US economy thread (3 Viewers)

[massraider]

Consumer sentiment drops in March to 57.9, according to University of Michigan survey, worse than expected

Not pretty for consumer confidence or future inflation expectations. I don't see a rate cut this year, and I expect to see the 10 year start to rise again.

That's interesting because the EOCI and leading economic indicator are positive and trending up.

https://realinvestmentadvice.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/image-60.png

Every time I see data or conversations like this all I can think of is Mathew Berry’s 100 facts articles. Data can be shaped and molded to tell almost any story. Makes it so hard to decipher because it’s all “true”.

True, but it doesn't appear to be huge doom and gloom out there. The best indicator is unemployment and that's hanging in there. Economic output is pretty decent and dramatically improving over the last few years - the last few years buoyed by huge govt. spending. Now those are reversing as govt. is getting much tighter and business conditions are improving.

This is another good composite view of economic conditions, which have us in somewhat negative territory. It gives another look at facets of the economy and has value when you see it over time. Looks like consumer sentiment, house, and car sales are what's hurting - no surprise with current interest rates. http://www.econpi.com/

I posted a while back in the stock thread that I didn't see any rate cuts this year and lean toward hikes, if anything, so right with you there.

Oh, and just to be completely contrarian, here is a pretty good article that refutes the premise that the cause of the current downturn was tariffs. Something I mostly agree with - my thoughts are the tariffs tipped the scales over the precipice on what was a mildly overheated market. So the straw that broke the camel's back.

https://www.morningstar.com/markets/tariffs-arent-true-cause-markets-selloff

The "negatives" right now are almost completely wrapped up in sentiment. Keeping with the theme of the entire life of this thread, I haven't seen any economic data that points towards the direction people generally "feel" things are going, outside of a few cherry picked indicators similar to those that have been shared since the inception of this thread, which are often non-predictive on their own or taken out of context.

And that makes sense, given that the things people worry will trigger a big downturn aren't really reflected in any numbers yet, but sentiment is getting ahead of the curve here.

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast. This is around the 5th likely recession we've been through in this thread's 2 year history, and the majority of the time we see that no matter how much people worry about spending when chatting, when push comes to shove they spend the money anyway.

We don't know if empirically these changes are actually going to have a huge effect on things like inflation, unemployment, earnings reports, etc yet. It's entirely possible and even possibly the more likely case that if and when it doesn't have as large effect on those empirical numbers as people expect, sentiment will reverse practically overnight. It's also possible we will see it in those numbers and things will snowball from there, but I think that is the less likely scenario.

This post immediately made me think of this story I just read:

https://www.thestreet.com/retail/dollar-general-ceo-flags-alarming-shift-in-customer-behavior

 

[The Z Machine]

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

True, but it doesn't appear to be huge doom and gloom out there. The best indicator is unemployment and that's hanging in there. Economic output is pretty decent and dramatically improving over the last few years - the last few years buoyed by huge govt. spending. Now those are reversing as govt. is getting much tighter and business conditions are improving.

This is another good composite view of economic conditions, which have us in somewhat negative territory. It gives another look at facets of the economy and has value when you see it over time. Looks like consumer sentiment, house, and car sales are what's hurting - no surprise with current interest rates. http://www.econpi.com/

I posted a while back in the stock thread that I didn't see any rate cuts this year and lean toward hikes, if anything, so right with you there.

Oh, and just to be completely contrarian, here is a pretty good article that refutes the premise that the cause of the current downturn was tariffs. Something I mostly agree with - my thoughts are the tariffs tipped the scales over the precipice on what was a mildly overheated market. So the straw that broke the camel's back.

https://www.morningstar.com/markets/tariffs-arent-true-cause-markets-selloff

Great posting. It's as if there are two different economies based on what media source you listen to.

Employment, GDP growth and Federal deficit/debt should be at the top of the list in terms of evaluating the economy IMHO. Short term stock market pullbacks are rather insignificant.

These, and would also add inflation, as it is part of the Fed’s dual mandate. Would also potentially add the housing market to this list of economic indicators.

 

[djmich]

I think I may have asked the before, has anyone seen a full blown model that illustrates the impact of tariffs, with clear assumptions and all 2nd order effects. It would be nice to have, make it easier to argue the assumptions if they were commonly understood.

 

[dkp993]

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast.

This is an important point, and possibly an indicator.

I’m in a unique position with the job I have to get a good glimpse into people’s (especially 20’s and 30’s age groups) discretionary spending. I’m an executive in the wedding business in one of the largest (possibly the largest) wedding companies in the country, we did 10,000 last year. We have 80 venues (and growing rapidly) across 6 states (west, mid and east coast). I’ve been in the business for 12 years now so understand our customers buying cycle extremely well. Our average booking window (the time our clients book the event to the time the event happens) has been extremely consistent in those 12 years (absent COVID obviously). 9-12 months. So far in Q1 (our peak booking season) we have seen a dramatic shift to 12-15 months as well as people choosing to book Fridays and Sundays vs higher priced, and more desirable, Saturday’s. Nether of these things we’ve ever seen before, and certainly not in tandem.

For us it’s pretty clear, our customers are being far more cautious with their money and wanting(needing?) more time to save for it.

What does this mean for the economy as a whole, who knows, maybe nothing maybe everything. It’s only one data point. But for me it’s certainly eyebrow raising and the first the first real indicator that has me nervous.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast.

This is an important point, and possibly an indicator.

