11 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

But the poor are not buying the nearly as much in imports. Most all the food and energy they buy is domestically produced, housing is domestic, big-ticket items they buy used, so what does that leave?

 

Kicking out the illegals will drive up their wages, drive down there housing costs and free up social services. 

Just ask yourself where the poor do most of their shopping. And where a huge percentage of the stocks in those stores comes from.

3 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

 

Maybe you should educate yourself, though I don't have much hope on that.

 

New orders include IMPORTS, the article clearly says production fell from 51.4 to 47.8, and that is what is produced in the US

Imports represent less than 15% of GDP. Did you not know that?

 

 

13 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

But the poor are not buying the nearly as much in imports. Most all the food and energy they buy is domestically produced, housing is domestic, big-ticket items they buy used, so what does that leave?

 

Kicking out the illegals will drive up their wages, drive down there housing costs and free up social services. 

Big ticket items they buy used? You think there's a big market out there for used washing machines? And even if there were, the more expensive new items become, the more expensive used ones do, too. You know how much the average price of a used auto has risen in the USA?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUSR0000SETA02

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Imports represent less than 15% of GDP. Did you not know that?

 

 

 

And the relevance of that to the ISM figures is???????????????

 

If you can't win, start deflecting., typical MAGA behavior.

3 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Just ask yourself where the poor do most of their shopping. And where a huge percentage of the stocks in those stores comes from.

Where they shop makes not difference, It's what they buy that matters. 

 

The spend almost all their money on rent, energy, transportation and food. Most all of that is domestically produced. 

1 minute ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Big ticket items they buy used? You think there's a big market out there for used washing machines? And even if there were, the more expensive new items become, the more expensive used ones do, too. You know how much the average price of a used auto has risen in the USA?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUSR0000SETA02

Yes, there is a big market out there for used washing machines among the poor.

 

You've never been poor, have you?

3 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

 

And the relevance of that to the ISM figures is???????????????

 

If you can't win, start deflecting., typical MAGA behavior.

Quoting the data you linked to is deflection? 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Where they shop makes not difference, It's what they buy that matters. 

 

The spend almost all their money on rent, energy, transportation and food. Most all of that is domestically produced. 

Tariffs Hit Poor Americans Hardest

Raising or maintaining tariffs on imports is called protectionism for a reason. The goal is to protect domestic industry and jobs from lower priced foreign goods. But often forgotten is the impact of the US tariff structure on the wallets of American consumers when they visit shopping malls and have to pay a higher price for the goods they purchase. The table below tells the story by income category: Poor households get hit hardest.

https://www.piie.com/blogs/trade-and-investment-policy-watch/2014/tariffs-hit-poor-americans-hardest

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yes, there is a big market out there for used washing machines among the poor.

 

You've never been poor, have you?

Even if that's true, Trump's tariffs will raise the price of new appliances. Which means that the prices of used ones go up, too.

4 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Tariffs Hit Poor Americans Hardest

Raising or maintaining tariffs on imports is called protectionism for a reason. The goal is to protect domestic industry and jobs from lower priced foreign goods. But often forgotten is the impact of the US tariff structure on the wallets of American consumers when they visit shopping malls and have to pay a higher price for the goods they purchase. The table below tells the story by income category: Poor households get hit hardest.

https://www.piie.com/blogs/trade-and-investment-policy-watch/2014/tariffs-hit-poor-americans-hardest

The table and article written over ten years ago had has nothing to do with the recent Trump tariffs, and does not provide any information on what the numbers are based on. 

 

It looks great but it's just silly, 

13 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Quoting the data you linked to is deflection? 

 

I asked the relevance of this  Imports represent less than 15% of GDP.to the monthly ISM figures.

 

I assume,. though I don't hold my breath, that trade deficit INCREASED last month. Imports increased, exports declined.

5 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Even if that's true, Trump's tariffs will raise the price of new appliances. Which means that the prices of used ones go up, too.

Long term sure, but the idea is to increase the manufacturing base and get people earning more money. 

