Posted on 04/05/2025 3:42:20 AM PDT by RandFan
That is how I look at it. Perfect way of explaining it.
How long do people think we were going to last if we keep the status quo?
The Republic was on its way out.
Rand shouldn’t fret it. If what Trump is doing doesn’t work, we can elect democrats and the communism they were installing should fix it. /s
Rand Paul is just another John McCain. They thrive on the attention of being a “Maverick.”
Trummp’s going to dismantle the globalilists, who think redistributing America’s wealth abroad is a good thing.
It’s so simple. Manufacturing is the key to everything and foreign nations, mostly corrupt with cheap labor rape us and we have allowed it.
The problem Trump faces will be labor unions that make labor expensive here. Hopefully, he can do something about that and then America is reset.
Paul is a fool.....trying to match Trump in this area. Go back to operating on eyes. Let the big boys deal with geopolitics and geo industrial power and all is at stake.
All over the F’n bourbon.
What a piece of sh!t.
A short little 💩 at that.
+
We're supposed to forget that the Federal Reserve raised rates in the late 1920s. We're supposed to forget that the press made out like Republican Hoover was messing up the stock market and bank system (the bank scare). We're supposed to forget that 1930 had a severe drought. We're also supposed to forget that many investors invested with credit (borrowing money to invest) and couldn't handle an otherwise modest downturn for a few years. We're also supposed to forget that before Smoot-Tawley, European countries had sky high tariffs on American products. Last but not least, we're supposed to forget that Europe in between the wars had overproduction of agriculture (their food prices were too low to support their farmers) and, thus, Europe had trouble paying back their loans to American banks.
All of that before FDR came into power and entrenched the depression into the Great Depression by punishing businesses and successful people.
Rand needs a course in The Art of the Deal.
Bourbon.
Its nasty crap.
Last time I had a drink I threw up. Can’t stand the smell.
Rand can shove a bottle up his rear and light it off.
what a sell out
I generally like Rand Paul, as much as you can like someone who may not be a thief himself, but tolerates the many thieves in Congress while pretending to revere the Constitution.
Ok, taking this at face value, what is your plan Rand? Sure it’s messy right now, but if this tariff move doesn’t work (I have no idea if it will or not) what next? Keep printing? That’s what all your buddies in Congress want - it fills their pockets with literal and/or defacto bribes. No, that won’t work. How about an outright default on our debt? Would that be better?
We may end up doing that anyway, regardless of how the tariff gambit turns out. Is that what you want?
So Rand, old pal, are you getting bribed with the rest of ‘em? Where do you think that money comes from? You are the most likely to understand this out of all of the thieves in Congress. What’s your plan?
Based on what I’ve read any product subject to the USMCA is exempt from this round of tariffs so cars assembled in the US with parts from Canada or Mexico will not be subject to additional tariffs
Libertarian doctrine too often take a leap away from common sense. Trump taking down the corrupt globalist order that has sapped our economic and moral strength is the only thing that has started to make any sense in decades.
100%
It’s as if there’s this global evil cabal fomenting fear and doom about Trump’s tariffs. All the Marxists around the globe are suddenly banding together to oppose Trump. These are primarily reciprocal tariffs. Why don’t they ever mention tariffs that have been targeted against Americans for the last 30 years?
Why even the super wealthy Wall Streeters are having their power clipped and are throwing a fit.
Look, I’ve already lost plenty in the market but I also just put a lot of money (for me) into investments because I totally believe this doomsday fear is temporary and the short-term pain is well worth smashing the evil Deep State and evil globalists.
The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Hid Dad was a grifter; why not him. Rumor here on FR when Ron was in the senate said Old Ron Paul would find a bill going through congress he KNEW would pass and become law. Then he’d write up a ton of pork for his own district and attach it to that bill. He’d then vote against the bill, knowing it would pass anyhow. Then if anyone complained about pork he’d boast that he’d voted against it.
+++++++++++
1000% correct. In virtually every walk of life. Once again I will use my neighbors as an example. Most of them are yuppies / school teacher types. These people are afraid to clean their own gutters or do yard work.
Whenever someone has an unusual problem, my doorbell rings. Flat tire on car bicycle - I have the compressor and the floor jack. Battery dead needs car started. Gar door opener doesn't work. Water pipe broken, water in house needs to be shut off. Tree fallen over that needs to be chain sawed. Etc. etc.