I’m in a unique position with the job I have to get a good glimpse into people’s (especially 20’s and 30’s age groups) discretionary spending. I’m an executive in the wedding business in one of the largest (possibly the largest) wedding companies in the country, we did 10,000 last year. We have 80 venues (and growing rapidly) across 6 states (west, mid and east coast). I’ve been in the business for 12 years now so understand our customers buying cycle extremely well. Our average booking window (the time our clients book the event to the time the event happens) has been extremely consistent in those 12 years (absent COVID obviously). 9-12 months. So far in Q1 (our peak booking season) we have seen a dramatic shift to 12-15 months as well as people choosing to book Fridays and Sundays vs higher priced, and more desirable, Saturday’s. Nether of these things we’ve ever seen before, and certainly not in tandem.

For us it’s pretty clear, our customers are being far more cautious with their money and wanting(needing?) more time to save for it.

What does this mean for the economy as a whole, who knows, maybe nothing maybe everything. It’s only one data point. But for me it’s certainly eyebrow raising and the first the first real indicator that has me nervous.

Bookmarking this for the next time I get married

 

[tommyGunZ]

Consumer sentiment drops in March to 57.9, according to University of Michigan survey, worse than expected

Not pretty for consumer confidence or future inflation expectations. I don't see a rate cut this year, and I expect to see the 10 year start to rise again.

That's interesting because the EOCI and leading economic indicator are positive and trending up.

https://realinvestmentadvice.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/image-60.png

Every time I see data or conversations like this all I can think of is Mathew Berry’s 100 facts articles. Data can be shaped and molded to tell almost any story. Makes it so hard to decipher because it’s all “true”.

True, but it doesn't appear to be huge doom and gloom out there. The best indicator is unemployment and that's hanging in there. Economic output is pretty decent and dramatically improving over the last few years - the last few years buoyed by huge govt. spending. Now those are reversing as govt. is getting much tighter and business conditions are improving.

This is another good composite view of economic conditions, which have us in somewhat negative territory. It gives another look at facets of the economy and has value when you see it over time. Looks like consumer sentiment, house, and car sales are what's hurting - no surprise with current interest rates. http://www.econpi.com/

I posted a while back in the stock thread that I didn't see any rate cuts this year and lean toward hikes, if anything, so right with you there.

Oh, and just to be completely contrarian, here is a pretty good article that refutes the premise that the cause of the current downturn was tariffs. Something I mostly agree with - my thoughts are the tariffs tipped the scales over the precipice on what was a mildly overheated market. So the straw that broke the camel's back.

https://www.morningstar.com/markets/tariffs-arent-true-cause-markets-selloff

The "negatives" right now are almost completely wrapped up in sentiment. Keeping with the theme of the entire life of this thread, I haven't seen any economic data that points towards the direction people generally "feel" things are going, outside of a few cherry picked indicators similar to those that have been shared since the inception of this thread, which are often non-predictive on their own or taken out of context.

And that makes sense, given that the things people worry will trigger a big downturn aren't really reflected in any numbers yet, but sentiment is getting ahead of the curve here.

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast. This is around the 5th likely recession we've been through in this thread's 2 year history, and the majority of the time we see that no matter how much people worry about spending when chatting, when push comes to shove they spend the money anyway.

We don't know if empirically these changes are actually going to have a huge effect on things like inflation, unemployment, earnings reports, etc yet. It's entirely possible and even possibly the more likely case that if and when it doesn't have as large effect on those empirical numbers as people expect, sentiment will reverse practically overnight. It's also possible we will see it in those numbers and things will snowball from there, but I think that is the less likely scenario.

There’s a lot of good stuff in this post.

Agree with your point that the calls for recessions in recent years have almost made current calls “boy who cried wolf”.

To that, I’ll add that employment is a lagging indicator, and most of the calls I’ve seen about a possible near term recession are based on the Atlanta Fed’s recent report that indicated GDP growth has gone negative. I think it’s fair to distinguish the recessionary calls that in hindsight were clearly based in advancing political interests, to calls now which are literally based on hard data from the Fed.

Report from financial website Barron’s: https://www.barrons.com/livecoverag...now-estimate-falls-again-kv9ZZAC5h68mreyNgjBk

 

[TripItUp]

The "negatives" right now are almost completely wrapped up in sentiment. Keeping with the theme of the entire life of this thread, I haven't seen any economic data that points towards the direction people generally "feel" things are going, outside of a few cherry picked indicators similar to those that have been shared since the inception of this thread, which are often non-predictive on their own or taken out of context.

And that makes sense, given that the things people worry will trigger a big downturn aren't really reflected in any numbers yet, but sentiment is getting ahead of the curve here.

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast. This is around the 5th likely recession we've been through in this thread's 2 year history, and the majority of the time we see that no matter how much people worry about spending when chatting, when push comes to shove they spend the money anyway.

