Post New

Apple, NVDA, QQQ should bounce at the Monday open.

"Electronics imported to the United States will be exempt from President Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs, according to a US Customs and Border Protection notice posted late Friday."

https://content.govdelivery.com/bulletins/gd/USDHS...

CSMS # 64724565 - UPDATED GUIDANCE – Reciprocal Tariff Exclusion for Specified Products; April 5, 2025 Effective Date

https://content.govdelivery.com/bulletins/gd/USDHS...

Chapter 3: "The Art of the Deal" - Donald J. Trump

Think Big: Aim high to achieve big results.

Maximize Options: Keep flexibility in negotiations.

Protect the Downside: Always have a plan to limit risks.

"Smartphones, laptop computers, memory chips and other electronics will be exempt from President Trump’s sweeping tariffs on China, according to new guidance from the administration, in another step back that could ease some consumer concerns about an immediate spike in costs for electronic products.

The guidance, published Friday night by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, also exempts machines used to create semiconductors, flat screen TVs, tablets and desktop computers from Trump’s 125% China tariff and his 10% baseline tariff on countries around the world."

https://www.wsj.com/tech/trump-exempts-smartphones...

Trump to China: "OK, I've compromised. Now it's your turn."

Will it work? We'll see.

It's interesting that the guidance exempts machines used to create these electronics. I've been saying for a while that even the factories that make the machines we would need to in an iPhone factory come from China. Putting a tariff on that industrial equipment at the same time claiming we can make all these things domestically was never believable. Experts say a made in US iphone would cost 2x-3x what it does now. I can still see an argument for a small strategic iPhone factory in the US selling iPhones directly to the government that could also fill a technology gap should we ever go to war with China.

But I'm quite sure I would not call this a compromise, more than I'd take it as confirmation of what everyone has been saying all along. That China can stand way more tariff pain than the US is willing to inflict on its population.

That China can stand way more tariff pain than the US is willing to inflict on its population.

Though probably true, let's hope it doesn't get tested.

The US is definitely a manufacturing powerhouse, second biggest in the world. (though just so efficient that it's accomplished with only 8% of the workforce). Germany, Japan, and South Korea are all famously huge too. But China's manufacturing output is more than the sum of those four combined.

Pressuring other countries is not good form, but if you really wanted to do it, tariffs are not the way. That's better accomplished with export restrictions. I suspect that China could shut the US economy down by banning the export of only (say) 20 products, and I think it wouldn't even violate WTO rules. The CCP wouldn't really care much about the impact on the local manufacturing companies. It would certainly make enemies, of course, so (again) I hope this sort of thing is never tested.

Jim

The "Art of the Deal"/"The Art of War"

“He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain” - Sun Tzu

Trump is a big fan of Sun Tzu (has quoted him often in his books and social media). I asked Grok(Elon's X AI)about the influence Sun Tzu has had on Donald J. Trump.

How could Trump's recent implementation of tariffs be related to the use of Sun Tzu "The Art of War" principles?

Below is how Grok responded:

"Donald J. Trump’s recent implementation of tariffs, particularly in early 2025, can be analyzed through the lens of Sun Tzu’s The Art of War principles, as his approach to trade policy often mirrors the strategic deception, adaptability, and psychological leverage emphasized in the text.

Below, I explore how Trump’s tariff strategy aligns with specific Sun Tzu principles, drawing on his documented references to the book (e.g., X posts from 2012–2014, Trump 101, and Think Like a Champion) and recent tariff actions, while critically assessing the depth of this connection. I’ll focus on tariffs announced in April 2025, including the 10% universal tariff (paused for 90 days except for China at 145%), as well as steel, aluminum, and auto tariffs, and avoid speculative claims.

1. Deception and Unpredictability
Sun Tzu Principle: “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive” (Chapter 1). Trump quoted a related idea in 2012: “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”

Tariff Application: Trump’s tariff announcements and reversals create confusion and keep trading partners off-balance. On April 2, 2025, he declared a 10% tariff on all countries, escalating to higher rates for some, only to pause most tariffs (except China’s) for 90 days by April 9 after market volatility. This rapid shift mirrors Sun Tzu’s tactic of appearing aggressive then retreating to sow uncertainty. Posts on X suggest Trump uses tariffs as a “classic Art of the Deal strategy” to gain leverage by projecting strength, then negotiating from an unpredictable position. For example, announcing high tariffs (e.g., 145% on China) signals resolve, but the pause invites negotiations, making opponents unsure of his next move.