2 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

 

I asked the relevance of this  Imports represent less than 15% of GDP.to the monthly ISM figures

I thought you implied that most of the 10% increase in new orders were imports, when imports represent much less than that. 

10 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I thought you implied that most of the 10% increase in new orders were imports, when imports represent much less than that. 

 

That is the second time in just 2 pages that you show your MAGA level of intelligence. Keep it up, you are on par with Mogandave

Yes, i don't know why, but even tho I knew he was a scammer and a bit of a scumbag, I thought that this man would be perfect for America at the moment.

 

Unfortunately I was wrong. Time to short US stocks. 

Buh what about the price of eggs bro?  The convicted felon compulsive liar fraudster says they are doing like 89%.  Everyone says so.  All the best people.  Ask anyone.

 

 

Trump lying.....

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

But the poor are not buying the nearly as much in imports. Most all the food and energy they buy is domestically produced, housing is domestic, big-ticket items they buy used, so what does that leave?

 

Kicking out the illegals will drive up their wages, drive down there housing costs and free up social services. 

 

The poor will still suffer. Used goods increase in cost as newer products increase in cost. People will hang on to their goods because they can't afford to purchase the newer versions. It is being seen now with automobiles.  Housing incorporates foreign produced components. Wood is a major input item and the  high tariffs on building materials  is estimated to add $14,000 to the cost of a new home by 2027.  It does not matter how much the wage is, if their is a labor shortage and the USA has a farm worker and construction trade labor shortage.

 

Canadian lumber 

I think everything’s wonderful just how Comrade Putin’s propaganda course said it would be.

 

Alienate Americas allies and friends to isolate America, drive down Americans living standards get rid of anyone who disagrees use the courts law enforcement or army to enforce your will or settle old grudges while all the time feeding Americans false and misleading information and keep telling them how lucky they are to have such a great leader and the greatest most beautiful President America has ever had just like comrades Vladimir, Kim & Xi.

15 hours ago, Bannoi said:

I think everything’s wonderful just how Comrade Putin’s propaganda course said it would be.

 

Alienate Americas allies and friends to isolate America, drive down Americans living standards get rid of anyone who disagrees use the courts law enforcement or army to enforce your will or settle old grudges while all the time feeding Americans false and misleading information and keep telling them how lucky they are to have such a great leader and the greatest most beautiful President America has ever had just like comrades Vladimir, Kim & Xi.

 

And what about barely legible run-on sentences?

Is that a tactic your side uses to drive the enemy mad?

 

6 hours ago, shdmn said:

Buh what about the price of eggs bro?  The convicted felon compulsive liar fraudster says they are doing like 89%.  Everyone says so.  All the best people.  Ask anyone.

 

 

Second time ive seen you posting this. Eggs are now 11 dollars for 60 eggs at costco. They are like pre Biden prices

7 hours ago, Celsius said:

Yes, i don't know why, but even tho I knew he was a scammer and a bit of a scumbag, I thought that this man would be perfect for America at the moment.

 

Unfortunately I was wrong. Time to short US stocks. 

The trend is your friend

Should be easy enough to back this up with detailed accounting.

 

trump seems to confuse billions and trillions quite often.

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/B8EnslW6Uao

 

 

Those "investment" deals are pure hopeium.

So the National Debt is falling?

8 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

The table and article written over ten years ago had has nothing to do with the recent Trump tariffs, and does not provide any information on what the numbers are based on. 

 

It looks great but it's just silly, 

...no information about what the numbers are based on...? Really?

From the article...

"The impact of tariffs on the pocketbook can be calculated using consumption data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and applied tariff rate data from UN Trade Analysis and Information System (TRAINS), which are matched with the spending habits of various income groups. For each income bracket, some 21 product groups that are subject to a nonzero tariff (ranging from fruits and vegetables to furniture) are assigned tariff impact scores equal to the share of consumption spent on those products times the tariff rate on imported goods of the same type. For example, imported poultry products are subject to an average tariff of 10 percent. Poultry makes up about 0.4 percent of consumption for households making less than $5,000, which serves as the “weight” for the tariff on poultry products. The results are then averaged, giving an average tariff faced by consumers for each income bracket (on products that are associated with a nonzero tariff). This calculation assumes that a tariff of 10 percent raises the price of both imports and competing domestic goods by 10 percent. That does not always happen. Some domestic producers offer lower prices for goods competing with imports. But even if the impact of tariffs on consumers is imprecise, the figures show that the relative impact of the US tariff schedule affects different household income groups in different ways. The impact disproportionately falls on lower income households, as any regressive tax, such as a sales tax, would."

