It’s over

He is running … for the GOP

You don’t need AI, you can do it in Excel

- Column A: overstayed (TRUE/FALSE)
- Column B: prob(overstayed) = COUNTIF(A:A, TRUE)/COUNT(A:A)

Price elasticity for cinemas is < -1, this study for example estimates a range between -3.3 and -2.5, so a 100% price increase would reduce demand to zero. No foreign movies, only 3 dolls, it’s going to be the new golden age.

nicderoos.com/files/movies...

Tariffs and sales tax are converging

You double the price of the ticket, half goes to the federal government 🤷‍♂️

After a brief period of option 1 (150 deals in 90 days) and a market rebound, we are back to Schrödinger tariffs: option 2 and 3 at the same time.

The US need to reduce the deficit and the debt. Even if the tariffs generate extra revenue (spoiler: they will not, they will more likely de-industrialize America even more), it should be used to reduce the debt/GDP ratio, not to tax cuts.

Tariffs is the most beautif…

We are almost there, summer is still almost two months ahead 🤞

That’s right, you are nuking your economy.

Option 1 I believe is the true one. It’s aligned with the bully and transactional approach of Trump, it explains why the tariff “formula” was nonsense (ie why wasting time fine tuning a reciprocal tariff if it’s just a threat), and it’s the least tard compared to option 2 and 3.

The goal would be the same as the CHIPS act (reindustrialization), but less targeted to specific industries and pursued with tariffs rather than subsidies.

Option 3

Tariffs are enacted, and they are so high to trigger import substitution. The goal wouldn’t be revenue generation (imports don’t come in so the tariff is not collected), but protection to incentivize reshoring and reindustrialization

The extra revenue will not allow to cancel the income tax (that’s just not realistic), and it will be used to reduce the deficit and debt (if Trump is fiscal conservative), or to reduce taxes (it would be a tax transfer from those that pay the tariff = sales tax, to the beneficiaries of the tax cut)

Option 2

Tariffs are enacted, it’s not a bluff, but the barrier is not too high, and thus it will not trigger import substitution. This would be like Trump 1, it would a tax on US consumers, with the goal of increasing federal revenue.

If the other actors believe that Trump is truly willing to explode himself and the global economy with him, they will come to the negotiation table. If they call his bluff with retaliation, let’s see what happens, it could be a massive disaster.

Option 1

Tariffs are just a negotiation tactic to obtain a reduction in tariff and non tariff barriers (eg Europe blocks the hormone treated meat produced in the US). Differently from Trump 1, he had to make the threat more credible, eg with a 10% drop in the S&P.

There are three possible goals related to tariffs, mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive.

Option 1: tariffs not enacted - negotiation tactic
Option 2: tariffs enacted - revenue generation
Option 3: tariffs enacted - import substitution

🧵

www.cartoonshateher.com/p/you-will-o...