Chinese "to the last mugicha" man.
this is the most insane paragraph ive read. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Miran >trump economics advisor explains alot
Stephen Miran - Wikipedia
Chinese "to the last mugicha" man.
Reply to @[email protected]
this nigger is going to the front of the bus 90km/h
Chinese "to the last mugicha" man.
Reply to @[email protected]
did this guy fake his degree. what the fuck is he trying to do? no mention of balance of payment, or capital accounts. china makes iphone sells it to the us. US in return gets IP. actual cost of doing business a net gain to the us. this is ignored? why?
Reply to @[email protected]
@IAMAL_PHARIUS@poa.st I still cant get over the 4 * 1/4. They legit pulled a randomly generated equation and arbitrarily layered numbers over it
Reply to @[email protected]
@KaiserKitty@clubcyberia.co @Elliptica@poa.st @Frondeur@poa.st @KingOfWhiteAmerica@poa.st Nah, you have to start somewhere and if necessary adjust based on experience. @IAMAL_PHARIUS@poa.st is correct to point out the elasticity figures are "a wild fucking guess. because there's like 100 countries all doing different shit" because this is complicated beyond belief with things that aren't tariffs but act in the same way, like export refunded VATs vs. our corporate income tax. This formula ___had___ the advantages of a) being simple, b) getting everyone but the PRC to the negotiating table, c) apparently getting a 10% base tariff accepted, and d) provoking the PRC into a serious response which has long been needed in their cold war with the entire rest of the world. The formula is "no longer operative" except for the purposes of spurring the success of b).
Reply to @[email protected]
@ThatWouldBeTelling@shitposter.world @Elliptica@poa.st @Frondeur@poa.st @IAMAL_PHARIUS@poa.st @KingOfWhiteAmerica@poa.st what is the point of 4 * 1/4 then? Its not simple its overly complex where it is. It literally adds random varibles to obscure what it actually is.
Reply to @[email protected]
@KaiserKitty@clubcyberia.co @Elliptica@poa.st @Frondeur@poa.st @IAMAL_PHARIUS@poa.st @KingOfWhiteAmerica@poa.st They're real variables and have to be considered for all this. That they sum to one is, again, just a starting point in the whole process. What's your alternative? Pretend for real there's no elasticity invoked by changing formal and informal tariffs rates? Did the whole equation result in desired or necessary results for Team Trump or not?
Reply to @[email protected]
im not sure why they needed to break it into phi AND epsilon...why not just say the multiplier is 1 and call it a day... but im guessing there's a strategic component to communicating it...where if an affected country is willing to cut its prices less (higher phi)...this makes it clear the tariff on them could be negotiated lower...