We don't know if empirically these changes are actually going to have a huge effect on things like inflation, unemployment, earnings reports, etc yet. It's entirely possible and even possibly the more likely case that if and when it doesn't have as large effect on those empirical numbers as people expect, sentiment will reverse practically overnight. It's also possible we will see it in those numbers and things will snowball from there, but I think that is the less likely scenario.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Back to the economy...several thoughts

1) I do believe that when/if there is more clarity on tariffs we will have more stock market stability and likely rebound of stock prices
2) If the Federal govt is able to continue to cut spending and eventually balance the budget it will be a financial boon to the economy
3) There will be winners and losers in this new economic landscape, just like there were winners and losers with the govts covid policies
4) it's a mistake to presume anything regarding the tariff policies, not all of the facts are known and economists disagree on their net outcomes. I pretty much ignore all the white noise from talking heads that know little to nothing about economics. There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

 

[Instinctive]

Back to the economy...several thoughts

1) I do believe that when/if there is more clarity on tariffs we will have more stock market stability and likely rebound of stock prices
2) If the Federal govt is able to continue to cut spending and eventually balance the budget it will be a financial boon to the economy
3) There will be winners and losers in this new economic landscape, just like there were winners and losers with the govts covid policies
4) it's a mistake to presume anything regarding the tariff policies, not all of the facts are known and economists disagree on their net outcomes. I pretty much ignore all the white noise from talking heads that know little to nothing about economics. There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

That's where it gets political though. A true economist could only say it's the right way to go...for a specific goal. So I guess it depends on what someone thinks this situation needs, then we could evaluate if tariffs would be a positive or negative to get that need.

 

[Schmeabs]

Consumer sentiment drops in March to 57.9, according to University of Michigan survey, worse than expected

Not pretty for consumer confidence or future inflation expectations. I don't see a rate cut this year, and I expect to see the 10 year start to rise again.

That's interesting because the EOCI and leading economic indicator are positive and trending up.

https://realinvestmentadvice.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/image-60.png

Every time I see data or conversations like this all I can think of is Mathew Berry’s 100 facts articles. Data can be shaped and molded to tell almost any story. Makes it so hard to decipher because it’s all “true”.

True, but it doesn't appear to be huge doom and gloom out there. The best indicator is unemployment and that's hanging in there. Economic output is pretty decent and dramatically improving over the last few years - the last few years buoyed by huge govt. spending. Now those are reversing as govt. is getting much tighter and business conditions are improving.

This is another good composite view of economic conditions, which have us in somewhat negative territory. It gives another look at facets of the economy and has value when you see it over time. Looks like consumer sentiment, house, and car sales are what's hurting - no surprise with current interest rates. http://www.econpi.com/

I posted a while back in the stock thread that I didn't see any rate cuts this year and lean toward hikes, if anything, so right with you there.

Oh, and just to be completely contrarian, here is a pretty good article that refutes the premise that the cause of the current downturn was tariffs. Something I mostly agree with - my thoughts are the tariffs tipped the scales over the precipice on what was a mildly overheated market. So the straw that broke the camel's back.

https://www.morningstar.com/markets/tariffs-arent-true-cause-markets-selloff

The "negatives" right now are almost completely wrapped up in sentiment. Keeping with the theme of the entire life of this thread, I haven't seen any economic data that points towards the direction people generally "feel" things are going, outside of a few cherry picked indicators similar to those that have been shared since the inception of this thread, which are often non-predictive on their own or taken out of context.

And that makes sense, given that the things people worry will trigger a big downturn aren't really reflected in any numbers yet, but sentiment is getting ahead of the curve here.

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast. This is around the 5th likely recession we've been through in this thread's 2 year history, and the majority of the time we see that no matter how much people worry about spending when chatting, when push comes to shove they spend the money anyway.

We don't know if empirically these changes are actually going to have a huge effect on things like inflation, unemployment, earnings reports, etc yet. It's entirely possible and even possibly the more likely case that if and when it doesn't have as large effect on those empirical numbers as people expect, sentiment will reverse practically overnight. It's also possible we will see it in those numbers and things will snowball from there, but I think that is the less likely scenario.

There’s a lot of good stuff in this post.

Agree with your point that the calls for recessions in recent years have almost made current calls “boy who cried wolf”.

To that, I’ll add that employment is a lagging indicator, and most of the calls I’ve seen about a possible near term recession are based on the Atlanta Fed’s recent report that indicated GDP growth has gone negative. I think it’s fair to distinguish the recessionary calls that in hindsight were clearly based in advancing political interests, to calls now which are literally based on hard data from the Fed.

Report from financial website Barron’s: https://www.barrons.com/livecoverag...now-estimate-falls-again-kv9ZZAC5h68mreyNgjBk

The recent Atlanta GDPNow estimate of -2.4% is not officially from the Fed nor is it "hard" data. This report is very flawed and I would not trust it. First, there was a huge surge of gold imports in January which had a negative 2% impact on this reading. Gold imports are not counted in the official GDP report, only Atlanta GDPNow report. Second, there was a huge jump in imports of all goods before the initial tariffs. That amount of trade deficit won't continue. Third, the employment report from March 7th was very good and not yet reflected in the report. It will add .5% to the number. In summary, I expect 1st quarter GDP to be positive.

 

[Ridgeback]

Back to the economy...several thoughts

1) I do believe that when/if there is more clarity on tariffs we will have more stock market stability and likely rebound of stock prices
2) If the Federal govt is able to continue to cut spending and eventually balance the budget it will be a financial boon to the economy
3) There will be winners and losers in this new economic landscape, just like there were winners and losers with the govts covid policies
4) it's a mistake to presume anything regarding the tariff policies, not all of the facts are known and economists disagree on their net outcomes. I pretty much ignore all the white noise from talking heads that know little to nothing about economics. There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There's a reason why they are rarely used until recently.

 

[Manster]

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast.

This is an important point, and possibly an indicator.