 

And Trump's tariffs are far higher and more widespread than what existed before. So that somehow means that they "have nothing to do with the recent Trump tariffs." Your comments are a clear case of economic and mathematical cluelessness.

42 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

...no information about what the numbers are based on...? Really?

From the article...

"The impact of tariffs on the pocketbook can be calculated using consumption data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and applied tariff rate data from UN Trade Analysis and Information System (TRAINS), which are matched with the spending habits of various income groups. For each income bracket, some 21 product groups that are subject to a nonzero tariff (ranging from fruits and vegetables to furniture) are assigned tariff impact scores equal to the share of consumption spent on those products times the tariff rate on imported goods of the same type. For example, imported poultry products are subject to an average tariff of 10 percent. Poultry makes up about 0.4 percent of consumption for households making less than $5,000, which serves as the “weight” for the tariff on poultry products. The results are then averaged, giving an average tariff faced by consumers for each income bracket (on products that are associated with a nonzero tariff). This calculation assumes that a tariff of 10 percent raises the price of both imports and competing domestic goods by 10 percent. That does not always happen. Some domestic producers offer lower prices for goods competing with imports. But even if the impact of tariffs on consumers is imprecise, the figures show that the relative impact of the US tariff schedule affects different household income groups in different ways. The impact disproportionately falls on lower income households, as any regressive tax, such as a sales tax, would."

 

And Trump's tariffs are far higher and more widespread than what existed before. So that somehow means that they "have nothing to do with the recent Trump tariffs." Your comments are a clear case of economic and mathematical cluelessness.

Ok, just help me with the math. Per the chart, what does the "tariff Impact (percent) represent? 

 

It seems to imply that people that earned $9,999 per year about ten years ago paid 13.95% of their income on tariffs, or $1,395. 

 

Ten years ago, most US tariffs are down around 1-3%. At three percent, a person earning $9,999 would have to buy ~$46,495 of goods to spend that much on tariffs. Even at 10% tariffs, they'd have to spend ~$13,948.

 

Or does it mean that the person earing $9,999 spends 13.95% of their income, ~1,395 on imported goods?

 

Or does it mean that the people earning from $5,000 to $9,999 are paying 13.95% of all tariffs? 

 

Just tell me in your own words what the number represents. 

Looks like Trump get a bit desperate, that even with a politicized 6-3 republican supreme court, his tariff windfall can continue. 

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-ask-supreme-court-save-100249093.html

 

Trump to ask Supreme Court to save tariffs but faces tough legal questions

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump is set to imminently ask the conservative-majority Supreme Court to validate his broad emergency tariffs after two setbacks at lower courts, but will face tough legal questions as his administration presses ahead with backup plans.

Legal and trade experts said that the Supreme Court's 6-3 majority of Republican-appointed justices may slightly improve Trump's odds of keeping in place his "reciprocal" and fentanyl-related tariffs after a federal appeals court ruled 7-4 last week that they are illegal.

Trump said on Tuesday that his administration would seek as early as Wednesday an expedited ruling by the Supreme Court "because we need an early decision." He warned of "devastation" if the duties he imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) are struck down.

He just makes stuff it.

Nothing out of his mouth should be believed.

Obviously the numbers cannot be taken verbatim….when has trump ever used FACTS or hard data,that being said yes he did impose a grift….oops I meant tax err ahem tariff…you get my drift ….

Tonight is the BLS release of the August jobs number, after Trump installed a lackey at the helm.

 

My guess:

 

1.4 trillion jobs created in August, with July revised upward to 1 x 10^14