Podcasts about us economy

The U.S. labor market is facing one of the sharpest corrections in over a century, even as AI-driven productivity gains push markets forward. In this conversation, Kerry Lutz and Dale Smothers explore the strange duality of slowing job growth alongside investor optimism — and what it means for interest rates, mortgages, and the Federal Reserve's next moves. Dale explains why today's Fed rate may be higher than necessary, and how stronger labor stats could have opened the door for earlier cuts. The discussion then shifts to the impact of tariffs, with both guests weighing the pros, cons, and the possibility of a consumption tax overhaul. Could tariffs really flip the U.S. economy? Tune in for a candid, insight-packed look at the forces shaping America's financial future. Find Dale here: https://rdsmotherswealth.com Find Kerry here: http://financialsurvivalnetwork.com/ and here: https://inflation.cafe Kerry's New Book “The World According to Martin Armstrong – Conversations with the Master Forecaster” is now a #1 Best Seller on Amazon. . Get your copy here: https://amzn.to/4kuC5p5  

The Guardian's senior China correspondent, Amy Hawkins, visits factories threatened by US tariffs in Guangzhou, south China, as the deadline for a US-China trade agreement approaches with no deal yet in sight. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/infocus

Trump fires the head of the BLS after job revisions. Weak data out of the US prompts further calls for rate cuts. Tariff revenue could match corporate income taxes. Toronto pre-sale market on the brink. Start an investment portfolio that's built to perform with Neighbourhood Holdings. Visit https://www.neighbourhoodholdings.com/looniehour to learn more!Check out Saily at https://www.saily.com/looniehour and use our promo code 'LOONIEHOUR' to get 15% off your first purchase!

The president of the United States fired the head of the government's main economic statistics agency after a recent report showed a less than positive picture of U.S. employment.The civil servant President Donald Trump fired was former Commissioner of Labor Statistics Erika McEntarfer, a labor economist nominated to the role in 2023 by President Joe Biden. The Senate overwhelmingly confirmed her in 2024. Commissioners often serve under multiple presidents.The president defended his reasoning for the firing on social media – though he didn't provide evidence to back up his claims. We discuss the consequences when the president fires the person at the head of the government's main agency for economic statistics.Want to support 1A? Give to your local public radio station and subscribe to this podcast. Have questions? Connect with us. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

The Hidden Lightness with Jimmy Hinton – The One Big Beautiful Bill Act — crafted to simplify the tax code, offer incentives to manufacturers, and create a more favorable investment climate — has proven to be a hit. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, approval ratings for pro-business tax policies have jumped significantly over the past year. Americans are beginning to realize that when...

SUBSCRIBE to our newsletter: https://riskreversalmedia.beehiiv.com/subscribe Dan Nathan & Guy Adami break down the top market headlines and bring you stock market trade ideas for Wednesday, August 6th. FactSet Insight Podcast: https://www.factset.com/podcasts Follow Doug on Twitter: https://x.com/DougKass --Learn more about FactSet: https://www.factset.com/lp/mrkt-callMRKT Call is brought to you by our presenting sponsors CME Group, FactSet, SoFi & MoneyLionSign up for our emailsFollow us on Twitter @MRKTCallFollow @GuyAdami on TwitterFollow @CarterBWorth on TwitterFollow us on Instagram @RiskReversalMediaLike us on Facebook @RiskReversalWatch all of our videos on YouTube Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Understanding any era of history requires the ability to view complex things. However, people often employ simple narratives as their historical guides, which leads to wrong conclusions. The pre-war history of the American South is one that is much more complex than the narratives imply.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/complexity-historical-narratives

Understanding any era of history requires the ability to view complex things. However, people often employ simple narratives as their historical guides, which leads to wrong conclusions. The pre-war history of the American South is one that is much more complex than the narratives imply.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/complexity-historical-narratives

While the White House claims the US economy is booming, recent data indicates otherwise, with one report in particular fueling concerns about a weak job market. In response, President Trump fired the person responsible for producing the numbers he claims were "rigged." So what's really happening? Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman and Greg Mankiw, who served as chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Bush, join the show to break it all down.  Also on today's show: Alexander Gabuev, Director, Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center; Barak Ravid, Global Affairs Correspondent, Axios; author Sami Tamimi ("Boutany")  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Dr Boyce breaks down the status of the US economy

Chuck Zodda and Paul Lane discuss recent economic data releases are pointing to a slowing US economy. What are the ramifications of Trump firing the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics? Trump is set to name a new Fed Governor. The stock market got a sobering reality check. Berkshire Hathaway operating earnings dip 4% as conglomerate braces for tariff impact.

Unleashed: The Political News Hour with Bruce Robertson – In this episode, I reveal how Trump and Tulsi Gabbard expose the Obama administration's alleged coup plot, while the US economy flourishes under Trump's leadership. With record-high markets, low inflation, and new trade deals, I break down how Trump's policies are shaking up Washington and redefining America's global influence...