I’m in a unique position with the job I have to get a good glimpse into people’s (especially 20’s and 30’s age groups) discretionary spending. I’m an executive in the wedding business in one of the largest (possibly the largest) wedding companies in the country, we did 10,000 last year. We have 80 venues (and growing rapidly) across 6 states (west, mid and east coast). I’ve been in the business for 12 years now so understand our customers buying cycle extremely well. Our average booking window (the time our clients book the event to the time the event happens) has been extremely consistent in those 12 years (absent COVID obviously). 9-12 months. So far in Q1 (our peak booking season) we have seen a dramatic shift to 12-15 months as well as people choosing to book Fridays and Sundays vs higher priced, and more desirable, Saturday’s. Nether of these things we’ve ever seen before, and certainly not in tandem.

For us it’s pretty clear, our customers are being far more cautious with their money and wanting(needing?) more time to save for it.

What does this mean for the economy as a whole, who knows, maybe nothing maybe everything. It’s only one data point. But for me it’s certainly eyebrow raising and the first the first real indicator that has me nervous.

So ur the devil.....

 

[dkp993]

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast.

This is an important point, and possibly an indicator.

I’m in a unique position with the job I have to get a good glimpse into people’s (especially 20’s and 30’s age groups) discretionary spending. I’m an executive in the wedding business in one of the largest (possibly the largest) wedding companies in the country, we did 10,000 last year. We have 80 venues (and growing rapidly) across 6 states (west, mid and east coast). I’ve been in the business for 12 years now so understand our customers buying cycle extremely well. Our average booking window (the time our clients book the event to the time the event happens) has been extremely consistent in those 12 years (absent COVID obviously). 9-12 months. So far in Q1 (our peak booking season) we have seen a dramatic shift to 12-15 months as well as people choosing to book Fridays and Sundays vs higher priced, and more desirable, Saturday’s. Nether of these things we’ve ever seen before, and certainly not in tandem.

For us it’s pretty clear, our customers are being far more cautious with their money and wanting(needing?) more time to save for it.

What does this mean for the economy as a whole, who knows, maybe nothing maybe everything. It’s only one data point. But for me it’s certainly eyebrow raising and the first the first real indicator that has me nervous.

So ur the devil.....

lol. No, I just throw the party.

 

[Manster]

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast.

This is an important point, and possibly an indicator.

I’m in a unique position with the job I have to get a good glimpse into people’s (especially 20’s and 30’s age groups) discretionary spending. I’m an executive in the wedding business in one of the largest (possibly the largest) wedding companies in the country, we did 10,000 last year. We have 80 venues (and growing rapidly) across 6 states (west, mid and east coast). I’ve been in the business for 12 years now so understand our customers buying cycle extremely well. Our average booking window (the time our clients book the event to the time the event happens) has been extremely consistent in those 12 years (absent COVID obviously). 9-12 months. So far in Q1 (our peak booking season) we have seen a dramatic shift to 12-15 months as well as people choosing to book Fridays and Sundays vs higher priced, and more desirable, Saturday’s. Nether of these things we’ve ever seen before, and certainly not in tandem.

For us it’s pretty clear, our customers are being far more cautious with their money and wanting(needing?) more time to save for it.

What does this mean for the economy as a whole, who knows, maybe nothing maybe everything. It’s only one data point. But for me it’s certainly eyebrow raising and the first the first real indicator that has me nervous.

So ur the devil.....

lol. No, I just throw the party.

I'm just messin with ya......I do however think there's a lot of pressure on girls to have a big wedding. That usually equals $$$$

It's not unlike the quinceañera industry. My friend is very familiar, and said it's crazy how much pressure is on families to out-do each other.

Your industry is seeing people having waaaay less for discretionary spending. Anecdotally, my wife and I are making more money then we ever have, by a fair amount. After bills, and saving for retirement, we are finding we are coming up short. I would image there is a good percentage of Americans who are getting in debt that they will not be able to get out of on their own.

 

[Stoneworker]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Back to the economy...several thoughts

1) I do believe that when/if there is more clarity on tariffs we will have more stock market stability and likely rebound of stock prices
2) If the Federal govt is able to continue to cut spending and eventually balance the budget it will be a financial boon to the economy
3) There will be winners and losers in this new economic landscape, just like there were winners and losers with the govts covid policies
4) it's a mistake to presume anything regarding the tariff policies, not all of the facts are known and economists disagree on their net outcomes. I pretty much ignore all the white noise from talking heads that know little to nothing about economics. There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

That's where it gets political though. A true economist could only say it's the right way to go...for a specific goal. So I guess it depends on what someone thinks this situation needs, then we could evaluate if tariffs would be a positive or negative to get that need.

This thread is chalked full of politics. But, if you insist, the current tariffs are in place as a matter of national security. So, I'll take a link in that context.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Back to the economy...several thoughts

1) I do believe that when/if there is more clarity on tariffs we will have more stock market stability and likely rebound of stock prices
2) If the Federal govt is able to continue to cut spending and eventually balance the budget it will be a financial boon to the economy
3) There will be winners and losers in this new economic landscape, just like there were winners and losers with the govts covid policies
4) it's a mistake to presume anything regarding the tariff policies, not all of the facts are known and economists disagree on their net outcomes. I pretty much ignore all the white noise from talking heads that know little to nothing about economics. There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There's a reason why they are rarely used until recently.

Until recently they've been seen as an unwise way to go to accomplish anything meaningful too. The assertion is that there are respectable experts are out there saying they are a good thing now. I'm merely asking for one. We are supposed to provide links to things we state as fact right?

 

[Sparky Polastri]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

This doesn't come remotely close to answering the question posed.

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs. To this person, they are a small part of the equation.

 

[Stoneworker]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

This doesn't come remotely close to answering the question posed.

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs. To this person, they are a small part of the equation.