Analysis: This aligns with Sun Tzu’s emphasis on psychological disruption. By oscillating between threats and concessions, Trump forces countries like Canada, Mexico, and the EU to reassess strategies, potentially weakening their resolve. However, the market turmoil (e.g., stock plunges reported on April 4) suggests a risk Sun Tzu warns against: overextending resources or losing control of the narrative.

2. Winning Without Fighting
Sun Tzu Principle: “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting” (Chapter 3), a quote Trump shared on X in July 2012. Success lies in achieving goals through intimidation or diplomacy rather than prolonged conflict.

Tariff Application: Trump’s tariffs appear designed to pressure trading partners into concessions without a full-scale trade war. The April 9 pause on reciprocal tariffs (except for China) was framed as a negotiation window, with advisors like Scott Bessent noting Trump’s desire for “bespoke” deals. This echoes Trump’s 2012–2014 X posts praising Sun Tzu’s avoidance of prolonged warfare, as seen in his comment: “There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.” By threatening high tariffs (e.g., 25% on autos, 145% on China), Trump aims to extract trade agreements or market access (e.g., his demand for the EU to buy $350 billion in U.S. energy) without sustained economic damage.

Analysis: This strategy partially reflects Sun Tzu’s ideal of victory through coercion. The pause suggests Trump recognizes the cost of prolonged trade conflict, aligning with Sun Tzu’s resource conservation. However, China’s retaliation (e.g., higher tariffs on U.S. exports) and the EU’s 25% counter-tariffs indicate limits to this approach, as opponents may not yield as Sun Tzu’s weaker foes might. Trump’s focus on China, isolating it while easing pressure on allies, shows selective targeting akin to Sun Tzu’s advice to divide enemies.

3. Exploiting Weaknesses
Sun Tzu Principle: “Attack where they are unprepared, go where they do not expect” (Chapter 6). Trump’s 2012–2014 X posts, like “Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack,” suggest balancing strength with opportunistic strikes.

Tariff Application: Trump’s tariffs target perceived vulnerabilities, such as China’s reliance on U.S. markets and allies’ dependence on trade stability. The 145% tariff on China exploits its economic slowdown and export-driven model, aiming to force concessions on issues like intellectual property or fentanyl. Meanwhile, tariffs on steel, aluminum (expanded February 2025), and autos (25% from April 3) hit industries where countries like Japan and Germany have exposure, pressuring them to negotiate. X posts from April 2025 (e.g., @Garcia1968Crown
) claim Trump uses Sun Tzu to counter China’s currency manipulation, suggesting tariffs as a precise strike at economic leverage points.

Analysis: This aligns with Sun Tzu’s focus on exploiting gaps. Trump’s selective exemptions (e.g., USMCA goods at 0% for Canada and Mexico) show calculated targeting to avoid alienating key allies unnecessarily, reflecting Sun Tzu’s advice to preserve alliances. However, global retaliation (e.g., Japan’s “national crisis” response) suggests Trump may misjudge opponents’ resilience, risking Sun Tzu’s warning against underestimating enemies.

4. Psychological Warfare
Sun Tzu Principle: “The leader is the arbiter of the people’s fate, the man on whom it depends whether the nation shall be in peace or in peril” (Chapter 1). Sun Tzu stresses morale and perception, intimidating opponents to sap their will.

Tariff Application: Trump’s public rhetoric amplifies tariff threats to project dominance. On April 8, 2025, he insisted tariffs were “medicine” for the economy, and his ALL-CAPS X posts (“THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY”) aimed to calm markets while maintaining an aggressive stance. This mirrors his 2010 Think Like a Champion praise for Sun Tzu’s strategic clarity over Machiavelli’s power obsession, suggesting he values psychological control. The White House’s April 10 statement, “Do not retaliate and you will be rewarded,” directly pressures allies to comply, aiming to demoralize resistance.

Analysis: Trump’s bombast reflects Sun Tzu’s psychological tactics, using fear of economic pain to coerce compliance. His reversals (e.g., pausing tariffs after market “yippiness”) show adaptability, as Sun Tzu advises adjusting to shifting conditions. Yet, Sun Tzu cautions against alienating allies, and Trump’s broad initial tariffs (hitting Poland, Japan, etc.) risked unifying opposition, partially corrected by the pause.

5. Adaptability and Strategic Positioning
Sun Tzu Principle: “He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain” (Chapter 6). Flexibility is key to maintaining advantage.

Tariff Application: Trump’s tariff rollout shows tactical shifts based on feedback. After markets crashed (April 4–9, 2025), he lowered duties to 10% for 90 days (except China), responding to economic signals while keeping pressure on Beijing. His February 2025 steel and aluminum tariff expansions and April auto tariffs show staged escalation, positioning the U.S. as a dominant negotiator. In Trump 101, he recommended The Art of War for managerial adaptability, and his 2025 actions suggest he adjusts to avoid overcommitment, as seen in exemptions for semiconductors and pharmaceuticals to protect U.S. supply chains.

