of the Piano. Once the largest industry and virtually died when the radio came in. I'm sure there were people screaming about re-opening piano factories but the world moved on. Theres no company in the world opening a new factory today, or planing a new factory today that won't be 90% robots/technology/AI. They will not be employing a substantial amount of humans.
As for housing and rents, extra costs added to labor and materials will slow construction and affordability lowering supply coming online, this will likely push both up in the mid-term, not down.
Consumer spending is included with GDP
Wouldn't it be a good thing if the next generation of semi cons, bio tech, robotics, surgical robots et al was built here in the states?
The ancillary companies, employees etc could earn a living. Believe it or not the jobs aren't really that complicated. If folks another countries can do it, why not Americans?
So similar to the CHIPS act? Incentives vs tariffs. And still, factories would be built to be efficient from the get. Highly robotic with revenue going to the top and only few highly skilled labor with substancial tax breaks going to the corporations. So if you can afford to buy shares of the companies, GREAT! But it doesn't substantially help labor jobs. The infrastructure in asia is massive and has been built for decades on low labor, and just because America would be taking jobs away from china for instance, does not mean jobs are created in any meaningful way in America.
The CHIPS act is a subsidy and actually helped increase inflation, no I'm more in favor of not incentivizing companies to off shore.
I do agree that the genie can't wholly be put back in the bottle, but at least some of the manufacturing done back here.
Automation does not eliminate as many jobs as you portray, I've automated alot of facilities.
yes I'm awaew of the pacific rims role in tech manufacturing, I've worked overseas also.
to wit, j believe the largest emerging manufacturing hub will probably be India.
As with many things in life I I believe it's not either/or but rather somewhere in the middle.
FWIW I also believe Bessents policies play a role in rooting out the inflationary environment.
India becoming more of a threat past an emerging market will make Russia and China immediately go on the offense in trade war. Netherlands would remain only trading partner that wouldn't change up on them.
Yes, they can be a viable hub but it'll need to be more than just them.
For anyone that fights America bringing back jobs--we need to control our own supply chain because we need to be self sufficient. Covid exposed our lack of capabilities. If you disagree with that, then not sure what more to say.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @Scott Trench:
I think this is a good push. I'll give two putbacks to my prior analysis:
1) The yield curve could invert, and the market brace, for even two years, if Trump credibly brings a candidate for Fed Chair who will lower rates regardless of what inflation data reads, or the markets expect to be extremely dovish. Even if the current Fed keeps raising rates, this will result in the yield curve inverting again, in anticipation of the new Fed Chair changing things. I think that Jay Powell has thoroughly proven that he has no political allegiance, and is singularly focused on attempting to remedy the massive err made in 2021, and that he has, actually, done the least bad job by a central banker in the world from 2022 to 2025 (*hot take!).
2) If Trump removes the threat of tariffs, inflation will stop, and he can do this immediately and at any time.
This only somewhat addresses the points in your take, which I completely respect, but also respectfully disagree with.
I believe that inflation already picked up on the threat of tariffs, and it immediately changed some firm's behavior in pushing up prices for goods and materials that might be affected.
I believe that, excluding "immediate deportations" of folks who cross the border and are immediately sent back, that the impact of deportations is small, and is largely isolated to the deportation of convicted criminals in jail or prison in mostly red states. I would be willing to bet on a version of that, and will, in effect, through my real estate purchases this year.
Also - to be clear, I am not arguing that the policies will be "good" or "bad" in a more general sense for Americans. Just that I believe that they tend towards an inflationary effect on non-housing goods and services, and a slightly deflationary effect on housing by reducing demand for housing.
Trump’s economic policies will trigger a deep recession. Prices/rents will go down in real terms, and possibly nominal terms as well.
Not there, yet. But awfully close.
the correct way to emphasize tariffs was not 50% of trade indifference but shaped 10% tariffs on neutral needs, 0% on inelastic needs and 25% on elastic goods. With a slow, but emerging threat of increase if people don't come to the table to talk. Each country's three categories needed to be tapered to hit them hard. So not 25% on everything elastic. Example alcohol from France: make that 40%, make vinegar 10%.
Prior to implementation the need to create infrastructure and financial support for foreign companies to come here. Some incentive, maybe dupe them to do it by offering some variable nonsense like subprime.
We all know why they don't come here; they stay there for their jobs necessary to remain as a relevant country, for their GDP, and for their needs and protect proprietary information.