Fixed-income investors, bonds are rising to the occasion and looking attractive again. Their yields are higher, and they have delivered as diversifiers against stock sell-offs this year. Yet, uncertainty has muddled the outlook as the bond market seeks clarity about tariffs, inflation, and interest rates.Paul Olmsted covers US fixed-income strategies for Morningstar Research Services. The senior manager research analyst explains why you need bonds for a balanced portfolio.Let's start with how you're thinking about the bond market in 2025. Can you talk about what you have considered key moments this year? As a follow-up, what is at the core of the bond market's concerns?We're recording this episode on July 30th around 10:30am. The Fed is expected to announce their interest-rate decision this afternoon. Market watchers are predicting the Fed will hold rates steady. High interest rates pose a risk to bonds. What other risks should investors watch out for now? Some bond investors are seeking a “Powell hedge” due to expectations that Trump could oust the Fed Chair. What are they hedging against, and is this something everyday investors need to think about? What's the probability of Trump firing Powell before the Fed Chair's term ends in May 2026, and who would be the ideal candidate? We have talked about how the memory of the worst bond market ever in 2022 is still lingering. However, bonds served as diversifiers during stock sell-offs earlier this year. Why do you think bonds can't shake the bad rap?What's the optimal bond allocation in a diversified portfolio during a high-rate environment? Should investors focus more on whether their holdings are short- or long-term, or is credit quality a bigger issue?What are the best bonds for portfolio diversification?What's the takeaway for fixed-income investors for the rest of 2025? Read about topics from this episode.  Investors Should Embrace Elevated Bond Yields3 Principles to Invest By, Whatever Comes NextWhy the Fed's Independence Matters to Markets, the Economy, and Your Wallet4 Top-Performing High-Yield Bond FundsTariffs and Dollar Weakness Tested US ResilienceIncome Opportunities Remain at the Front End of the Yield Curve What to watch from Morningstar. Covered-Call ETFs Are Booming. But Not All Yield Is GoodThis Dividend Investing Strategy Deserves a Second LookMarket Volatility: Is Your Investment Portfolio Ready for a US-EU Trade Deal?Market Volatility: 4 Key Factors to Track in Q3 2025 Read what our team is writing.Paul OlmstedIvanna Hampton Follow us on social media.Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MorningstarInc/X: https://x.com/MorningstarIncInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/morningstar... LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/5161/

Despite growing pressure to lower interest rates to appease the president, the Federal Reserve voted to leave them unchanged. This week Jonathan Freedland speaks to Heather Boushey, former chief economist to Joe Biden, about the latest tussle between the White House and the Federal Reserve

On today's show, we dive into the latest developments surrounding the U.S. economy, starting with a closer look at current GDP trends and what they may signal for the months ahead. We also discuss the Trump-era tariffs—what impact have they had on trade, domestic manufacturing, and the economy as a whole. Freedom Marketplace: https://freedommarketplace.net The Stack: https://www.toddhuffshow.com/stack-of-stuff Email: todd@toddhuffshow.comPhone: 317.210.2830Follow us on…Instagram: @toddhuffshowFacebook: The Todd Huff ShowTwitter: @toddhuffshowLinkedIn: The Todd Huff ShowTikTok: @toddhuffshowSupport Our Partners:https://www.toddhuffshow.com/partners Links:https://www.mypillow.com/todd Promo Code: TODDhttps://mystore.com/toddhttps://soltea.com - Promo Code TODD for $29.95 off your first orderRed, White, & Brand – Text TODD at 317-210-2830 for a 10% discount.

On today's show, we dive into the latest developments surrounding the U.S. economy, starting with a closer look at current GDP trends and what they may signal for the months ahead. We also discuss the Trump-era tariffs—what impact have they had on trade, domestic manufacturing, and the economy as a whole. Freedom Marketplace: https://freedommarketplace.net The Stack: https://www.toddhuffshow.com/stack-of-stuff Email: todd@toddhuffshow.comPhone: 317.210.2830Follow us on…Instagram: @toddhuffshowFacebook: The Todd Huff ShowTwitter: @toddhuffshowLinkedIn: The Todd Huff ShowTikTok: @toddhuffshowSupport Our Partners:https://www.toddhuffshow.com/partners Links:https://www.mypillow.com/todd Promo Code: TODDhttps://mystore.com/toddhttps://soltea.com - Promo Code TODD for $29.95 off your first orderRed, White, & Brand – Text TODD at 317-210-2830 for a 10% discount.

