Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (20) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84351 
Subject: Re: Perfecton attained!
Date: 11/06/24 12:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 3
B-b-b-but...Trump wants to put higher tariffs on imported goods, which will create...(drum roll)...higher prices! And that will increase the demand for non-imported goods, which if I'm remembering my Econ 101 well, will create...(drum roll)...higher prices!

What am I missing?


That voters don't care to get into the weeds about economic policy. Inflation happened on Biden's watch (like every other incumbent party), therefore we need to throw him out. Because he did a bad job. Almost no voters have any real economic background - they're going by heuristics. Inflation happened when Democrats were in charge, therefore we should let the Republicans have control of the economy...because they didn't cause the inflation.

Also - I don't think this was a message that Harris focused on. They attacked Trump on abortion, character and fitness, and "threat to democracy." They never really attacked his tariff policy very much. Sure, sometimes - but it wasn't the thrust of their argument, that Trump would make inflation bad again.

And finally, you end up with the "take Trump seriously but not literally" problem. No one really thinks that Trump is going to impose an across the board 60% tariff on everything from China. He's not using that number as a serious policy outline, but as a way of signalling his general position: "I want to start using protectionist muscle against China and I'm dead serious about it." Everyone knows that 60% is just a number he made up without a lot of thought, and so it's highly unlikely that's where he'd land if he actually won. Which makes it almost impossible to pick apart his "proposal" without seeming like a someone who isn't smart enough to understand the point.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (20) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community