Only America goes to other countries like full blown misguided "capitalists". To me, borders on a retarded strategy. Market share is a force if you lose control of the market I digress though.
@Alan F. copper has a 90 day lock, because go check 1yr chart . I cannot post due to technology incompetence right now. It's down trend, they're betting on it going down; how you hedge is important.
"the correct way to emphasize tariffs was not 50% of trade indifference but shaped 10% tariffs on neutral needs, 0% on inelastic needs and 25% on elastic goods."
-----------------------------------------------
That's not the formula Trump used. He took the trade deficit, subtracted it from the value of the goods imported from the other country, calculated the percentage, and then divided that percentage by 2. The result was the amount of the tariff.
Any economist will tell you it is complete, total, and utter, nonsense.
Trump’s tariff scheme is economically, financially, and politically, incoherent. The worst part is that he has destroyed America’s reputation for reliability. Of all of those factors, the loss of reliability will be the most expensive. The dollar will lose its reserve currency status.
You're not reading what I'm writing. I'm stating how I would've done it versus what Trump did.
We're saying the same thing on the 50%/ divided by 2 part not my implementation versus Trump's.
Think your blind hate is distorting your reading comprehension when I'm actually agreeing with you.
Then, separately suggested how I would've done it if I was president. Just an opinion I added.
To your last point, what's going to replace USD? Before folks make such comments please go read trade wars among other countries ex-US, it's miserable. You're asking the world to depend almost entirely on China unless you have another solution, good luck with that. A bunch of sub 5 GDPs aren't going to bail out the next in trade deficits. I have an idea on what it would be.
As for loss of reserve status, that will come down to the Euro, china, and baskets of currencies tied to particular commodities, such as oil and OPEC nations.
That's such a vague way to replace the reserve. We both know that's just not pragmatic or a solution. I'm waiting to hear a genuine solution.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @Scott Trench:
I think this is a good push. I'll give two putbacks to my prior analysis:
1) The yield curve could invert, and the market brace, for even two years, if Trump credibly brings a candidate for Fed Chair who will lower rates regardless of what inflation data reads, or the markets expect to be extremely dovish. Even if the current Fed keeps raising rates, this will result in the yield curve inverting again, in anticipation of the new Fed Chair changing things. I think that Jay Powell has thoroughly proven that he has no political allegiance, and is singularly focused on attempting to remedy the massive err made in 2021, and that he has, actually, done the least bad job by a central banker in the world from 2022 to 2025 (*hot take!).
2) If Trump removes the threat of tariffs, inflation will stop, and he can do this immediately and at any time.
This only somewhat addresses the points in your take, which I completely respect, but also respectfully disagree with.
I believe that inflation already picked up on the threat of tariffs, and it immediately changed some firm's behavior in pushing up prices for goods and materials that might be affected.
I believe that, excluding "immediate deportations" of folks who cross the border and are immediately sent back, that the impact of deportations is small, and is largely isolated to the deportation of convicted criminals in jail or prison in mostly red states. I would be willing to bet on a version of that, and will, in effect, through my real estate purchases this year.
Also - to be clear, I am not arguing that the policies will be "good" or "bad" in a more general sense for Americans. Just that I believe that they tend towards an inflationary effect on non-housing goods and services, and a slightly deflationary effect on housing by reducing demand for housing.
Trump’s economic policies will trigger a deep recession. Prices/rents will go down in real terms, and possibly nominal terms as well.
Not there, yet. But awfully close.
the correct way to emphasize tariffs was not 50% of trade indifference but shaped 10% tariffs on neutral needs, 0% on inelastic needs and 25% on elastic goods. With a slow, but emerging threat of increase if people don't come to the table to talk. Each country's three categories needed to be tapered to hit them hard. So not 25% on everything elastic. Example alcohol from France: make that 40%, make vinegar 10%.
Prior to implementation the need to create infrastructure and financial support for foreign companies to come here. Some incentive, maybe dupe them to do it by offering some variable nonsense like subprime.
We all know why they don't come here; they stay there for their jobs necessary to remain as a relevant country, for their GDP, and for their needs and protect proprietary information.
Only America goes to other countries like full blown misguided "capitalists". To me, borders on a retarded strategy. Market share is a force if you lose control of the market I digress though.