I say none of this to toot my own horn. I am the guy (country) that makes things and knows how things work. It is a very valuable resource.
Buy American. You won’t notice.
Not made here? That means we are paying someone not to work, or to work for government at a stay at home job.
What does all that welfare mean: fake economy, fake prosperity, huge government deficits, useless currency, reliance on other nations-especially in times of war, DRUGS, CRIME, and hard working Americans taxed to oblivion.
Then throw in that all that government controlled money is being used to: subvert the constitution, subvert basic rights, support marginal groups that divide us, create an entire class of rich people who creation is stealing from the poor via NGO’s and skimming. Loss of freedom of the press as they become dependent on government money. Then, a government of the government, by the government, and for the government is what you get.
So Rand, since you were ineffective controlling Joe Biden and Barack Obama spending sprees, or Clinton’s destruction of Glass-Steagall, that has led to these dire times, maybe get on board. What we have now isn’t really a Republic when the Democrats can call CNN to cover a remote political rally of a Republican, which they hardly ever do, while they try to murder a Presidential candidate, to get great video.
Maybe some Americas are willing to sacrifice for a Constitutional Republic. Bring the manufacturing home. Get people employed outside fake government jobs. Let’s build some things. Let’s create the next revolution in manufacturing, even with robots, right here. Let’s support our manufactures, and our non-government Unions, before we are just another 1900-2000 Argentina.
Controlling ‘people’ and removing their Freedoms isn’t the answer, controlling manufacturing is.
Where was Rand Paul’s concern when American jobs were being shipped overseas for over 30 years? The American worker was sold out from the first Bush administration to the end of Obama’s term. I never heard Rand Paul or a Democrat say anything about the selling out of the American worker. They had decades to do something but they did nothing to help or change the gutting of manufacturing jobs in America. Instead of stabbing Trump in the back he should get on board and help the president get this big deal done.
He needs to STFU
I with Rand on this one ! As a retiree who just lost 10% of my future , these goofy tariffs are no joke!
During one of the 2016 Republican debates, the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Stassel challenged Donald Trump on the projected revenue from his proposed tax plan. In essence Stassel claimed some economists doubted the growth factor Mr. Trump projects in his tax proposal.
What was highlighted within the question was one of the larger hurdles Trump faced as he needs to re-educate an entire generation on a fundamentally new vision of the U.S. economy. A return to a goods-based manufacturing and industry driven economic model.
President Trump’s MAGAnomic trade and foreign policy agenda is jaw-dropping in scale, scope and consequence. There are multiple simultaneous aspects to each policy objective; they have been outlined for a long time.
Interestingly, many people have forgotten a 1991 (35 years old) video of Donald Trump testifying before congress – as evidence of him being tuned in to the economic consequences of political activity.
The entire video is well worth watching, because it gives us insight into a very specific moment in time as they discuss the ‘Reagan era’ 1986 tax reform act.
However, for the sake of this discussion post, I would like to draw your attention to a very specific exchange between Donald Trump and Representative Helen Delich Bently (R-MD).
Representative Bently takes the discussion a little off subject from real-estate and engages Mr. Trump on U.S. manufacturing. Remember, this is 1991.
(The video is prompted to @39:24). Watch – it’s only about two minutes:
Donald Trump on Economic Recovery (1991)
[Related Note – During Donald Trump’s testimony before congress in this video, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz were approximately 20 years old. This understanding sets the backdrop for a generation who were disconnected from the previous economic model being discussed within the congressional committee itself.]
In this 1991 hearing, Representative Helen Bently is pointing out an ongoing erosion of U.S. manufacturing. Notice how she references current trade deals and “fair trade” versus “free trade”, sound familiar? It should.
What you will find in all of Donald Trump’s positions, is a paradigm shift he necessarily understands must take place in order to accomplish the long-term goals for the U.S. citizen/worker as it relates to “entitlements” or “structural benefits”.
All other politicians, and even Presidents, begin their policy proposals with a fundamentally divergent perception of the U.S. economy. They are working with, and retaining the outlook of, a U.S. economy based on “services”; a service-based economic model. Consequently, their forecasted economic growth projections are based on ever-increasing foreign manufacturing dependency, and a self-fulfilling prophecy of service-based economics.