The White House is boasting about a new trade “deal” with the EU. But every supposed benefit that comes from the agreement applies only to a small subset of the country while leaving the American public, as a whole, worse off.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/us-eu-trade-deal-nothing-celebrate

President Trump is proposing a $1.5 million levy on Chinese-built ships that enter US harbors. Since a majority of cargo ships have been produced by Chinese shipyards, the costs would be substantial. This action also would damage US exports, yet another unintended consequence of US policies.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/trumps-tariff-ship-has-sailed-chinese-ship-levy

The White House is boasting about a new trade “deal” with the EU. But every supposed benefit that comes from the agreement applies only to a small subset of the country while leaving the American public, as a whole, worse off.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/us-eu-trade-deal-nothing-celebrate

President Trump is proposing a $1.5 million levy on Chinese-built ships that enter US harbors. Since a majority of cargo ships have been produced by Chinese shipyards, the costs would be substantial. This action also would damage US exports, yet another unintended consequence of US policies.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/trumps-tariff-ship-has-sailed-chinese-ship-levy

A strong second quarter rebound for the U.S. economy. AP correspondent Mike Hempen reports.

AP correspondent Damia Troise reports the U.S. second quarter GDP showed an unexpected economic rebound.

US Economy grows faster than expected. Why? 

The goalposts are continually changing (more like fallacy-hopping), but one would-be goal of tariffs needs to be confronted—tariffs for domestic job protection.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/tariffs-mean-lost-jobs

The goalposts are continually changing (more like fallacy-hopping), but one would-be goal of tariffs needs to be confronted—tariffs for domestic job protection.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/tariffs-mean-lost-jobs

The U.S. economy is demonstrating resilience with strong consumer spending and low unemployment filings, despite looming inflation and tariff pressures. Retail sales rose by 0.6% in June, surpassing expectations and indicating solid growth in gross domestic product for the second quarter. However, concerns about rising import costs, which saw their largest monthly increase in over a year, continue to cast a shadow over the economic outlook. While manufacturers anticipate growth and increased hiring, the uncertainty surrounding tariffs remains a significant concern.IBM's CEO, Arvind Krishna, argues that fears of artificial intelligence (AI) eliminating jobs are exaggerated, suggesting that AI will actually enhance employment opportunities by increasing productivity. He notes that while some clerical roles may be phased out, new job creation will occur in programming and sales. Meanwhile, Gartner forecasts a substantial rise in global IT spending, projected to reach $5.43 trillion in 2025, driven largely by investments in AI infrastructure. This shift indicates a growing trend where companies must adapt to the changing landscape or risk being left behind.The podcast also discusses recent layoffs at major tech firms, including Microsoft, Tata Consultancy Services, and Intel, as they navigate the challenges posed by AI and automation. Microsoft has laid off approximately 9,000 employees while reporting significant revenue growth, highlighting the paradox of job cuts amid financial success. Similarly, TCS plans to cut 12,000 jobs, primarily affecting senior and mid-level positions, as clients demand AI-driven services and cost reductions. This trend underscores the rapid transformation of the workforce as companies pivot towards automation and higher-margin activities.Legislative updates include the Federal Communications Commission's review of state laws on AI, aimed at reducing regulations to promote American AI systems. Critics argue that this approach lacks a comprehensive vision for AI innovation. In the UK, a court has denied WhatsApp's intervention in a case involving Apple's compliance with government orders to access encrypted data, raising concerns about privacy. Additionally, New York has announced stricter cybersecurity regulations for water utilities, emphasizing the need for enhanced security measures in critical infrastructure. These developments reflect a broader struggle between regulatory frameworks and the fast-evolving tech landscape. Four things to know today 00:00 U.S. Economy Grows Steadily as AI Reshapes Labor and IT Spend Soars to $5.43 Trillion04:45 Global Policy Divide on AI and Cybersecurity Widens as U.S., UK, and New York Take Conflicting Regulatory Paths07:54 Layoffs Mount Across Tech and Services as AI Drives Shift Toward Margin, Not Manpower12:09 Intel Restructures for AI Future with Major Layoffs, Factory Slowdown, and Network Division Spinoff Supported by:  https://scalepad.com/dave/ https://businessof.tech/sponsor/moovila/  Tell us about a newsletter!https://bit.ly/biztechnewsletter All our Sponsors: https://businessof.tech/sponsors/ Do you want the show on your podcast app or the written versions of the stories? Subscribe to the Business of Tech: https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe/Looking for a link from the stories? The entire script of the show, with links to articles, are posted in each story on https://www.businessof.tech/ Support the show on Patreon: https://patreon.com/mspradio/ Want to be a guest on Business of Tech: Daily 10-Minute IT Services Insights? Send Dave Sobel a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech Want our stuff? Cool Merch? Wear “Why Do We Care?” - Visit https://mspradio.myspreadshop.com Follow us on:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079/YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftechBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech

CBS Business Analyst Jill Schlesinger says she's paying attention to places like Chipotle to help gauge how strong the economy in the US is. She wonders if Tom and Debbie have pulled back, 'prices have stayed high', and how does that impact future decisions made by the Federal Reserve?

Bloomberg Economics Editor Mike McKee joins Megan Lynch as some key data will be released and used this week to shape the US economy for the coming months.