@Alan F. copper has a 90 day lock, because go check 1yr chart . I cannot post due to technology incompetence right now. It's down trend, they're betting on it going down; how you hedge is important.
"the correct way to emphasize tariffs was not 50% of trade indifference but shaped 10% tariffs on neutral needs, 0% on inelastic needs and 25% on elastic goods."
-----------------------------------------------
That's not the formula Trump used. He took the trade deficit, subtracted it from the value of the goods imported from the other country, calculated the percentage, and then divided that percentage by 2. The result was the amount of the tariff.
Any economist will tell you it is complete, total, and utter, nonsense.
Trump’s tariff scheme is economically, financially, and politically, incoherent. The worst part is that he has destroyed America’s reputation for reliability. Of all of those factors, the loss of reliability will be the most expensive. The dollar will lose its reserve currency status.
You're not reading what I'm writing. I'm stating how I would've done it versus what Trump did.
We're saying the same thing on the 50%/ divided by 2 part not my implementation versus Trump's.
Think your blind hate is distorting your reading comprehension when I'm actually agreeing with you.
Then, separately suggested how I would've done it if I was president. Just an opinion I added.
To your last point, what's going to replace USD? Before folks make such comments please go read trade wars among other countries ex-US, it's miserable. You're asking the world to depend almost entirely on China unless you have another solution, good luck with that. A bunch of sub 5 GDPs aren't going to bail out the next in trade deficits. I have an idea on what it would be.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @Scott Trench:
I think this is a good push. I'll give two putbacks to my prior analysis:
1) The yield curve could invert, and the market brace, for even two years, if Trump credibly brings a candidate for Fed Chair who will lower rates regardless of what inflation data reads, or the markets expect to be extremely dovish. Even if the current Fed keeps raising rates, this will result in the yield curve inverting again, in anticipation of the new Fed Chair changing things. I think that Jay Powell has thoroughly proven that he has no political allegiance, and is singularly focused on attempting to remedy the massive err made in 2021, and that he has, actually, done the least bad job by a central banker in the world from 2022 to 2025 (*hot take!).
2) If Trump removes the threat of tariffs, inflation will stop, and he can do this immediately and at any time.
This only somewhat addresses the points in your take, which I completely respect, but also respectfully disagree with.
I believe that inflation already picked up on the threat of tariffs, and it immediately changed some firm's behavior in pushing up prices for goods and materials that might be affected.
I believe that, excluding "immediate deportations" of folks who cross the border and are immediately sent back, that the impact of deportations is small, and is largely isolated to the deportation of convicted criminals in jail or prison in mostly red states. I would be willing to bet on a version of that, and will, in effect, through my real estate purchases this year.
Also - to be clear, I am not arguing that the policies will be "good" or "bad" in a more general sense for Americans. Just that I believe that they tend towards an inflationary effect on non-housing goods and services, and a slightly deflationary effect on housing by reducing demand for housing.
Trump’s economic policies will trigger a deep recession. Prices/rents will go down in real terms, and possibly nominal terms as well.
Not there, yet. But awfully close.
the correct way to emphasize tariffs was not 50% of trade indifference but shaped 10% tariffs on neutral needs, 0% on inelastic needs and 25% on elastic goods. With a slow, but emerging threat of increase if people don't come to the table to talk. Each country's three categories needed to be tapered to hit them hard. So not 25% on everything elastic. Example alcohol from France: make that 40%, make vinegar 10%.
Prior to implementation the need to create infrastructure and financial support for foreign companies to come here. Some incentive, maybe dupe them to do it by offering some variable nonsense like subprime.
We all know why they don't come here; they stay there for their jobs necessary to remain as a relevant country, for their GDP, and for their needs and protect proprietary information.
Only America goes to other countries like full blown misguided "capitalists". To me, borders on a retarded strategy. Market share is a force if you lose control of the market I digress though.
@Alan F. copper has a 90 day lock, because go check 1yr chart . I cannot post due to technology incompetence right now. It's down trend, they're betting on it going down; how you hedge is important.
"the correct way to emphasize tariffs was not 50% of trade indifference but shaped 10% tariffs on neutral needs, 0% on inelastic needs and 25% on elastic goods."
-----------------------------------------------
That's not the formula Trump used. He took the trade deficit, subtracted it from the value of the goods imported from the other country, calculated the percentage, and then divided that percentage by 2. The result was the amount of the tariff.
Any economist will tell you it is complete, total, and utter, nonsense.
