Donald I, emperor of the world.

[Ian H]

Going through the Red Sea is already problematic and could get worse.
Having to go around South Africa isn’t pleasant and adds a lot of time.

Those people at Star Trek need to upsize their teleporter thingies to cope with goods.

 

[Badger_Boom]

"Common sense". Very good.

He's either trolling or fundamentally doesn't understand economics.

I suspect he knows plenty about the economics of clickbait and is doing very well thank you very much. If only we could all be as good at leveraging our 'influence'.

 

[Ian H]

I suspect he knows plenty about the economics of clickbait and is doing very well thank you very much. If only we could all be as good at leveraging our 'influence'.

Economics isn't an exact science: 63.25% of it is about human psychology.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Imagine if you were retiring this week and lost 10%of your pot over night.
Such a pointless economic crash.

Hopefully they have already done a proper crash test to ensure their plans are solid, and rejigged portfolios to reflect their plans.
But yes, it will be pretty sh!t for them, especially as you say, that it is so unnecessary.
Markets hate uncertainty, and almost everything the Tangoed Tw@t has done since he came to office has added uncertainty.
but do remember that 2024 was a pretty good year on the markets.

 

[C R]

Going through the Red Sea is already problematic and could get worse.
Having to go around South Africa isn’t pleasant and adds a lot of time.

I was pointing out that to some extent closing the Panama Canal is like trying to plug a leaking dam with your finger. China has alternatives, including a Canal through Nicaragua.

 

[Pblakeney]

I was pointing out that to some extent closing the Panama Canal is like trying to plug a leaking dam with your finger. China has alternatives, including a Canal through Nicaragua.

Shhhh. 😉

 

[Pblakeney]

Imagine if you were retiring this week and lost 10%of your pot over night.
Such a pointless economic crash.

I'd urge anyone of a nervous disposition to not look at their pension pot.

 

[First Aspect]

I'm awaiting for our resident economic expert to counter the above link. Then I have both sides of the USA strategy

Tarriff revenue is paid by you, not us. The fed govt doesn't get any revenue if companies work around tariffs and manufacture in the US. It takes years from a standing start to do so. The two aims are fundamentally incompatible. If companies manufacture in the US, you will get massive inflation to accommodate manufacturing costs. If they don't you will get inflation due to tariffs. The US is the biggest economy, but only just. The EU and China are very close now. The US is at economic war with everyone and saying there is no negotiation. If you guys aren't negotiating, everyone else will negotiate with each other, including the other absolutely huge trade blocs. The long term result will be less power for the US, which is the opposite of the intended aims. Basically, the US is cashing in all its chips at once. You can't do this twice, and it won't work the first time. Dumb on every level.

 

[Stevo 666]

I'm not sure how valid a comparison that is but yeah - who gives a sh!t what the electorate wants? Bloody democracy (such as it is with the UK's corrupt & functionless electoral system), getting in the way of grifting, lying politicians & their obscenely wealthy owners!

I'm just being realistic.

What do you propose to do about the 'problem'?

 

[Stevo 666]

Which competitive advantage will only last as long as Starmer keeps sucking up to Trump, or Trump has had his State Visit if he is unhappy with his welcome.

Other than a*se-licking the UK doesn't have a competitive advantage, but if that floats your boat...

If you don't think that (other things being equal), a 10% lower price for equivalent goods isn't a competitive advantage then maybe go read a book on basic economics.

I don't think anybody wants to be in the current situation with tariffs, but best to make the most of the hand we've been dealt, no?

 

[Psamathe]

Unrelated to tariffs and reported but not with massive coverage

A judge in the United Kingdom has ordered President Trump to pay more than $820,000 in legal fees to the company representing former British spy Christopher Steele after he unsuccessfully sued over a dossier.
...
Judge Jason Rowley said Trump now must pay more than $820,000 with interest accruing daily at 12 percent, the AP reported.
(from https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5230710-trump-legal-fees-steele-dossier-lawsuit/)

Not only the amount but given Trump failed to pay an interim award, 12% interest daily seems significant. Wonder if he'll pay-up of if we'll be seeing bailiffs seeking out Trump assets in the UK.

Ian

 

[AuroraSaab]

Here's a quote from the Economist magazine.

Perhaps America’s courts will try to undo some of the madness.The legal basis of the president’s “emergency” tariffs is questionable.

On what grounds could a court act to change an elected government's economic policies?Biden also increased tariffs - 100% on electric cars from China for example - and tariff setting, reckless or not, has never been considered beyond the scope of a government's mandate as far as I recall.

 

[First Aspect]

If you don't think that (other things being equal), a 10% lower price for equivalent goods isn't a competitive advantage then maybe go read a book on basic economics.

I don't think anybody wants to be in the current situation with tariffs, but best to make the most of the hand we've been dealt, no?

I don't know why people are struggling so much with this. The UK is being a bit Swiss for once.

 

[Stevo 666]

I'd urge anyone of a nervous disposition to not look at their pension pot.

I'm taking a long term view...not that there's a lot of choice anyway.

My US opposite number was crying into his beer on Friday as he is (was) a fair bit closer to retiring.

 

[Stevo 666]

I don't know why people are struggling so much with this. The UK is being a bit Swiss for once.

I suspect that some are not looking at it from a rational economics/business standpoint.