My bad for thinking that actually providing a white paper from the chief economic adviser might lead to being more informed about the theoretical concepts underpinning why/how tariffs are being used to guide economic policy

Carry on with your b*tching and moaning

 

[Zeppelin]

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs.

This part is way too political and needs to stop. The reason is it leads to responses that are political. It's not hard to stick to the facts without mentioning stuff like the above. Otherwise this thread will be in trouble.

 

[dkp993]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

This doesn't come remotely close to answering the question posed.

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs. To this person, they are a small part of the equation.

You asked for one credible source, he gave you that. Now apparently it’s one credible source that aligns with your viewpoint.

 

[JAA]

Back to the economy...several thoughts

1) I do believe that when/if there is more clarity on tariffs we will have more stock market stability and likely rebound of stock prices
2) If the Federal govt is able to continue to cut spending and eventually balance the budget it will be a financial boon to the economy
3) There will be winners and losers in this new economic landscape, just like there were winners and losers with the govts covid policies
4) it's a mistake to presume anything regarding the tariff policies, not all of the facts are known and economists disagree on their net outcomes. I pretty much ignore all the white noise from talking heads that know little to nothing about economics. There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

Also, I think we are decades off of 'balancing the budget'

 

[fruity pebbles]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

This doesn't come remotely close to answering the question posed.

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs. To this person, they are a small part of the equation.

You are one of the chief political posters in this thread and you really need to stop

 

[FBG Moderator]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

This doesn't come remotely close to answering the question posed.

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs. To this person, they are a small part of the equation.

You are one of the chief political posters in this thread and you really need to stop

Thank you.

 

[Desert_Power]

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs.

This part is way too political and needs to stop. The reason is it leads to responses that are political. It's not hard to stick to the facts without mentioning stuff like the above. Otherwise this thread will be in trouble.

If we don't want things to be political it probably isn't a good idea to post opinion papers of current administration members either. Although, I agree it is best to not respond in this way.

 

[Instinctive]

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs.

This part is way too political and needs to stop. The reason is it leads to responses that are political. It's not hard to stick to the facts without mentioning stuff like the above. Otherwise this thread will be in trouble.

It's the same guy over and over too. How many people need to ask you to stop before you stop?

 

[TripItUp]

Some links that are positive for tariffs for those of you only tuning into the usual media sources and googling etc.

How Tariffs Can Help America

Economists have drawn the wrong lessons from the failures of the 1930s.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Economic View: Tariffs Done Right Can Rebuild Our Economy | Coalition For A Prosperous America

Proposals for new tariffs face a lot of criticism these days, from the media, from economists, and from foreign policy types. Part of the reason is that it’s Donald Trump making the proposals and many in those groups don’t like Trump. But the fact is that tariffs can work to build our economy...

prosperousamerica.org

https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/blackstone-backs-trumps-tariff-move-says-it-will-boost-us-manufacturing-2025-03-12/

 

[The Z Machine]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

Thanks for the link. It's quite long. I've read the first few pages. It sounds like Miran is advocating for the USD to weaken enough so that the exports gain value and imports are more expensive. Ok... but what are the implications for businesses that import, which currently make up more of the economy than exporters Doesn't sound like growth to me. Plus, weakening the dollar, making imports more expensive will likely be inflationary as there are many items that cannot be produced in the US. So the bananas, coffee, avocados, aluminum, etc will get more expensive. And what about reciprocal tariffs imposed by other counties? That would depress the export business, would it not?

 

[djmich]

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs.

This part is way too political and needs to stop. The reason is it leads to responses that are political. It's not hard to stick to the facts without mentioning stuff like the above. Otherwise this thread will be in trouble.

It's the same guy over and over too. How many people need to ask you to stop before you stop?

Dude, you can just put him on ignore lol

 

[Zeppelin]

Though I will conceded, its probably pretty easy to find a list of Trump appointees who agree with him. Though what is in this analysis is not what this administration is doing nor how they are using tariffs.

This part is way too political and needs to stop. The reason is it leads to responses that are political. It's not hard to stick to the facts without mentioning stuff like the above. Otherwise this thread will be in trouble.

It's the same guy over and over too. How many people need to ask you to stop before you stop?

Dude, you can just put him on ignore lol

That's all well and good but he keeps posting political comments and that could shut this thread down.

 

[Sand]

The "negatives" right now are almost completely wrapped up in sentiment.

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast. This is around the 5th likely recession we've been through in this thread's 2 year history, and the majority of the time we see that no matter how much people worry about spending when chatting, when push comes to shove they spend the money anyway.

Condensed your comments here. Completely agree on sentiment. I think probably 2000 is the last time sentiment crashed the market? It's real and can absolutely cause a spiral. Humans are strange animals.

On another note we haven't seen three recessions in a decade in well over 50 years. We're on two now. Anything is possible, but it's unlikely. Heck, our economy is pretty decent right now.

https://awealthofcommonsense.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Screenshot-2025-03-14-100114.png

Also, I think we are decades off of 'balancing the budget'

Get our expenditures to 20% of GDP and actually hold it there and we should grow out of the problem. We're still a number of clicks too high right now.

 

[Stoneworker]

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

Thanks for the link. It's quite long. I've read the first few pages. It sounds like Miran is advocating for the USD to weaken enough so that the exports gain value and imports are more expensive. Ok... but what are the implications for businesses that import, which currently make up more of the economy than exporters Doesn't sound like growth to me. Plus, weakening the dollar, making imports more expensive will likely be inflationary as there are many items that cannot be produced in the US. So the bananas, coffee, avocados, aluminum, etc will get more expensive. And what about reciprocal tariffs imposed by other counties? That would depress the export business, would it not?