Analysis: This reflects Sun Tzu’s call for fluid strategy. Trump’s pause aligns with “retreating to advance later,” preserving leverage for talks. However, Sun Tzu emphasizes knowing the terrain, and Trump’s initial miscalculation of market sensitivity (e.g., $800 billion import drop projected) suggests incomplete preparation, risking Sun Tzu’s warning of losses from hasty moves.

Critical Assessment
Depth of Influence: Trump’s tariff strategy loosely mirrors Sun Tzu’s principles, particularly deception, coercion, and adaptability, as seen in his quoted maxims and books. His unpredictable tariff reversals and targeted pressure on China echo Sun Tzu’s tactical flexibility and focus on weak points. However, the influence may be more stylistic than doctrinal. The Art of War was a trendy business text in the 1980s–2000s, and Trump’s references (mostly famous quotes) suggest he draws on its reputation to frame his “Art of the Deal” instincts rather than a deep study. His chaotic execution (e.g., market volatility) sometimes deviates from Sun Tzu’s disciplined planning.

Risks and Divergences: Sun Tzu warns against prolonged conflict and alienating allies, yet Trump’s tariffs sparked global retaliation (China, EU, Japan) and economic fears (e.g., JPMorgan’s 60% recession odds). His broad initial tariffs ignored Sun Tzu’s precision, though the pause corrected this somewhat. Unlike Sun Tzu’s emphasis on spies and intelligence, Trump’s team (e.g., Navarro, Lutnick) lacks the robust analysis China employs, as noted in 2018 critiques.

Alternative Influences: Trump’s tariffs also reflect domestic political goals (e.g., boosting manufacturing) and his dealmaking ethos, not just Sun Tzu. Advisors like Peter Navarro and his own Art of the Deal focus on bold leverage, which overlaps with but isn’t exclusive to Sun Tzu. X posts comparing “Art of War vs. Art of the Deal” (@princeofnew
, April 2025) highlight this blend of quiet strategy and loud transaction.

Recent Context and Sources

Trump’s 2025 tariffs, per reports (e.g., Reuters, April 9; Tax Foundation, April 11), aim to reduce trade deficits and protect U.S. industries, raising $1.2 trillion over a decade but costing households $1,300 annually. The pause on April 9, after China’s counter-tariffs and market drops, suggests responsiveness to Sun Tzu’s adaptability but also a reactive stance, unlike Sun Tzu’s proactive foresight. X sentiment (e.g., @WiseEyedEagle, April 2025) views tariffs as isolating China per Sun Tzu’s “break alliances,” though global unity against the U.S. (e.g., EU’s response) complicates this.
Conclusion

Trump’s tariffs reflect Sun Tzu’s The Art of War in their use of deception (unpredictable announcements), psychological pressure (threats to coerce deals), and adaptability (pausing tariffs). His prior references to Sun Tzu frame these as deliberate, but the influence is likely intuitive, filtered through his dealmaking lens. Missteps, like market chaos and global pushback, deviate from Sun Tzu’s precision and restraint, suggesting a partial application. For deeper insight, I could analyze a specific tariff (e.g., China’s 145%) or compare with his 2018 trade war. What angle interests you most?"


Perhaps there is a method to Trump's madness, or this artificial stupidity?

Trump to China: "OK, I've compromised. Now it's your turn."

Will it work? We'll see.

It might work. But this type of negotiation tactic is generally ineffective and often backfires. Trump has made several bold opening moves, but then quickly backed down--at least partially--without gaining any concessions in return. Sending unclear signals is a poor negotiating tactic. It also isn't clear what China (or any countries') concessions need to be. For example, tariffs on Canada are linked to fentanyl smuggling. So what specifically does Canada need to do in regards to fentanyl to get the tariffs lifted? It isn't clear, we haven't heard. And since other countries not linked to fentanyl also got hit with tariffs, a reasonable person would conclude tariffs don't have anything to do with fentanyl. The rates and exemptions seem to be changing weekly. Different administration officials are taking different negotiating positions. If we don't send clear signals what our position is, the other parties can't counter.

Another similar bad negotiating form is breaking trust. Once you break trust you can never really get it back. Saying untrue things like "the EU was designed to screw the US" will not improve Trump's position.

Professional negotiators seldom if ever start off with a big opener. It is called anchoring, and it makes it hard to move off of that position without losing face. Along those lines, a big opener can be seen as a threat or bullying. People don't like to be bullied and that often ends negotiations. In fact, China already said they won't be bullied, so it is unlikely we'll see anything fruitful in that regard for a while.