While this economic path has been created by decades old U.S. policy and is ultimately the only historical economic path now taught in school, Trump intends to change the course entirely.
Because so many shifts -policy nudges- have taken place in the past several decades, few academics and even fewer MSM observers, are able to understand how to get off this path and chart a better course.
President Trump continually proposed less dependence on foreign companies for cheap goods (the cornerstone of a service economy) and a return to a more balanced U.S. larger economic model, where the manufacturing and production base can be re-established and competitive based on American entrepreneurship and innovation.
No other economy in the world innovates like the U.S.A. President Trump sees this as a key advantage across all industry – including manufacturing.
The benefit of cheap overseas labor, which is considered a global market disadvantage for the U.S, is offset by utilizing innovation and energy independence.
Watch How Treasury Secretary Bessent Wins Over A Skeptical CNN Reporter.
The third highest variable cost of goods beyond raw materials first, labor second, is energy. If the U.S. energy sector is unleashed -and fully developed- the manufacturing price of any given product will allow for global trade competition even with higher U.S. wage prices.
In addition, the U.S. has a key strategic advantage with raw manufacturing materials such as: iron ore, coal, steel, precious metals and vast mineral assets which are needed in most new modern era manufacturing. Trump proposes we stop selling these valuable national assets to countries we compete against – they belong to the American people; they should be used for the benefit of American citizens. Period.
EXAMPLE: China was buying and recycling our heavy (steel) and light (aluminum) metal products (for pennies on the original manufacturing dollar) and then using those metals to reproduce manufactured goods for sale back to the U.S.
Donald Trump proposed we do the manufacturing ourselves with the utilization of our own resources; and we use the leverage from any sales of these raw materials in our international trade agreements.
When you combine FULL resource development (in a modern era) with the removal of over-burdensome regulatory and compliance systems, necessarily filled with enormous bureaucratic costs, President Donald Trump feels we can lower the cost of production and be globally competitive.
In essence, Trump changes the economic paradigm, and we no longer become a dependent nation relying on a service driven economy.
In addition, an unquantifiable benefit comes from investment, where the smart money play -to get increased return on investment- becomes putting capital INTO the U.S. economy, instead of purchasing foreign stocks.
With all of the above opportunities in mind, this is how we get on the pathway to rebuilding our national infrastructure. The demand for labor increases, and as a consequence so too does the U.S. wage rate which has been stagnant (or non-existent) for the past three decades.
As the wage rate increases, and as the economy expands, the governmental dependency model is reshaped and simultaneously receipts to the U.S. treasury improve. More money into the U.S Treasury and less dependence on welfare programs have a combined exponential impact. You gain a dollar and have no need to spend a dollar. That is how the SSI and safety net programs are saved under President Trump.
When you elevate your economic thinking, you begin to see that all of the “entitlements” or expenditures become more affordable with an economy that is fully functional.
As the GDP of the U.S. expands, so too does our ability to meet the growing need of the retiring U.S. worker. We stop thinking about how to best divide a limited economic pie and begin thinking about how many more economic pies we can create.
Simply put, we begin to….
If you understand the basic elements behind the new dimension in American economics, you already understand how three decades of DC legislative and regulatory policy was structured to benefit Wall Street and not Main Street. The intentional shift in fiscal policy is what created the distance between two entirely divergent economic engines.
REMEMBER […] there had to be a point where the value of the second economy (Wall Street) surpassed the value of the first economy (Main Street).
Investments, and the bets therein, needed to expand outside of the USA. hence, globalist investing.
However, a second more consequential aspect happened simultaneously. The politicians became more valuable to the Wall Street team than the Main Street team; and Wall Street had deeper pockets because their economy was now larger.
As a consequence Wall Street started funding political candidates and asking for legislation that benefited their interests.
When Main Street was purchasing the legislative influence the outcomes were -generally speaking- beneficial to Main Street, and by direct attachment those outcomes also benefited the average American inside the real economy.
When Wall Street began purchasing the legislative influence, the outcomes therein became beneficial to Wall Street. Those benefits are detached from improving the livelihoods of main street Americans because the benefits are “global”. Global financial interests, multinational investment interests -and corporations therein- became the primary filter through which the DC legislative outcomes were considered.
There is a natural disconnect. (more)
As an outcome of national financial policy blending commercial banking with institutional investment banking something happened on Wall Street that few understand.