From what I understand one of the major goals is for tariffs/currency revaluation to rebalance trade, which would draw more investment to the U.S. and expand our industrial capacity.

Both tariffs and currency policy are aimed at improving the competitiveness of American manufacturing, and thus increasing our industrial plant and allocating aggregate demand and jobs from the rest of the world stateside. - Miran

Is this "economic growth" per se, or just reshuffling? I'm not smart enough to answer that.

Also, large trade deficits are widely believed to hinder economic growth by reducing domestic savings and investment, as well as an overreliance on foreign capital. There are also strong arguments that large trade deficits can lead to large budget deficits and therefore much higher national debt, which is a drag on the economy. So in theory reducing these economic drags could release pent-up growth

 

[fatness]

Since 2020 our population has increased 2% and our budget has increased 55%

Revenue is up 47% in that time frame.

And we still can't help but overspend. Sheesh.

Well there's a big difference between overspending by 6% and overspending by 53%, wouldn't you agree? The latter is what your post implied;

Since 2020 our population has increased 2% and our budget has increased 55%. That hides a multitude of sins while the money train is flowing, but at some point the markets can't bear it.

The best way to cut down on spending is to go after overpriced and/or unnecessary defense contracts. But for some reason there is a hunger currently for taking away people's jobs instead. Despite any perverse emotional satisfaction someone might feel (I'm not talking about you or any poster in particular) at other people's jobs being taken away, it's difficult to argue that doing so actually saves the US more money.

 

[fatness]

US businesses are getting concerned about the trade wars and how they're affecting their businesses, now and in the future.

Tesla is concerned.

"The group that penned the letter also warned that President Trump's tariffs could make it more expensive for Tesla and other U.S. automakers to make vehicles domestically and much less competitive in key overseas export markets. Tesla pointed out issues within its own supply chain. It finds it difficult to source domestically made components for its EVs and the lithium-ion batteries used to power them. Although it processes lithium in Texas and assembles much of its batteries in its Nevada Gigafactory, many raw materials, like lithium and cobalt, must be imported. 'Nonetheless, even with aggressive localization of the supply chain, certain parts and components are difficult or impossible to source within the US," Tesla said. They also urged the trade rep to "further evaluate domestic supply chain limitations to ensure that US manufacturers are not unduly burdened by trade actions that could result in the imposition of cost-prohibitive tariffs on necessary components.' "

"Tesla added that "consideration should also be given to the timeline of implementation" of such policies, adding that "US companies will benefit from a phased approach that enables them to prepare accordingly and ensure appropriate supply chain and compliance measures are taken.”"

 

[The Z Machine]

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

Thanks for the link. It's quite long. I've read the first few pages. It sounds like Miran is advocating for the USD to weaken enough so that the exports gain value and imports are more expensive. Ok... but what are the implications for businesses that import, which currently make up more of the economy than exporters Doesn't sound like growth to me. Plus, weakening the dollar, making imports more expensive will likely be inflationary as there are many items that cannot be produced in the US. So the bananas, coffee, avocados, aluminum, etc will get more expensive. And what about reciprocal tariffs imposed by other counties? That would depress the export business, would it not?

From what I understand one of the major goals is for tariffs/currency revaluation to rebalance trade, which would draw more investment to the U.S. and expand our industrial capacity.

Both tariffs and currency policy are aimed at improving the competitiveness of American manufacturing, and thus increasing our industrial plant and allocating aggregate demand and jobs from the rest of the world stateside. - Miran

Is this "economic growth" per se, or just reshuffling? I'm not smart enough to answer that.

Also, large trade deficits are widely believed to hinder economic growth by reducing domestic savings and investment, as well as an overreliance on foreign capital. There are also strong arguments that large trade deficits can lead to large budget deficits and therefore much higher national debt, which is a drag on the economy. So in theory reducing these economic drags could release pent-up growth

I think i was reading this incorrectly. Miranda thinks that tariffs combined withnsome sort of currency manipulation by the Fed (or Congress?) to strengthen the USD will offset the costs of the tariffs to consumers.

I'm not sure how that will help foreign investment into the US manufacturing sector if it becomes that much more expensive to build here. Furthermore it seems predicated on other countries not retaliating and engaging in a prolonged trade war. That will just dampen the export market with a combined hit of more expensive US made products (due to stronger USD) and barriers to trade where the US made product is at a disadvantage compared to a Brazilian, Mexican, or German made product.

 

[Stoneworker]

I think i was reading this incorrectly. Miranda thinks that tariffs combined withnsome sort of currency manipulation by the Fed (or Congress?) to strengthen the USD will offset the costs of the tariffs to consumers.

I'm not sure how that will help foreign investment into the US manufacturing sector if it becomes that much more expensive to build here. Furthermore it seems predicated on other countries not retaliating and engaging in a prolonged trade war. That will just dampen the export market with a combined hit of more expensive US made products (due to stronger USD) and barriers to trade where the US made product is at a disadvantage compared to a Brazilian, Mexican, or German made product.

Yes. The idea seems to be that the tax increase paid by U.S. importers is offset by a cheaper exchange rate.

“American consumers’ purchasing power isn’t affected, since the tariff and the currency move cancel each other out,” Miran, who obtained his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard, wrote, “but since the exporters’ citizens became poorer as a result of the currency move, the exporting nation ‘pays for’ or bears the burden of the tax, while the U.S. Treasury collects the revenue.”