Another key to successful negotiations is keeping your emotions out of it. Trump said his recent tariff hikes on China were because he felt disrespected. That means he's being controlled by his emotions and not focused on getting to the outcome.

A great movie depicting high level negotiations is "Bridge of Spies" starring Tom Hanks. It is a true story. Hanks plays James Donovan, an American trying to negotiate the return of pilot Gary Powers from the Russians and a innocent American student swept up by the East Germans in exchange for a Russia spy. The Russians and East Germans don't want to work with each other, and definitely don't like Americans, and they make things exceptionally difficult for Donovan. But throughout he stays on message "your one guy for our two guys" and patiently keeps emphasizing that it is in all sides best interests to come to an agreement. Eventually, everyone agrees.

...."the art of the deal. He is the worst negotiator. China never bought anything. They took him the cleaner. North Korea never agreed to anything. He negotiated a trade deal with Canada, Mexico, and then he just blew blew it up.

He is not a good negotiator. When you claim, you're a good negotiator, it's to cover up the fact that you're a horrible negotiator. ...He's going to say ... I got this deal, and then he's going to try to calm the markets down. But the fact is the damage to America. Nobody will ever trust us. In eight weeks, he's destroyed eighty years of reputation that America built, all of us collectively, all through all the battles, he has destroyed in the end"

---Rahm Emmanuel, former White House chief of staff, diplomat and mayor.

Given that this is the BRK board, who would you rather have as a "businessman U.S. president", Donald Trump or Warren Buffett at age 78 (Trump's age)?

If not WB, I would prefer Mike Bloomberg, but c'est la vie.

I wonder what the results would be if Xi, rather than saying the drop in tariffs on electronics was a step in the right direction, applied an "export tax" in the amount of the targeted reduced tariffs of the same percentage, maintaining the post-tariff pain to the consumer. (If nothing else, it would point out that tariff taxews aree not collected by the manufacturing country). If, in fact, the tariffs are designed finance the continuation of the income tax reductions, one wonders what percentage of the pile is reduced by the removal of the tariff revenue of these reletively expensive items.

Jeff

Howard Lutnick, U.S. Secretary of Commerce, has effectively responded to the OP's speculation about what will happen at Monday's open:

https://www.ft.com/content/9038804f-cf69-4193-9332...
"... speaking on ABC’s This Week on Sunday, Lutnick said products such as smartphones, laptops and wireless earphones that were offered a reprieve on Friday would be re-examined as part of a government probe into semiconductors, that could result in tariffs. 
“What he’s doing is he’s saying they’re exempt from the reciprocal tariffs,” Lutnick said, referring to President Donald Trump. “But they’re included in the semiconductor tariffs, which are coming in probably a month or two.” “Correct. That’s right . . . We need our medicines and we need semiconductors and our electronics to be built in America.”

Maybe Tim Apple needs to chat with Lutnick about Apple's planned $500billion investment in the U.S. over the next four years
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/02/apple-will-...
Presumably plans are just that, i.e. something that can change when the situation changes.

On "Face the Nation" this morning, it was stated (right or wrong) that the electronics exempted from the tariffs constituted about a third of our trade deficit.

Jeff

I suspect that China could shut the US economy down by banning the export of only (say) 20 products,

Yes. Yes! YES!!! That's why the US needs to wean itself from such a large dependence on China. These was a recent news article that said some of the crucial materials for the latest US fighter jets come from China.

https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2025/04/11/us-scramb... and https://www.rand.org/pubs/articles/2023/the-time-t...
"All of which makes China's near-total domination of the rare earth market a matter of economic and national security concern."

How insane is it for a country to intensely depend on an adversary(ish) country for some necessary good? If you recall, Germany laughed at Trump 45 when he said they should not depend on Russia for natural gas. Look what happened.

How could Trump's recent implementation of tariffs be related to the use of Sun Tzu "The Art of War" principles?

Below is how Grok responded:...

From another site, Grok was posed a related question:
To Grok:
Please briefly explain the art of the deal for [people] who still don't understand how Trump operates even after decades of him using the same strategy for everything. Be concise.

Output:
"The Art of the Deal" is Donald Trump's negotiating strategy that he has used consistently for decades. Here are the key elements:
1. Start with an extreme position to create room for compromise.
2. Use attention-grabbing statements to control the narrative and put the other side on the defensive.
3. Create a sense of urgency to pressure the other side into making concessions.
4. Keep the other side guessing about your true intentions and bottom line.
5. Be willing to walk away if the deal doesn't meet your standards.

How insane is it for a country to intensely depend on an adversary(ish) country for some necessary good?

