All Things Economic

Are the current Market Closes the " soft landing" we heard about ?

“The Donald Trump thing in the market amazes me, When they’re up, it’s all because of him and looking forward to him. When they’re down, it’s all because the Democrats and how horrific they are. Yet some of our biggest point drops, three of the biggest of the top 10, occurred during his administration” “Now, a lot of those were in the COVID years, I get that, but, you know, you either own the markets or you don’t. It does confuse me.” - Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto

Well at least the portfolio reallocations are here. lol

I woke up to a flurry of emails and notifications on trades triggered by whatever algo they use.

The Shorts are cumming, the Shorts are cumming!

I would never argue for tariffs in lieu of income taxes, because there is no logical or economic argument for doing so.

My only exception to a strong bent for free markets is in response to unusual subsidies.

Wanna start a trade war?

"...pro side of the tarrifs for income taxes proposal?"

Is there any pro side other than tax revenue? I get how this helps protect our domestic markets, but it also means we don't always get the best products for the best price.

It's fair when the low price is strictly due to foreign subsidies, but if a country is making a good product for a good price without subsidies, we'll never see those products.

Just blocked him so he won't have to listen to my "lies."
Insert eye roll emoji here.

Out of curiosity, does anyone care to argue the pro side of the tarrifs for income taxes proposal?

"Currentrider said that Trump "suggested" eliminating income tax. Thats why he is a fucking lier"

I also heard that claim (Trump tariff/Federal Income Tax suggestion) before it was posted here. I hadn't heard the 85% figure that an economist opined might be necessary to achieve that. It appears to me Current was discussing the implications of imposing tariffs.

Damn, I hope this thread doesn't get moved to Politics.

I know it was a very long time ago, but it's still hard to wrap my head around paying thousands of dollars more for the used car we just got than what houses cost when I was in my late teens. Of course my income is also at least 10x more than what low paying jobs were back then. Like always, we paid cash for the car so still continue to have zero debt and more available credit than we could possibly need.

It was interesting that the high end of the Kelly Bluebook Private sale value and the NADA retail were only about $1K apart. I was also able to buy the car for a price in the middle of the the KBB Private sale range from a dealer. This dealer had very good prices for all of the vehicles we looked at there.

On the flip side, I kind of expect dealers like Carmax to have a meltdown, or at least a rude awakening. They have a ton of inventory and continue to mark up their vehicles ridiculously. It's crazy how many people do seat-of-the-pants evaluation of car values vs just looking it up. Both NADA and KBB are available for free online. I find KBB super easy to use and it will give you a good idea what a car is worth if you wanted to sell it in a private sale.

FWIW - I blocked bifem4u37. It's obvious they have a confrontational posting style. I actually enjoy differing opinions, but not when people can't be civil about it and their first defense is name calling. I left that behavior behind back in grammer school.

Let me help,you out . What Donald Trump said was he would eliminate income tax on SOCIAL SECURITY funds . Never used to pay income tax on SS till Ronald Reagan .

Bifem,

Google can be your friend too...

"Donald Trump on Thursday brought up the idea of imposing an "all tariff policy" that would ultimately enable the U.S. to get rid of the income tax, sources in a private meeting with the Republican presidential candidate told CNBC.

Trump, in the meeting with GOP lawmakers at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington, D.C., also talked about using tariffs to leverage negotiating power over bad actors, according to another source in the room.

The remarks show Trump, who championed tariffs as a foreign policy multi-tool during his first term in office, is considering a drastically more protectionist trade agenda if he defeats President Joe Biden in November.

Spokespeople for Trump's campaign did not immediately respond to CNBC's requests for comment. Trump in a Truth Social post later Thursday morning said there was "lots discussed, all positive" in the meeting, without providing any more details"

"Former President Donald Trump has proposed eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits. A few weeks after promising to eliminate taxes on tips, former President Donald Trump has unveiled a second proposal for targeted tax relief"

Currentrider said that Trump "suggested" eliminating income tax. Thats why he is a fucking lier

DBCooper wtf? We thought you might understand options but fuck no. Now here this . We did sell coverered calls on DJT but luckily we were not reined in when the stock shot up. Calls keep a perxon from making the big hits

@Bifem

What Hotluvrs asked...fuckstick.

Bifem4u: “ Currentrider you are nothing but a lying dipshit”

I’m curious about this statement. I often disagree with Currentrider, but I think that most of of what he posts is expressed as opinion.
What do you think he was lying about?

BIFEM4U

But had you done a covered call, you would have collected the premium, plus still had the position to write another call the next time the stock skyrockets.

About 11% of NPR funding comes from the federal government. The rest comes from corporations and individual donations.

NPR is government supported and claims to be non partisan. Are you suggesting that they are not. LOL

Currentrider you are nothing but a lying dipshit

DBcooper is correct. We were long on that position. We did actually sell to open a PUT which was excercised because the stock price fell. So we then held 200 shares which made some good money.We were glad to get out and do not plan to buy it again. Current pick intuitive machines ticker LUNR about 3.90 per share. Load up on it!

Idiots.. have no clue how to play Puts and Calls!

But here they are.. on SLS!

Donald Trump is suggesting that, if elected, he would eliminate income taxes. How you ask? Not clear. But he has vaguely suggested replacing them with tariffs on virtually all imports. One economist projected that this would require average tariffs of 85%.

This idea would represent a more than 100 year historical regression to the days before the 16th Amendment was passed in 1909. In those days, government revenues were predominantly comprised of alcohol and tobacco taxes and customs duties . As economic or social policy, it is also akin to the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, signed by Herbert Hoover in 1930, which created tariffs of 40-50% on a wide range (about half) of imported goods. Though Smoot-Hawley clearly did not create the depression, some economists disagree about to what extent (some even as to whether) it deepened and extended the depression. I am with the trade advocates on this one. Not surprisingly, Smoot Hawley resutled in retaliation leading to a global trade war and a collapse of international trade.

Since we are not an island, trade wise, and unlike in 1930 have a trade deficit, not a surplus, this policy would raise prices for virtually all goods in the country (arguably this was a benefit of Smoot-Hawley - to combat depression induced dis-inflation). Because everyone, regardless of income, needs food, clothing, energy, shelter, etc. , This would have a similar effect to a national sales tax or Value Added Tax (VAT). Namely that lower income people would be taxed more due to the fact that they spend proportionately more of their income on basics. While some of the arguments for VATs is discouraging consumption in favor of income, and exports in favor of imports, there is no realistic way to argue they are not "regressive" with regard to lower income people paying proportionately more, compared to "progressive" taxes like the income tax, where people with higher incomes (to a point, as TBR pointed out) pay progressively more.