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,With tariff and immigration policies uncertain, and the emerging AI revolution continuing to emerge, there's plenty to speculate about when it comes to the US economy. Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I invite Joseph Politano to help us try and make sense of it all.He is the author of the popular Apricitas Economics Substack newsletter. Politano previously worked as an analyst at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.In This Episode* Trade and immigration headwinds (1:03)* Unpredictable trade policy (7:32)* Tariffs as a political tool (12:10)* The goal: higher tariffs (17:53)* An AI tailwind (20:42)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Trade and immigration headwinds (1:03)You're going to have what is probably the largest one-year change in immigration in US history.Pethokoukis: What are the main economic headwinds that you're tracking right now? Or is it just trade, trade, trade?Politano: It's hard for me to not say it's trade, trade, trade because that's what my newsletter has been covering since the start of this administration and I think it's where the biggest change in longstanding policy is. If you look back on, say, the last 100 years of economic history in the United States, that's the kind of level you have to go to find a similar period where tariffs and trade restrictions were this high in the United States.At the start of this year, we were at a high compared to the early 2000s, but it was not that large compared to the 1970s, 1960s, the early post-war era. Most of that, especially in Trump's first term, was concentrated in China, and then a couple of specific sectors like steel or cars from Mexico. Now we have one, you had the big jump in the baseline — there's ten percent tariffs on almost all goods that come to the United States, with some very important exceptions, but ten percent for most things that go into the US. Then, on top of that, you have very large tariffs on, say, cars are 25 percent, steel and aluminum right now are 50 percent. China was up to 20 percent then went to the crazy 150 percent tariffs we had for about a month, and now it's back down to only 30 percent. That's still the highest trade war in American history. I think that is a big headwind.The headwind that I don't spend as much time covering, just because it's more consistent policy — even if it is, in my opinion, bad policy — is on the immigration stuff. You're going to have what is probably the largest one-year change in immigration in US history. So we're going to go from about 2.8 million net immigration to a year, to people like Stan Veuger projecting net-zero immigration this year in the United States, which would be not entirely unprecedented — but again, the biggest shift in modern American history. I think those are the two biggest headwinds for the US economy right now.You're highlighting two big drivers of the US economy: trade and immigration. But analyzing them is tricky because recent examples are limited. To understand the effects of these changes, you often have to look back 50 or 100 years, when the economic landscape was very different. I would think that would make drawing clear conclusions more difficult and pose a real challenge for you as an analyst.Again, I'm going to start with trade because that's where I focused a lot of my energy here, but the key thing I'm trying to communicate to people — when people think of the protectionist era in US history, the number one thing people think about is Smoot-Hawley, which were the very large tariffs right before the Great Depression — in my opinion, obviously did not cause the Great Depression, but were part of the bad policy packages that exacerbated the Great Depression. That is an era in which one, the US is not a big net importer to the same degree; and two, trade was just a much smaller share of the economy, even though goods were a much larger share of the economy.This is pre- the really big post-war globalization and pre- the now technology-era globalization. So if you're doing tariffs in 1930 or prior, you're hitting a more important sector. Manufacturing is a much larger share of the economy, construction is a larger share of the economy, but conversely, you're hitting it less hard. And now you have this change of going from a globalized world in which trade is a much larger share of GDP and hitting that with very large tariffs.The immigration example is hard to find. I think the gap is America has not done . . . let's call it extensive interior enforcement in a long time. There's obviously been changes to immigration policy. Legally the tariffs have gone up. Legally, lot of immigration policy has not changed. We don't pass bills on immigration in the same way. We don't pass bills on tariffs, but we do pass bills on tax policy. So immigration has changed mostly through the enforcement mechanisms, primarily at the border, and then secondarily, but I think this is the bigger change, is the kind of aggressive interior enforcement.The Steven Miller quote that was in the Wall Street Journal is what I think about, like, why aren't you going to Home Depot to try to deport people who are here undocumented? That's a really big change in economic policy from the first term where it was like, “Okay, we are going to restrict the flow of legal and undocumented immigrants at the border, and then mostly the people who are in the interior of the United States, we're only going to focus on people who've committed some other crime.” They got picked up by local law enforcement doing something else, and then we're going to deport them because of that.This is very different, and I think also very different tonally. In the first term, there was a lot of, “People don't want refugees.” Refugee resettlement was cut a lot, but there was a rhetorical push for, “We should let some people in from Venezuela or Cuba, people who were fleeing socialist dictatorships.” That program [was] also very much torn up. So it's hard to find examples, in that case, where you've got to go back to 1924 immigration policy, you've got to go back to 1930 trade