Yes, well most of the world is catching on to this vis a vis the USA.

IP

"I suspect that China could shut the US economy down by banning the export of only (say) 20 products" - Mungofitch

"Yes. Yes! YES!!! That's why the US needs to wean itself from such a large dependence on China. These was a recent news article that said some of the crucial materials for the latest US fighter jets come from China.

https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2025/04/11/us-scramb... and https://www.rand.org/pubs/articles/2023/the-time-t...
"All of which makes China's near-total domination of the rare earth market a matter of economic and national security concern."

How insane is it for a country to intensely depend on an adversary(ish) country for some necessary good?" - rayvt

Your making your opponent's point. That is why it is so insane to start a trade war with a country the U.S. is so dependent upon. How are tariffs going to help correct the fact that the U.S. is dependent upon China for some important products?

Everyone knows that the U.S. is dependent upon China for these important goods. Prior, more sane administrations, were trying to wean America off of the China dependency by developing alternative sources. So they were subsidizing chip manufacturing in America. They were subsidizing rare earth element mining in America. They were looking to Australia for rare metals. All of those steps were designed to wean the U.S. off of China, yet those things take time.

Trump jumped the gun and started a war that the U.S. isn't yet ready to fight leaving it at the mercy of an adversary. All because he doesn't understand what trade account balances indicate. Dumb.

well, better get those highly skilled redstate workers cranking out their craft semiconducters and biologics.
we will need it until we have american jobs for american robots, surely by the midterms.

oh yeah, add the military supply chain also :
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:...

(unless of course someone imagines trump may reverse his position...daily)

"All of which makes China's near-total domination of the rare earth market a matter of economic and national security concern."

Here I go again. The US gave Mountain Pass, CA money to develop their rare earth mine and refinery. There really weren't enough of the varied rare earths to really help, the refining tech was questionable, and ultimately didn't work, so they ship to China for refining. Great independence. The US got took by a con, but everyone involved liked it.

Lynas couldn't get set up completely in Australia because all of the refinery builders had contracts occupying them. So they set up in Malaysia - big mistake - Malaysia's greens ignored the advancements and ran an anti thorium radiation campaign of mutated animals and babies. The concentrated ore was shipped to Malaysia and for a year was operated by an incompetent French CEO. He was fired, Amanda Lacaz took over, smoothed out operations and got the process down pat. When China lowered RE prices to bankrupt outside of China refineries, Lynas remained profitable. lYNAS survived the price downward manipulation. Now Lynas is poised to start separating heavy rare earths in June, and will be the first to do so. Lynas built another plant in Calgary ( haven't followed this one) and is part owner of another processing plant in Texas ( haven't followed this one either).

Lynas has the tech know how and IP on processing. They've lived it, survived political storms, Chinese price manipulation, and are now expanding operations. Australia is a friendly if T doesn't go complete asshat on them. MAGA - get T off of our allies backs. We need our allies - give T a wake up call. No one minded NATO getting a kick but turn around and work with them now - it's the smartest thing to do. Putin is no help, we know you like persecuting gays, etc., but it ain't helping. That is all.

here's a big redstate problem... they dont have a surplus of highly skilled workers....there is no historically embedded industry in many of them... viz look at TSM's issue in AZ, many companies in TX , and numbers being brought in from outside, eg California..

reminds me of fab setups in europe, we had to create lower level jobs in ireland, as we had already sucked out almost every engineer from their universities , and retrain anyone who had some kind of background eg car repair work , . in israel, we had to ship in and rotate scottish engineers hired on graduation, in CA even we looked at Brazil and school of mines in zambia as engineering resource.....if it dont exist it takes time to create the necessary labor force (we didnt in the end)

in chem eng in holland , the top 3 companies hired ALL the engineers on graduation, the rest were left fighting to find labor.

The US gave Mountain Pass, CA money to develop their rare earth mine and refinery.

There was a certain amount of shorthand in Lapsody's post that needs to be expanded upon. The issue with most rare earth mining and refining operations is that these (really not that rare) elements tend to co-locate with radioactive elements. Separating the useful elements from the radioactive dross in a way that keeps the mining and refinery workers safe and the downstream inhabitants un-irradiated is expensive. The Chinese operations tend to take a more casual attitude towards those concerns. It sounds like some of these concerns were also expressed by the Malaysian greens. It is straight-forward to mitigate the risks but to do so at a cheaper price than what the Chinese are offering is a challenge. So the US choice is to subsidize a more environmentally (and worker) friendly operation or to buy from the lowest bidder, which currently seems to be the Chinese.