Your bolded comment about trade wars is definitely a risk pointed out by Miran himself at his confirmation hearings. The antidote seems to be that the U.S. has much better negotiating leverage and therefore can always set more favorable trade terms.

Inflation is also an obvious risk, but apparently is counteracted by other parts of the economic agenda including tax cuts, deregulation and domestic energy production.

In theory at least. We'll see in practice.

 

[The Z Machine]

I think i was reading this incorrectly. Miranda thinks that tariffs combined withnsome sort of currency manipulation by the Fed (or Congress?) to strengthen the USD will offset the costs of the tariffs to consumers.

I'm not sure how that will help foreign investment into the US manufacturing sector if it becomes that much more expensive to build here. Furthermore it seems predicated on other countries not retaliating and engaging in a prolonged trade war. That will just dampen the export market with a combined hit of more expensive US made products (due to stronger USD) and barriers to trade where the US made product is at a disadvantage compared to a Brazilian, Mexican, or German made product.

Yes. The idea seems to be that the tax increase paid by U.S. importers is offset by a cheaper exchange rate.

“American consumers’ purchasing power isn’t affected, since the tariff and the currency move cancel each other out,” Miran, who obtained his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard, wrote, “but since the exporters’ citizens became poorer as a result of the currency move, the exporting nation ‘pays for’ or bears the burden of the tax, while the U.S. Treasury collects the revenue.”

Your bolded comment about trade wars is definitely a risk pointed out by Miran himself at his confirmation hearings. The antidote seems to be that the U.S. has much better negotiating leverage and therefore can always set more favorable trade terms.

Inflation is also an obvious risk, but apparently is counteracted by other parts of the economic agenda including tax cuts, deregulation and domestic energy production.

In theory at least. We'll see in practice.

While the US is the biggest economy in the world, having pissing off everyone at the same time means that in aggregate the pissed off countries outweigh the US. Seems to me that those countries should collude to stay strong in the face of tariffs, impose counter tariffs and then break down barriers between each other, fostering non-US trade. The coalition of "others" would need the balls to see their own economies suffer in the short term to put the squeeze on the US. Seems like a recipe for a trade war and chaos.

 

[Stoneworker]

I think i was reading this incorrectly. Miranda thinks that tariffs combined withnsome sort of currency manipulation by the Fed (or Congress?) to strengthen the USD will offset the costs of the tariffs to consumers.

I'm not sure how that will help foreign investment into the US manufacturing sector if it becomes that much more expensive to build here. Furthermore it seems predicated on other countries not retaliating and engaging in a prolonged trade war. That will just dampen the export market with a combined hit of more expensive US made products (due to stronger USD) and barriers to trade where the US made product is at a disadvantage compared to a Brazilian, Mexican, or German made product.

Yes. The idea seems to be that the tax increase paid by U.S. importers is offset by a cheaper exchange rate.

“American consumers’ purchasing power isn’t affected, since the tariff and the currency move cancel each other out,” Miran, who obtained his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard, wrote, “but since the exporters’ citizens became poorer as a result of the currency move, the exporting nation ‘pays for’ or bears the burden of the tax, while the U.S. Treasury collects the revenue.”

Your bolded comment about trade wars is definitely a risk pointed out by Miran himself at his confirmation hearings. The antidote seems to be that the U.S. has much better negotiating leverage and therefore can always set more favorable trade terms.

Inflation is also an obvious risk, but apparently is counteracted by other parts of the economic agenda including tax cuts, deregulation and domestic energy production.

In theory at least. We'll see in practice.

While the US is the biggest economy in the world, having pissing off everyone at the same time means that in aggregate the pissed off countries outweigh the US. Seems to me that those countries should collude to stay strong in the face of tariffs, impose counter tariffs and then break down barriers between each other, fostering non-US trade. The coalition of "others" would need the balls to see their own economies suffer in the short term to put the squeeze on the US. Seems like a recipe for a trade war and chaos.

It is clear that what's going on is disruptive. And I'm certainly not going to argue that "short-term pain leads to long-term economic gain." For the US or anyone else. I simply don't know. Just trying like everybody to make sense of it all and make better individual economic decisions. Maybe even profit some once the new world order starts taking better shape

 

[Ilov80s]

Another long term economic concern is how some of our current, let’s say realities, will impact our ability to attract the best quality talent to train and work in our country. That probably won’t be felt right away but I’ve already ready seen some stories about EU and Canada making a push to market themselves as the top international destination for the world’s most skilled workers.

 

[The Z Machine]

Another long term economic concern is how some of our current, let’s say realities, will impact our ability to attract the best quality talent to train and work in our country. That probably won’t be felt right away but I’ve already ready seen some stories about EU and Canada making a push to market themselves as the top international destination for the world’s most skilled workers.

And China has been making strong statements that their government is backing scientific research and native Chinese researchers will have better opportunities working in China due to the larger investment. Some long time academics have already moved back to China after 20+ years in US research institutions.

 

[The Z Machine]

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/17/oecd-cuts-us-and-global-economic-growth-outlooks-as-trumps-trade-tariffs-weigh.html

"The U.S.’s annual GDP growth is also projected to fall to 2.2% in 2025 and 1.6% in 2026 — down from earlier forecasts of 2.4% this year and 2.1% next year."

So, slower growth projected for the US due to tariffs. Maybe that will result in growth in the domestic manufacturing sector, but economists are projecting pain for other sectors.