policy for the closest analogs.Unpredictable trade policy (7:32)People notice if the specific things that they associate with other countries go up in price, even if those aren't their most important export.Trade policy seems especially difficult to analyze these days because it's been so mercurial and it's constantly evolving. It's not like there's one or two clear policy shifts you can study — new announcements and reversals happen daily, or weekly. I think that unpredictability itself creates uncertainty, which many analysts see as a drag on growth, often as much as the tariffs themselves.I think that's exactly right. I used to joke that there were three people in Washington, DC who know what the current tariff levels are, and I'm not sure any of them are in the White House, because they do change them extremely frequently. I'm going to give an example of the last 24 hours: We had the announced rate on imports from the Philippines from 20 percent to 19 percent, the rate on imports from Indonesia went from 32 to 19, the rate on Japan went from 25 to 15. None of those are legal changes. They've not published, “Here's the comprehensive list of exactly what we're changing, exactly when these are going to go into effect, yada, yada, yada.” It's just stuff that administration officials or Trump, in particular, said. So it's really hard to know with any certainty what's going on.Even just this morning, the Financial Times had a good article basically saying that the US and the European Union are close to a quote-unquote “deal” where the tariffs on the EU would be at 15 percent. Then literally 30 minutes ago, Peter Navarro is on TV and he's like, “I would take that with a grain of salt.” So I don't know. Clearly some people internally know. This is actually the longest period of time that Trump has gone without legally changing the tariffs since he was inaugurated. 28 days was the previous record.Normally — I'll give an example of the last Trump administration — what would happen is you'd have, “Hey, we are doing this Section 301 investigation against China. This is a legal procedure that you say that the Chinese government is doing ABC, XYZ unfair trade practices and we're going to retaliate by putting tariffs on these specific goods.” But you would have a very long list of goods at least a couple of months before the tariffs would take effect.It wasn't quite to this degree, I don't want to make it sound like Trump won, everything was peachy keen, and there was no uncertainty. Trump would occasionally say something and then it would change the next week, but it was much more contained, and now it's like all facets of trade policy.I think a really good example was when they did the tariffs on China going from 10 to 20 to then 145 percent, and then they had to come back a week later and be like, “We're exempting smartphones and certain types of computers.” And then they came back a week after that and were like, “We're exempting other types of electronics and electronic parts.” It does not take an expert to know that smartphones come from China. It's on the package that Apple sends you. And if you were very strategically planning this out, if you were like, “Well, are going to do 150 percent tariffs on China,” that would be one of the first questions someone would be like, “Well, people are going to notice if their iPhone prices go up. Have we thought about exempting them?”During Trump's first term — again, you can take this as political or economic strategy — they mostly focused a lot of the tariffs on intermediate goods: computer parts, but not computers; brakes, not cars. That has more complicated economic costs. It, on balance, hurts manufacturing in the United States more and hurts consumers less, but it's clearly trying to set up a political salience. It's trying to solve a political salience problem. People notice if the specific things that they associate with other countries go up in price, even if those aren't their most important export. There's been much less of that this time around.We're doing tariffs on coffee and bananas. I complain about that all the time, but I think it is useful symbolism because, in an administration that was less concerned about political blowback, you'd be like, “Oh yeah, give me a list of common grocery items to exempt.” This is much less concerned with that blowback and much more slap-dash.Tariffs as a political tool (12:10). . . we're now in the process of sending out these quote-unquote “letters” to other countries threatening higher tariffs. It doesn't seem to me like there's a rhyme or reason why some countries are getting a letter or some countries aren't.I think there's a lot of uncertainty in interpreting administration statements, since they can change basically overnight. Even if the policy seems settled, unexpected events — like, oh, I don't know, a there's a trial of a politician who Trump likes in another country and all of a sudden there's a tariff to nudge that country to let that politician go. If the president views tariffs as a universal tool, he may use them for unpredictable, non-economic reasons, making it even harder to analyze, I would think.I think that's exactly right, and if you remember very early on in the Trump administration, the Columbian government did not want to take deportees on military aircraft. They viewed this as unjust treatment of Columbian nationals, and then Trump was like, “I'm going to do a 20, 30 percent tariff,” whatever the number was, and then that was resolved the next day, and then we stopped doing the military flights two weeks after that. I think that was a clear example . . . Columbia is an important US trading partner, but there's a lot more who are larger economies, unfortunately for Columbia.The example you're giving about Brazil is one of the funnier ones because . . . on April 2nd, Trump comes out and says, “We're doing reciprocal tariffs.” If you take that idea seriously, we should do tariffs against countries that employ unfair trade practices against US exports. You take that idea seriously, Brazil should be in your top offender categories. They have very high trade barriers, they have