♦ When U.S. banks were allowed to merge their investment divisions with their commercial banking operations (the removal of Glass Stegal) something changed on Wall Street.
Companies who are evaluated based on their financial results, profits and losses, remained in their traditional role as traded stocks on the U.S. Stock Market and were evaluated accordingly. However, over time investment instruments -which are secondary to actual company results- created a sub-set within Wall Street that detached from actual bottom line company results.
The resulting secondary financial market system was essentially ‘investment markets’. Both ordinary company stocks and the investment market stocks operate on the same stock exchanges. But the underlying valuation is tied to entirely different metrics.
Financial products were developed (as investment instruments) that are essentially wagers or bets on the outcomes of actual companies traded on Wall Street. Those bets/wagers form the hedge markets and are [essentially] people trading on expectations of performance. The “derivatives market” is the ‘betting system’.
♦Ford Motor Company (only chosen as a commonly known entity) has a stock valuation based on their actual company performance in the market of manufacturing and consumer purchasing of their product.
However, there can be thousands of financial instruments wagering on the actual outcome of their performance.
There are two initial bets on these outcomes that form the basis for Hedge-fund activity. Bet ‘A’ that Ford hits a profit number, or bet ‘B’ that they don’t. There are financial instruments created to place each wager. [The wagers form the derivatives.] But it doesn’t stop there.
Additionally, more financial products are created that bet on the outcomes of the A/B bets. A secondary financial product might find two sides betting on both A outcome and B outcome.
Party C bets the “A” bet is accurate, and party D bets against the A bet. Party E bets the “B” bet is accurate, and party F bets against the B. If it stopped there, we would only have six total participants. But it doesn’t stop there, it goes on and on and on…
The outcome of the bets forms the basis for the tenuous investment markets. The important part to understand is that the investment funds are not necessarily attached to the original company stock, they are now attached to the outcome of bet(s). Hence an inherent disconnect is created.
Subsequently, if the actual stock doesn’t meet it’s expected P-n-L outcome (if the company actually doesn’t do well), and if the financial investment was betting against the outcome, the value of the investment actually goes up. The company performance and the investment bets on the outcome of that performance are two entirely different aspects of the stock market. [Hence two metrics.]
♦Understanding the disconnect between an actual company on the stock market, and the bets for and against that company stock, helps to understand what can happen when fiscal policy is geared toward the underlying company (Main Street MAGAnomics), and not toward the bets therein (Investment Class).
The U.S. stock markets’ overall value can increase with Main Street policy, and yet the investment class can simultaneously decrease in value even though the company(ies) in the stock market is/are doing better.
This detachment is critical to understand because the ‘real economy’ is based on the company, the ‘paper economy’ is based on the financial investment instruments betting on the company.
Trillions can be lost in investment instruments, and yet the overall profit valuation – as measured by company operations/profits – can increase.
Conversely, there are now classes of companies on the U.S. stock exchange that never make a dime in profit, yet the value of the company increases. This dynamic is possible because the financial investment bets are not connected to the bottom-line profit. (Prior examples included tech stocks, social media companies, Amazon and a host of internet stocks.) It is this investment group of companies that stands to lose the most if/when the underlying system of betting on them stops or slows.
Specifically due to most recent U.S. monetary policy, modern multinational banks, including all of the investment products therein, are more closely attached to this investment system on Wall Street. It stands to reason they are at greater risk of financial losses overall with a shift in economic and monetary policy.
That financial and economic risk was the basic reason behind President Trump and then Treasury Secretary Mnuchin putting a protective, secondary and parallel, banking system in place for Main Street. They deregulated smaller banks and credit unions with under $10 billion in assets.
Big multinational banks can suffer big losses from their investment instruments, yet the Main Street economy can continue growing and have access to capital, uninterrupted.
Bottom Line: U.S. companies who have actual connection to a growing U.S. economy can succeed; based on the advantages of the new economic environment and MAGA policy, specifically in the areas of manufacturing and domestic production (and the ancillary supply benefactors).
Meanwhile U.S. investment assets (multinational investment portfolios) that are disconnected from the actual results of those benefiting U.S. companies, and as a consequence also disconnected from the U.S. economic expansion, can simultaneously drop in value even though the U.S. economy is thriving.
Trumps Policy and Economic Solutions in Three Easy To Understand Parts:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.