People do not last more than a week as headline writers unless they are all-in on enthusiastically making things more exciting in order to attract the eyeballs. So why is Bloomberg reporter Josh...
Trump's great skill is getting people to believe what should be obvious lies. That something can come from nothing.
It's why he won in 2024. The masses believed he could magically bring prices down. The wealthy believed he could not just keep their taxes low but lower them further without civil unrest or worse (and yes there is a worse) the generation of disease vectors that imperil global health.
This is all magical thinking promoted, as you note, as if the Presidency were another season of The Apprentice.
It would be comic if not so deadly.
On a related note, did you read Larry Fink's observation that, "Global GDP grew more since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 than in all recorded history before it. But the benefits weren’t evenly shared. S&P 500 investors saw a return of more than 3,800 per cent. Rustbelt workers did not."
Well sussed, Larry. Although it's more than just the rustbelt workers that haven't shared in the massive productivity advances, it's all but the top 5%.
His recommendation, MORE MARKETS..."Why? Because markets are uniquely suited to transforming global growth into local wealth — even though, historically, that hasn’t always happened."
This is like RFK Jr. noticing the spread of measles and thinking that spread has nothing to do with a decline in vaccination.
Mr. Fink is smart enough to know it was GOVERNMENT that more equitably distributed US growth until the Reagan Devolution.
He just wants to keep his slice of the pie.
There's so much more benefit from productivity advances, call it "low hanging fruit" waiting to be distributed to the masses (rationalization of financial costs, health care, drug prices, etc.) if only the
government would stop facilitating rent seeking.
Mr. Fink is wrong. We don't need more markets. We need more government and higher taxes.
President Trump's TV show mockery of what used to be an office which "promoted the general welfare" is hopefully the last stage of our RE-exploration of Capitalism Unchained.
It does make me think that the hollowing out of Main Street, what most people see as a market, by Amazon, Costco and Walmart, has created a strange new world. Very efficient but somewhat soulless. Would be beneficial to break up these giant retailers?
To the Faitful, government's being necessary to solving a problem is 'proof' that either
0.) government were the source of the problem,
xor
1.) the 'problem' is no problem at all*, in fact it is very likely a Very Good Thing, especially 'Massively inequitable growth is, on average, just peopleʼs getting their just desserts.'.
*or not to the people who actually matter, or are the only actual people…said _sotto_voce_ or, increasingly, out-loud.
Your comment reminds me of the wisdom of HL Mencken: " Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
“Expectations Management”. In the technology business at one time it was called releasing “vaporware” in order to freeze the market. The Malignant One and his Cult have simply made it the centerpiece of policy. The larger issue is “What’s wrong with Bloomberg?”. It has not only been “sane washing” the Malignant One on foreign policy pronouncements but on virtually all economic news, especially and more ominously crypto. One reads or listens to Bloomberg viz cryptocurrency and compares its giddy enthusiasms to someone like Krugman, and that question about Bloomberg becomes more pressing.
> the only public evidence is the White House’s own expectation
I believe that Trump's take on the Positive Thinking dogma's of his youthful Sundays is still firmly in play, here and in any situation in which 'true' and 'false' reduce for him to 'what I like/dislike hearing'. (…which in turn must lead to a fundamental distrust of science, whose metric is…different).
Has anyone else heard that some Chinese are speculating that Xi has a major health problem because he hasn't been making the obligatory photo ops with province officials, in factories, and on military bases?
I don't know if this speculation is reasonable, but if there is a decision vacuum at the top in China then the US administration is shouting into the void.
There are quite a lot of recent articles in Asian media suggesting that Xi Jinping is in trouble, either though ill-health or because Xi Jinping is being edged out and that other factions are possibly coming to power. The reason is suggested to be the slide in China's economic performance, which is, in some ways, an internal issue, although it impacts China's international economic position.
This article on China's situation outlines the economic context:
Whatever the case - the notion of Trump having a meaningful telephone conversation with Xi or his successor is probably ludicrous.
Trump would, as always, attempt to denigrate, deceive or bully whoever he gets to talk with and, while that may work with nations he has power over, it will not work with the Chinese. Xi will want to emerge from any potential conversation as having demonstrably got the upper hand, particularly if he is under attack internally and whoever replaces him will need to demonstrate that they offer the same strength as Xi has historically done.
Additionally, the Chinese would come to any such conversation well-prepared in terms of facts about the US economic, military and social state.
Not talking to Trump seems to me more like a deliberate strategy - the US economy and global position is suffering more from Trump's tariffs than China is, the US populace is beginning to feel some early effects as are US businesses and the Trump administration is globally humiliating itself. It's easier simply to let Trump go on putting missiles through his own foot, while the impacts of those missiles continuously weakens his position.
Someone is going to lose their ass trying to save face. It appears China's response is a slowdown in rare earth minerals exports, and it may be quite effective.
Trump's great skill is getting people to believe what should be obvious lies. That something can come from nothing.
It's why he won in 2024. The masses believed he could magically bring prices down. The wealthy believed he could not just keep their taxes low but lower them further without civil unrest or worse (and yes there is a worse) the generation of disease vectors that imperil global health.