very high tariffs, they have domestic industrial policy that's not super successful, but does clearly hurt US exports to the region. They got one of the lowest tariff rates because they didn't actually do it by trade barriers, they did it by a formula, and Brazil happens to export some oil, and coffee, and cashews, and orange juice to the United States more than they buy from us. That was the bad formula they did looking at the bilateral trade deficit.So you come back, and we're now in the process of sending out these quote-unquote “letters” to other countries threatening higher tariffs. It doesn't seem to me like there's a rhyme or reason why some countries are getting a letter or some countries aren't. We sent one to Libya, which is not an important trading partner, and we sent one to the Philippines, which is. But the letter to Brazil is half, “Okay, now we remembered that we have these unfair trade practices that we're complaining about,” and then it's half, “You have to let Jair Bolsonaro go and stop prosecuting him for the attempt to stay in power when he lost the election.”It's really hard to say, okay, what is Lula supposed to do? It's one thing to be like, economically, a country like Brazil could lower its tariffs and then the United States would lower its tariff threat. You'd still be worse off than you were at the start of the year. Tariffs would still be higher, trade barriers would still be higher, but they'd at least not be as bad as they could be. But tying it up in this political process makes it much less clear and it's much harder to find an internally consistent push on the political thing. There are out-and-out dictatorships that we have very normal trade relationships with. I think you could say we should just trade with everybody regardless their internal politics, or you could say trade is a tool of specific political grievances that we have, but neither of those principles are being applied consistently.As a business owner, totally separate from the political considerations, is it safe to import something from Mexico? Is Trump going to get upset at Claudia Sheinbaum over internal political matters? I don't know. He was upset with Justin Trudeau for a long period of time. Trudeau got replaced with Mark Carney, who is not exactly the same political figure, but they're in the same party, they're very similar people, and the complaints from Trump have dropped off a cliff. So it's hard to tell what the actual impulse is. I follow this stuff every day, and I have been wrong so many times, it is hard to count. I'll give an example: I thought Trump, last month, was like, “We're going to do 50 percent tariffs on the European Union.” And in my head I was like, “Oh, this makes sense.”With every other major trading partner, we go from a baseline level, we raise to a very large level, we keep that on for a very short amount of time, and then we lower back down to a level that is much higher than what we started at, but much lower than what was in practice. We went from average 20 percent-ish tariffs on China, we went from that to average 40 percent-ish tariffs, and then we went into the mid-100s, and now we're back down to average 50 percent-ish tariffs on China if you count stuff from Trump's first term.So I was like, “Oh, they paused this for 90 days, they're going to come back and they're going to say, ‘Well, everyone except the European Union, everyone except Japan, everyone except Brazil is doing really well in negotiations. We're going to raise tariffs on Brazil to 50 percent for a week and then we're going to lower them back.'” And that was obviously just wrong. They just kicked the can down the road unceremoniously.The goal: higher tariffs (17:53)It's not as though Donald Trump has a specific vision of what he wants the tariff rates to look like in five years, at a number level, per country per good. It's that he wants them to be higher.Do you feel that you have a good understanding, at this point, about what the president wants, ultimately, out of his trade policy?I do. In one word, he wants tariffs to be higher. Beyond that, all of the secondary goals are fungible. Recently, the White House has been saying, “Oh, tariffs don't raise prices,” which is an economic conjecture I think is empirically wrong. You can look at pre- and post-tariff import prices, post-tariff prices are up. It's not a 100 percent being passed through to consumers, but you can see some of that passed through in stuff like toys, and audio equipment, and coffee, and yada, yada.Point being, if you believe that conjecture, then it really can't industrialize the nation because it's implying that foreigners are just absorbing the costs to continue passing products that they make in Japan, or China, or Canada, into the United States. And then inversely, they'll say, “Well, it is industrializing the nation. Look at this investment, this factory that's being built, and we think it's because of the tariffs.”Well, if that's happening, it can't raise revenue. And then they'll come back and say, “Well, actually, it's fixing the budget deficit.” If that's happening, then you're in the worst of both worlds because it's raising prices and you're still importing stuff. So it's hard to find an internally consistent justification.Part of my mental model of how this White House works is that there's different camps on every issue, and it's very much not a consensus institution on policy, but it's also not a top-down institution. It's not as though Donald Trump has a specific vision of what he wants the tariff rates to look like in five years, at a number level, per country per good. It's that he wants them to be higher.He has this general impulse that he wants to reduce trade openness, and then somebody comes up to Trump and goes, “Hey, Mr. President, we should do 25 percent tariffs on cars. Remember where they come from?” And he goes, “That's a good idea.”And then somebody comes up to him and goes, “Hey, Mr. President, we should do a 10 percent baseline tariff on everything that comes into the United States.” And he goes, “That's a good idea.”And then somebody goes and says, “Hey, Mr. President, we should