During the cold war the US irradiated large numbers of miners and their families digging uranium ore in Southern Utah near Moab. There is a large site just north of Moab where the processing facility was built and the Department of Energy has spent decades cleaning up the results of that "damn the torpedoes" effort. The US has to decide what price to pay for on-shoring mining and manufacturing. It is considerably cheaper to let other people deal with the environmental consequences of these operations.

Rgds,
HH/Sean

Please briefly explain the art of the deal for [people] who still don't understand how Trump operates even after decades of him using the same strategy for everything. Be concise.

That was the wrong question to ask. And you don't need AI to answer it. Trump has already been president. Everyone with the slightest interest already knows how he operates. The real question "Do Trump's tactics work? Are they effective?"

This is topical because stock and bond markets are roiling, automakers have announced layoffs, construction projects are being canceled across the country, demand for export shipping containers is plummeting, GDPNow is pointing towards recession, consumer confidence is the lowest in decades, and so on. The economy was strong back in January. It isn't now.

We already went through Trump Tariffs 1.0. The CBO estimates it cost the US about 0.5% of GDP and led to a real reduction in US household income.¹ And for that high cost, we got very little to show for it. Any concessions were basically just window dressing. The trade deficit continued to go up. This is not like buying a car where you can walk away if negotiations go south. The stakes are high. There is real money at stake, some of it ours.

We can also examine the results of every other major thing that Trump negotiated or promised to negotiate during his term. He promised to replace the ACA with something better, build a border wall and have Mexico pay, and advance an infrastructure bill. None of that happened. He promised to replace the Iran nuclear deal with something better. He also promised a North Korea nuclear deal. He failed negotiate either of those. He recently promised to end the Ukraine war on day 1, and just this weekend Rubio said they probably can't negotiate it. In fact, I don't recall a single piece of signature legislation that was passed on his watch.²

After four years of seeing Trump repeatedly failing to negotiate anything of any substance, it is safe to say he's not good at negotiating. My confidence that a guy who has a poor track record of success who continues to use the same objectively bad tactics will succeed this time is very low.


¹ https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56073
²The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was Paul Ryan's baby.

"Please briefly explain the art of the deal for [people] who still don't understand how Trump operates even after decades of him using the same strategy for everything. Be concise."

He gets results:

Trump Administration Announces Trade Deal With Britain

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/07/business/econom...


U.S. and China agree to slash reciprocal tariffs in major step toward easing trade war

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/tariffs-china-t...

He gets results:

Depends on your frame of reference.

Your next door neighbour sets fire to your house, and his house, and says that if you lend him your lawnmower he won't block some of the fire trucks. He doesn't guarantee how many, but says it will be some. Is it a big win for him if you then lend him your lawnmower? He did, admittedly, get results.

On the exotic subject of Berkshire, has anybody noticed that it's one of only a hand full of S&P 500 companies to be lower in price in the last month? The rally relative-to-market started Feb 21 and ended around the first week of April. The advantage (representing all of the relative-to-market advantage in the last three years) has now half unwound.

Jim

More results:

Our previous Dementia Patient in Chief claims US Border will not be secure until Congress Critters passes a flawed pork filled bill:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Fj5W7P61pk

Once elected, Trump closes the once open border in a matter of DAYS:

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/04/28/100-days-most-...

We didn't need a new bill. We needed a new president.

Promises made. Promises kept.

Results.

More results...(I know, I know, most on this board do not agree with eliminating massive governmental waste, fraud and corruption:

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), initiated by the second Trump administration, has targeted various programs and contracts deemed wasteful, fraudulent, or corrupt. Below is a list of programs, NGOs, and contracts reportedly terminated by DOGE, along with their associated dollar amounts, based on available information from web sources and posts on X. Note that some claims lack detailed verification, and savings figures may be inflated or disputed, as highlighted by critics. I’ve included only those with specific dollar amounts and program details, ensuring clarity and accuracy where possible. All amounts are in USD.
Terminated Programs and Contracts:

Risk Management Agency (RMA) Lease in Topeka, Kansas
Description: A lease for a USDA branch office that was reportedly unoccupied since the pandemic, cited as an example of government waste.

Dollar Amount: $964,396 saved by terminating the lease (annual cost was $121,818).

Magnetic Tape Replacement with Digital Backups
Description: DOGE replaced magnetic tapes with digital backups, claiming savings. Experts questioned the savings due to a lack of cost-benefit analysis and noted potential archival and security risks.

Dollar Amount: ~$1,000,000 saved.

Department of Education Comprehensive Centers Grants
Description: 18 grants for consulting services with a focus on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) were terminated.

Dollar Amount: $226,000,000 saved.

Department of Education DEI Training Grants
Description: 70 grants for DEI training programs were canceled in a 48-hour period.