Post: Is It Time to Sell Your Columbus Home?
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
So the Columbus Cartel is shifting from the pursuit of buyers to pursuit of sellers.
This tells you everything.
Post: Trump Policies Will Put Downward Pressure on Real Estate Rents/Prices
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
Quote from @John Clark:
Quote from @Scott Trench:
I think this is a good push. I'll give two putbacks to my prior analysis:
1) The yield curve could invert, and the market brace, for even two years, if Trump credibly brings a candidate for Fed Chair who will lower rates regardless of what inflation data reads, or the markets expect to be extremely dovish. Even if the current Fed keeps raising rates, this will result in the yield curve inverting again, in anticipation of the new Fed Chair changing things. I think that Jay Powell has thoroughly proven that he has no political allegiance, and is singularly focused on attempting to remedy the massive err made in 2021, and that he has, actually, done the least bad job by a central banker in the world from 2022 to 2025 (*hot take!).
2) If Trump removes the threat of tariffs, inflation will stop, and he can do this immediately and at any time.
This only somewhat addresses the points in your take, which I completely respect, but also respectfully disagree with.
I believe that inflation already picked up on the threat of tariffs, and it immediately changed some firm's behavior in pushing up prices for goods and materials that might be affected.
I believe that, excluding "immediate deportations" of folks who cross the border and are immediately sent back, that the impact of deportations is small, and is largely isolated to the deportation of convicted criminals in jail or prison in mostly red states. I would be willing to bet on a version of that, and will, in effect, through my real estate purchases this year.
Also - to be clear, I am not arguing that the policies will be "good" or "bad" in a more general sense for Americans. Just that I believe that they tend towards an inflationary effect on non-housing goods and services, and a slightly deflationary effect on housing by reducing demand for housing.
Trump’s economic policies will trigger a deep recession. Prices/rents will go down in real terms, and possibly nominal terms as well.
Not there, yet. But awfully close.
the correct way to emphasize tariffs was not 50% of trade indifference but shaped 10% tariffs on neutral needs, 0% on inelastic needs and 25% on elastic goods. With a slow, but emerging threat of increase if people don't come to the table to talk. Each country's three categories needed to be tapered to hit them hard. So not 25% on everything elastic. Example alcohol from France: make that 40%, make vinegar 10%.
Prior to implementation the need to create infrastructure and financial support for foreign companies to come here. Some incentive, maybe dupe them to do it by offering some variable nonsense like subprime.
We all know why they don't come here; they stay there for their jobs necessary to remain as a relevant country, for their GDP, and for their needs and protect proprietary information.
Only America goes to other countries like full blown misguided "capitalists". To me, borders on a retarded strategy. Market share is a force if you lose control of the market I digress though.
@Alan F. copper has a 90 day lock, because go check 1yr chart . I cannot post due to technology incompetence right now. It's down trend, they're betting on it going down; how you hedge is important.
Post: Impact of International Travelers Cancelling US Travel
- Investor
- Posts 3,211
- Votes 3,261
I'm not sure which post to add but the thread started by @Scott Trench for some reason says it's locked or at least I am locked out. The Trump one. Not here to talk politics, just strategy. Can someone unlock it for me?
That thread is going to reveal the details that a lot of us mentioned. Think RE will face some reckoning soon, but everything else is pointing to austerity.
Our Treasury Secretary just said this past weekend.
" Wall Street has done great, it can continue doing well, but it's main street's turn. It's main street's turn. And that's what we saw yesterday."
Tell me that isn't as clear as day. We'll disagree on the long term view of BTC but James, some others in the Trumpcession view like John & Henry Clark have been spot on. Its incredible the knowledge of this board. As a retired CTA and not to toot my horn, but one of the best CTAs too--some say since George Washington--the macro views is simply off the charts. Better than institutional money or "smart" money.
Something to continue to keep an eye on is oil like i mentioned before to @Alan F. , but also copper. If it breaks any support, forget the USA recession but global will need to follow especially after this YTD rally.
I hope we don't u turn and then throw Bessent under the bus. This is the right play especially since he inherited such a disastrous situation. Shame on "smart" money running the count thinking DJT 2025 is DJT 2017. Different game. 10 year down we go as I'm seeing leveraged RE as an investor touching 6% rates. Just need the absolute value to adjust a little in non primo.
Hopefully, Main Street does get back into it.