do a tariff that's reciprocal that's based on other countries trade barriers.” And he goes, “That's actually a good idea.”Those are very, very wildly different goals that are conflicting, even in just that area. But it's not that there's one vision that's being spread across all these policies, it's that there's multiple competing visions that are all getting partially implemented.An AI tailwind (20:42)This is the one area where it's only American companies that dominate, and the depth is so high that [other countries] feel like they're not even competing.I see AI as a potential tailwind toward productivity gains, but my concern is that any positive impact may only cancel out the headwinds of current trade and immigration policies, rather than accelerating growth. Is it a big enough tailwind?I do think it's a tailwind, and the US has several distinct advantages specific to AI. The first being that most of the companies that are major players, both from a software-development and from an infrastructure-development point of view, are in the United States. We are here in the DMV, and this is the largest data center cluster on planet Earth, which is kind of crazy that it's in Loudoun County. But that kind of stuff is actually very important. Secondarily, that we have the depth of financing and the expertise that exists in Silicon Valley that is so rare across the rest of the world. So I am optimistic that it will increase GDP growth, increase productivity, maybe not show up as a growth in productivity growth immediately, if that makes sense. Not quite an acceleration, but definitely a positive tailwind and a tailwind that is more beneficial in the United States than it is in other countries.The counter to that is that the AI stuff is obviously not constrained by borders to even a nominal degree, at this point. The fact that everyone talks about DeepSeek, for obvious reasons, but there are tons of models in the Gulf States, in Western Europe, in Australia, and you can access them all from anywhere. The fact that you can access ChatGPT from Europe means that not all the benefits are just captured in the narrow area around open AI headquarters in San Francisco.The secondary thing is that, in my opinion, one of the most important reasons why the United States continues to benefit from this high-tech economy that most other high-income countries are extremely jealous of — you talk to people from Europe, and Japan, and even places like Canada, the prize that they're jealous of is the stuff in Silicon Valley, because they feel like, reasonably, they can make cars and do finance just as well as the Americans. This is the one area where it's only American companies that dominate, and the depth is so high that they feel like they're not even competing. Anyone who wants to found a company moves to San Francisco immediately, but that relies on both a big research ecosystem and also a big immigration ecosystem. I don't know if you saw the Facebook superstars that they're paying, but I believe it was 50 percent non-American-born talent. That's a really big advantage in the United States' case that lots of people want to move to the US to found a company to work for some of these big companies. I don't think that's demolished, but it's clearly partially under threat by a lot of these immigration restrictions.The other important thing to remember is that even though the president's most controversial immigration policies are all about undocumented immigrants, and then to a lesser extent, people who are documented asylees, people who are coming from Haiti, and El Salvador, Venezuela, et cetera, the biggest direct power that they have is over legal immigration, just from a raw numerical standpoint. So the idea that they want to cut back on student visas, they want to cut back on OPT, which is the way that student visas basically start working in the United States, they want to add more intensive restrictions to the H-1B program, those are all going to undermine the benefits that the US will get from having this lead in artificial intelligence.The last thing that I'll say to wrap a big bow around this: We talked about it before, I think that when Trump was like, “We're doing infinity tariffs April 2nd,” there were so many bits of the computer ecosystem that were still tariffed. You would've had a very large tariff on Taiwanese computer parts, which mostly is very expensive TSMC equipment that goes into US data centers. I think that Jensen Huang — I don't know if he personally did this . . . or it was the coalition of tech people, but I am using him as a representative here — I think Jensen Huang went in and was like, “We really badly need this,” and they got their exemption. The Trump administration had been talking about doing tariffs on semiconductors at some point, I'm sure they will come up with something, but in the meantime, right now, we are importing absolute record amounts of large computers. It's at a run-rate of close to $150 billion a year.This is not all computers, this is specific to the kind of large computers that go into data centers and are not for personal or normal business use. I don't know what happens to that, let's say a year and a half from now, if the tariffs are 25 percent, considering how much of the cost of a data center is in the semiconductors. If you're going to have to then say, “Well, we would really like to put this somewhere in Virginia, somewhere in Pennsylvania, somewhere in Arizona, but you have a 25 percent premium on all this stuff, we're going to put it in Vancouver. We're going to put it in somewhere in the Gulf States,” or what I think the administration is very worried about is, “We're going to put it somewhere in China.” That chart of US computer imports, in trade policy, it's really rare to get a chart that is just a straight line up, and this is just a straight line up.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro ReadsPlease check out the website or Substack app for the latest Up Wing economic, business, and tech news contained in this new edition of the newsletter. Lots of great stuff! Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