Dollar Amount: $373,000,000 saved.

Department of Education Equity Assistance Centers Grants
Description: Grants to four Equity Assistance Centers, focused on equity initiatives, were terminated.

Dollar Amount: $33,000,000 saved.

HUD Misplaced Funds Recovery
Description: Funds earmarked for financial services administration, deemed no longer needed, were recovered due to a broken process during the Biden administration.

Dollar Amount: $1,900,000,000 recovered.

USDA Grant for Queer, Trans, and BIPOC Urban Farmers
Description: A grant to educate queer, trans, and BIPOC urban farmers and consumers about food justice in the San Francisco Bay area was canceled.

Dollar Amount: $397,000 saved.

HHS Equity Assessments Contract
Description: A contract for equity assessments of existing program policies was among 167 canceled contracts.

Dollar Amount: $2,230,000 saved (part of ~$115,000,000 total savings from 167 contracts).

IRS Planned Contract Rescission
Description: A previously planned contract was rescinded, with the IRS committing to more intentional use of taxpayer dollars.

Dollar Amount: $1,900,000,000 saved.

Department of Defense Wasteful Programs
Description: Initial findings identified programs not supporting DOD’s core mission, including a human resources program, a grant to decarbonize Navy ship emissions, and a grant for equitable machine learning models.

Dollar Amount: $580,000,000 saved.

Eurasia Foundation Digital Transformation Activity
Description: Funding for digital transformation activities in Europe was terminated.

Dollar Amount: $69,000,000 saved.

Internews Media Programs
Description: Programs including “media enabling democracy, inclusion, and accountability in Moldova” were canceled.

Dollar Amount: $32,000,000 saved.

USAID Meals to Al Qaeda-Linked Group
Description: Alleged funding for meals to a terrorist group linked to Al Qaeda was terminated. (Note: This claim is unverified and lacks supporting evidence from primary sources.)

Dollar Amount: $10,000,000 saved.

USAID NGO Funding for Bat Virus Research in Wuhan
Description: Alleged funding to an NGO supporting bat virus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology was canceled. (Note: This claim is unverified and lacks corroboration.)

Dollar Amount: $5,000,000 saved.

HHS Free Housing and Cars for Illegal Aliens
Description: Alleged funding for housing and cars for undocumented immigrants was terminated. (Note: This claim is unverified and lacks detailed evidence.)

Dollar Amount: $22,000,000,000 saved.

DEI Scholarships in Burma
Description: Funding for DEI scholarships in Burma was canceled.

Dollar Amount: $45,000,000 saved.

Social and Economic Inclusion Program
Description: A program to improve social and economic inclusion (unspecified location) was terminated.

Dollar Amount: $40,000,000 saved.

Sex Changes in Guatemala
Description: Alleged funding for sex change procedures in Guatemala was canceled. (Note: This claim is unverified.)

Dollar Amount: $2,000,000 saved.

Sesame Street in Iraq
Description: Funding for a Sesame Street program in Iraq was terminated.

Dollar Amount: $20,000,000 saved.

DEI Contracts at the Department of Education
Description: 29 contracts related to DEI initiatives were canceled.

Dollar Amount: $101,000,000 saved.

ESG Consultant in Africa
Description: A consultancy contract for Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) initiatives in Africa was terminated.

Dollar Amount: $520,000,000 saved.

Promotion Program (Unspecified)
Description: A program for promotion (details unclear) was canceled.

Dollar Amount: $25,000,000 saved.

Johns Hopkins Social and Behavior Change in Uganda
Description: Funding for a program to drive social and behavior change in Uganda was terminated.

Dollar Amount: $42,000,000 saved.

Fiscal Federalism in Nepal
Description: A program supporting fiscal federalism in Nepal was canceled.

Dollar Amount: $20,000,000 saved.

Biodiversity Program (Unspecified)
Description: A biodiversity-focused program (details unclear) was terminated.

Dollar Amount: $19,000,000 saved.

EPA Wasteful Spending
Description: Funds identified as wasted by the Biden administration, including discretionary distributions to entities like the Climate United Fund.

Dollar Amount: $20,000,000,000 saved.

Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Contracts
Description: 89 contracts for educational research, including evaluations of programs like the 21st Century Community Learning Centers, were terminated. DOGE claimed $881,000,000 in savings, but analysis suggests actual savings may be ~$278,000,000 due to funds already spent.

Dollar Amount: $278,000,000 saved (adjusted estimate).

Mathematica Teacher Residency Evaluation Contract
Description: A contract to evaluate teacher residency programs was canceled. DOGE claimed $19,000,000 in savings, but the contract was valued at ~$8,000,000.