 

[-OZ-]

The economy was the top issue in the last election.

As far as I can remember, it always has been.
Last year we had really low unemployment, inflation had fallen to within a goal rate, the US stock market was at all time highs, yet people didn’t like that inflation had been high and was still felt, and that homes were a lot more expensive to buy than a few years ago at least partly due to interest rates.
Any pain people feel or see that has to do with money is going to motivate many. Even when things are objectively good to great.

 

[The Z Machine]

people didn’t like that inflation had been high and was still felt, and that homes were a lot more expensive to buy than a few years ago at least partly due to interest rates.

Punishment for 1) the injection of too much money during COVID times that resulted in an inflation spike, and 2) disinvestment in home building over 20 years starting in the early 2000s, not keeping up with population growth + higher interest rates to combat the effects of #1.

 

[-OZ-]

people didn’t like that inflation had been high and was still felt, and that homes were a lot more expensive to buy than a few years ago at least partly due to interest rates.

Punishment for 1) the injection of too much money during COVID times that resulted in an inflation spike, and 2) disinvestment in home building over 20 years starting in the early 2000s, not keeping up with population growth + higher interest rates to combat the effects of #1.

right. I’m just saying that no matter what the objective stats indicate, people care the most about their wallet and how they feel.

 

[Sammy3469]

I'll take a link to a single reputable economist saying tariffs, being used the way they are right now are the right way to go in the current situation.

There are smart people who have dedicated their lives to studying economics on both sides of this issue.

What sides are these? Pro-tariffs as an economic growth strategy vs. free market as a growth strategy?

If that's the case, what economists are saying that blanket tariffs and trade barriers are good for the US economy?

Stephen Miran. The economist who chairs the Council of Economic Advisers.

Pretty amazing you guys can have such a strong opinion on the matter and not even know who is advising policy makers.

Stephen Miran: A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System

Thanks for the link. It's quite long. I've read the first few pages. It sounds like Miran is advocating for the USD to weaken enough so that the exports gain value and imports are more expensive. Ok... but what are the implications for businesses that import, which currently make up more of the economy than exporters Doesn't sound like growth to me. Plus, weakening the dollar, making imports more expensive will likely be inflationary as there are many items that cannot be produced in the US. So the bananas, coffee, avocados, aluminum, etc will get more expensive. And what about reciprocal tariffs imposed by other counties? That would depress the export business, would it not?

I would just add the dollar declining is the way its suppose to work, but that remains to be seen with the advent of stablecoins which act as de facto dollars these days in a whole range of trade situations. It's entirely possible we end up in the worst of both worlds of tariffs and a highly valued dollar.

It's also entirely possible different regions give us different results. There's some early data that its working like this with China, but no with the rest of the world, which makes sense given the political realities.

 

[beer 30]

Sometimes it can become a self fulfilling prophecy, where people stop spending because they're worried about a downturn, and that drop in spending helps to create numbers that indicate a downturn, which reduces spending more, and so on. But sentiment can reverse fast.

This is an important point, and possibly an indicator.

I’m in a unique position with the job I have to get a good glimpse into people’s (especially 20’s and 30’s age groups) discretionary spending. I’m an executive in the wedding business in one of the largest (possibly the largest) wedding companies in the country, we did 10,000 last year. We have 80 venues (and growing rapidly) across 6 states (west, mid and east coast). I’ve been in the business for 12 years now so understand our customers buying cycle extremely well. Our average booking window (the time our clients book the event to the time the event happens) has been extremely consistent in those 12 years (absent COVID obviously). 9-12 months. So far in Q1 (our peak booking season) we have seen a dramatic shift to 12-15 months as well as people choosing to book Fridays and Sundays vs higher priced, and more desirable, Saturday’s. Nether of these things we’ve ever seen before, and certainly not in tandem.

For us it’s pretty clear, our customers are being far more cautious with their money and wanting(needing?) more time to save for it.

What does this mean for the economy as a whole, who knows, maybe nothing maybe everything. It’s only one data point. But for me it’s certainly eyebrow raising and the first the first real indicator that has me nervous.

Bookmarking this for the next time I get married

While not an economist, I think I could definitely assist you with future expenditures

Also, I think we are decades off of 'balancing the budget'

Methinks you are right. The hole we are currently in isn't getting dug out of anytime soon. It will absolutely take a bipartisan effort to address it properly and make headway. Government spending has to be reigned in, either through current efforts or some other method. I don't really care who gets the win for this one. It needs to be a win for the US.

 

[Dr. Manhattan]

If this thread isn't political, why can I tell which way 90% of the posters lean simply based on their post?

I could take the names off with no prior history to view and nail it the majority of the time.

Ditto with your post.

 

[Desert_Power]

Another long term economic concern is how some of our current, let’s say realities, will impact our ability to attract the best quality talent to train and work in our country. That probably won’t be felt right away but I’ve already ready seen some stories about EU and Canada making a push to market themselves as the top international destination for the world’s most skilled workers.

Seems hard to believe that we're going to throw away one of the biggest human capital advantages we have had as a nation but here we are.

 

[Stoneworker]

Another long term economic concern is how some of our current, let’s say realities, will impact our ability to attract the best quality talent to train and work in our country. That probably won’t be felt right away but I’ve already ready seen some stories about EU and Canada making a push to market themselves as the top international destination for the world’s most skilled workers.

Seems hard to believe that we're going to throw away one of the biggest human capital advantages we have had as a nation but here we are.

This type of post is just fear mongering based on ridiculous extrapolations of speculative theories