This is all magical thinking promoted, as you note, as if the Presidency were another season of The Apprentice.
It would be comic if not so deadly.
On a related note, did you read Larry Fink's observation that, "Global GDP grew more since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 than in all recorded history before it. But the benefits weren’t evenly shared. S&P 500 investors saw a return of more than 3,800 per cent. Rustbelt workers did not."
https://on.ft.com/4kl25U1
Well sussed, Larry. Although it's more than just the rustbelt workers that haven't shared in the massive productivity advances, it's all but the top 5%.
His recommendation, MORE MARKETS..."Why? Because markets are uniquely suited to transforming global growth into local wealth — even though, historically, that hasn’t always happened."
This is like RFK Jr. noticing the spread of measles and thinking that spread has nothing to do with a decline in vaccination.
Mr. Fink is smart enough to know it was GOVERNMENT that more equitably distributed US growth until the Reagan Devolution.
He just wants to keep his slice of the pie.
There's so much more benefit from productivity advances, call it "low hanging fruit" waiting to be distributed to the masses (rationalization of financial costs, health care, drug prices, etc.) if only the
government would stop facilitating rent seeking.
Mr. Fink is wrong. We don't need more markets. We need more government and higher taxes.
President Trump's TV show mockery of what used to be an office which "promoted the general welfare" is hopefully the last stage of our RE-exploration of Capitalism Unchained.
It does make me think that the hollowing out of Main Street, what most people see as a market, by Amazon, Costco and Walmart, has created a strange new world. Very efficient but somewhat soulless. Would be beneficial to break up these giant retailers?
To the Faitful, government's being necessary to solving a problem is 'proof' that either
0.) government were the source of the problem,
xor
1.) the 'problem' is no problem at all*, in fact it is very likely a Very Good Thing, especially 'Massively inequitable growth is, on average, just peopleʼs getting their just desserts.'.
*or not to the people who actually matter, or are the only actual people…said _sotto_voce_ or, increasingly, out-loud.
Your comment reminds me of the wisdom of HL Mencken: " Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
“Expectations Management”. In the technology business at one time it was called releasing “vaporware” in order to freeze the market. The Malignant One and his Cult have simply made it the centerpiece of policy. The larger issue is “What’s wrong with Bloomberg?”. It has not only been “sane washing” the Malignant One on foreign policy pronouncements but on virtually all economic news, especially and more ominously crypto. One reads or listens to Bloomberg viz cryptocurrency and compares its giddy enthusiasms to someone like Krugman, and that question about Bloomberg becomes more pressing.
> the only public evidence is the White House’s own expectation
I believe that Trump's take on the Positive Thinking dogma's of his youthful Sundays is still firmly in play, here and in any situation in which 'true' and 'false' reduce for him to 'what I like/dislike hearing'. (…which in turn must lead to a fundamental distrust of science, whose metric is…different).
Has anyone else heard that some Chinese are speculating that Xi has a major health problem because he hasn't been making the obligatory photo ops with province officials, in factories, and on military bases?
I don't know if this speculation is reasonable, but if there is a decision vacuum at the top in China then the US administration is shouting into the void.
There are quite a lot of recent articles in Asian media suggesting that Xi Jinping is in trouble, either though ill-health or because Xi Jinping is being edged out and that other factions are possibly coming to power. The reason is suggested to be the slide in China's economic performance, which is, in some ways, an internal issue, although it impacts China's international economic position.
This article on China's situation outlines the economic context:
https://www.qatar-tribune.com/article/179408/business/central-bank-struggles-to-contain-chinas-banking-crisis
On the succession question:
https://japan-forward.com/xi-jinping-power-struggles-and-successor-lists-in-the-ccp/
https://www.platinummediagroup.co.uk/platinum-business-magazine/2025/05/big-story-xi-jinping/
Whatever the case - the notion of Trump having a meaningful telephone conversation with Xi or his successor is probably ludicrous.
Trump would, as always, attempt to denigrate, deceive or bully whoever he gets to talk with and, while that may work with nations he has power over, it will not work with the Chinese. Xi will want to emerge from any potential conversation as having demonstrably got the upper hand, particularly if he is under attack internally and whoever replaces him will need to demonstrate that they offer the same strength as Xi has historically done.
Additionally, the Chinese would come to any such conversation well-prepared in terms of facts about the US economic, military and social state.
Not talking to Trump seems to me more like a deliberate strategy - the US economy and global position is suffering more from Trump's tariffs than China is, the US populace is beginning to feel some early effects as are US businesses and the Trump administration is globally humiliating itself. It's easier simply to let Trump go on putting missiles through his own foot, while the impacts of those missiles continuously weakens his position.
Agreed. Thanks for the links.
Someone is going to lose their ass trying to save face. It appears China's response is a slowdown in rare earth minerals exports, and it may be quite effective.
Person to person meetings between Biden and Xi Jinping:
1. November 2022 in Bali, Indonesia. Group of 20 meeting
2. November 2023 Woodside, California. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit APEC
3. November 2024 Lima, Peru. APEC Economic Leader’s meeting
Wait until November?
Some people these days get phone and/or TV stress anxiety sickness talking to certain people on the phone or watching TV.
I hope both sides have good people working on the trade discussions.