Dollar Amount: $8,000,000 saved (adjusted estimate).

Small Business Administration Fraudulent Loans
Description: Loans made to applicants over 115 or under 11 years old in 2020-2021 were identified as fraudulent and canceled.

Dollar Amount: $630,000,000 saved.

Labor Department Fraudulent Unemployment Payments
Description: Fraudulent unemployment payments made since 2020 were terminated.

Dollar Amount: $382,000,000 saved.


EPA Leasing Costs
Description: Savings from moving staff out of a Washington building, reducing leasing costs.

Dollar Amount: $18,000,000 saved.

Office Leases (Unspecified)
Description: Nearly two dozen office leases were terminated, with no specific details on locations.

Dollar Amount: $44,600,000 saved.

Elon, once a hero of the left and progressives, for supposedly helping to save us from the climate change fraud, has now become Enemy #1.. to the point where vandalism and violence is justified

More results...

Wrong board.

Jim

He gets results:
Trump Administration Announces Trade Deal With Britain

I'd genuinely like to know how this is a good result.

In 2023, the avg UK tariff rate on US imports was 3.8%. In contrast, the avg US tariff rate on UK imports was 3.3% - slightly less, but quite close.

With this deal, the avg UK tariff rate on US imports per White House will be 1.8%. In contrast, the avg US tariff rate on UK imports remains at the recently elevated 10%.

That means we consumers in the US will pay up to 6.2% more on average for imported UK goods than we did before, while consumers in the UK will pay up to 2% less for imported US goods.

One could argue it's a very slight win for very specific US companies selling goods into the UK, except if they buy the inputs for their goods from.. pretty much anywhere but the US, since tariffs have now raised prices on goods imported from every country in the world.

One could also argue it's a benefit to the US government in terms of additional tariff (tax) revenue, but in that case, let's call this a tax instead of pretending it's something else.

But what about all the consumers in the US who would buy goods from the UK? Now we're simply faced with paying more for what we used to get for less.

Considering these net effects as a whole, this still seems like a significantly more negative result than pre-tariff, with very little if anyything to celebrate about.

Depends on your frame of reference.

Your next door neighbour sets fire to your house, and his house, and says that if you lend him your lawnmower he won't block some of the fire trucks. He doesn't guarantee how many, but says it will be some. Is it a big win for him if you then lend him your lawnmower? He did, admittedly, get results.


One of my best friends is a Kiwi with an amazingly successful business history (he started as a teenager with a hot dog stand in Wellington, later the first one who imported used car parts from Japan (a business often copied, but never with his success), now in his "retirement" (Ha!!!) a mentor for many inventors and creative people without business skills) and racedriver history (NZ land speed record for Diesel engines, Porsche cup champion, around 70 24h races worldwide).

He once told me this about results and the means to get them:

"In business you can only get so far while staying a decent, honest person with integrity. There is a threshold you can't transcend without throwing scrupels over board. I am not willing to do that."

Keir Starmer: (During the announcement call with Trump (speaking via speakerphone from a Jaguar Land Rover factory in the West Midlands)

“This is a really fantastic, historic day.”

“It was about this time of day 80 years ago that Winston Churchill announced victory in Europe… To be able to announce this great deal on the same day 80 years forward, almost at the same hour and as we were 80 years ago with the U.K. and the U.S. standing side by side, I think is incredibly important.”

“This [deal] is going to boost trade between and across our countries. It’s going to not only protect jobs, but create jobs, opening market access.”

“The timing couldn’t be more apt, because not only was it 80 years ago today, victory came for Europe after and at the end of the Second World War but of course, on that day, the UK and the US stood together as the closest of allies.”

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-administrati...

Winning!

For decades politicians have talked about lowering drug prices and the huge discrepancy between prices paid in the US vs. identical drugs in other countries. Trump finally trying to do some about it:

Trump seeks to lower drug prices in U.S. by pressing other countries to pay more

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lower-medications-cos...

Sorry to all the international posters on this board. But wait, your government pays for it anyway./sarc

This process will take time, but is a step in the right direction.

More winning from our deal making president.

Didn't we just leave this phase of the board behind us?

Do we have to get dragged back into it?

Didn't we just leave this phase of the board behind us?

Do we have to get dragged back into it?


We don't have to. You know what to do.

dtb

Didn't we just leave this phase of the board behind us?

Do we have to get dragged back into it?

Just use the "ignore" button. My list has grown by one. It makes life more pleasant - particularly if people don't copy what was said and repost it.

I don't do this easily. But I do have a "three strikes and out" attitude. Given the number of good posters Manlobbi has attracted, there's actually very few of them.

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.