This week on Taking Stock Susan Hayes Culleton talks to David M Walker, a former Comptroller General of the United States, about the current state of American economics. Susan also looks at the economics of ‘food labelling'. Plus, Jamie Smyth of the Financial Times talks about Big Oil's possible pivot back to fossil fuels.

Patrick Newman offers a Rothbardian critique of the US Constitution, arguing that rather than establishing a framework for limited government and individual liberty, it was crafted to centralize political power and protect elite economic interests. Drawing from the Austrian tradition and historical analysis, the lecture challenges the prevailing narrative of the Constitution as a purely libertarian founding document.Recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, on July 23, 2025.Mises University is the world's leading instructional program in the Austrian School of economics, and is the essential training ground for economists who are looking beyond the mainstream.

Housing prices, retailer perception, tariffs, gas -- what's going on in this topsy turvy US economy? Here's a mid-year look at key indicators. On Deadline is hosted and produced by Lauren Barry and produced by Christy Strawser.

Housing prices, retailer perception, tariffs, gas -- what's going on in this topsy turvy US economy? Here's a mid-year look at key indicators. On Deadline is hosted and produced by Lauren Barry and produced by Christy Strawser.

We connect with New York-based Torsten Slok, Chief Economist of Apollo Global Management, to discuss the US economy. This highly compelling discussion touches on the path of likely slowing of the US economy, outlook of inflation and jobs, labour productivity, impact of AI on jobs, Fed independence, likelihood of financial repression, fiscal dominance, bond market liquidity, investor sentiment, and stable coin. In all of these topics, Torsten has sharp insights; a must listen.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Housing prices, retailer perception, tariffs, gas -- what's going on in this topsy turvy US economy? Here's a mid-year look at key indicators. On Deadline is hosted and produced by Lauren Barry and produced by Christy Strawser.

In this episode of Milk Road Macro, we break down why the U.S. economy is quietly heating up, and why a rate cut now could send us straight into an inflationary firestorm. Former hedge fund manager and macro strategist Danny Dayan joins to reveal why financial conditions aren't as tight as they seem, what the Fed is getting dangerously wrong, and how the White House may be setting the stage for a historic policy blunder.~~~~~

Housing prices, retailer perception, tariffs, gas -- what's going on in this topsy turvy US economy? Here's a mid-year look at key indicators. On Deadline is hosted and produced by Lauren Barry and produced by Christy Strawser.

Housing prices, retailer perception, tariffs, gas -- what's going on in this topsy turvy US economy? Here's a mid-year look at key indicators. On Deadline is hosted and produced by Lauren Barry and produced by Christy Strawser.

Episode 631: Neal and Toby chat about what's behind the US economy's bounce back after withstanding Trump tariff fears. Then, China begins construction of a $170B massive hydropower dam that will be the world's largest. Also, Figma excites Wall Street by becoming the first software company to hit the IPO market in a long time. Meanwhile, smart, techy toilets may be the key to solving America's problem with keeping a public restroom clean.  Gain the edge with Amazon Ads at advertising.amazon.com/startnow  Morning Brew Daily Puzzle: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Yzrl1BJY2FAFwXBYtb0CEp8XQB2Y6mLdHkbq9Kb2Sz8/viewform?edit_requested=true  Subscribe to Morning Brew Daily for more of the news you need to start your day. Share the show with a friend, and leave us a review on your favorite podcast app. Listen to Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.swap.fm/l/mbd-note⁠⁠⁠  Watch Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@MorningBrewDailyShow⁠

Mike Armstrong and Marc Fandetti discuss the busy week for earnings that started off with the ever reliable Verizon. Is the US economy regaining its swagger? How the Fed has learned from previous mistakes. Europe prepares for a US trade fight. What does a late career layoff look like in America? Wall Street want to make private markets a little more public.

The tariff threat hasn't gone away Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Avik Roy joins Bitcoin Magazine Political Correspondent Frank Corva for a discussion on the passage of the GENIUS Act, the future of Bitcoin in Washington as well as the macroeconomic picture when it comes to U.S. Treasury issuance, stablecoins, and why he believes bitcoin may become the focal asset in years to come.He breaks down the implications of various U.S. debt default scenarios, programmable currency surveillance, and the central tension between free markets and central planning in the digital age.Avik is the Founder & CEO of the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity (FREOPP) and is also the President & CEO of the National Institute for Health Care Management. He is also a Senior Advisor at the Bitcoin Policy Institute and an incoming Board Member at STRIVE Asset Management.

In this episode, we talk with Eric McShane, co-founder and CEO of Electroflow Technology (backed by Breakthrough Energy Ventures). Eric is on a mission to revolutionize lithium production, a vital battery material.We discuss the "Big Beautiful Bill's" impact on the battery industry and how Electroflow Technology's innovative approach addresses the critical need for domestic lithium production, especially given that "99% of this crucial battery material [LFP] is made in China." Eric shares how their unique process transforms brine into LFP, helping the U.S. become competitive again by "building real stuff" and using abundant low-concentration lithium brine resources.Key Topics:BBB's Impact: The "Big Beautiful Bill's" role in boosting U.S. battery capacity and achieving self-sufficiency in materials like lithium iron phosphate (LFP).Electroflow's Innovation: Details on Electroflow Technology's unique method for transforming brine into LFP and its benefits.Go-to-Market Strategy: Electroflow's plan for market entry and key differentiators.Climate Tech Perspective: Eric's insights on being a climate tech founder and the excitement of "building real stuff."Future Goals: Electroflow Technology's objectives and plans for utilizing U.S. lithium brine resources.Get Involved: How investors and engineers can connect with Electroflow Technology.Support the Show!Upgrade to paid today! It's $10/month or $100/year. Your support helps us continue to bring you valuable CleanTech insights.Upgrade to PaidSupport the showIf you're gonna change the world, you're gonna need a world-class team. Partner with ErthTech Talent to help you do that, for less. 70+ Placements 5+ Years (exclusively in CleanTech) The Lowest Fees in the Market (12-15% of first-year salary) 90-day placement guarantee It's really hard to say no to that. Wait?! -- The best service is also the cheapest? Seems too good to be true, but it's the entire reason we started this company. We believe that Climate entrepreneurs are doing important work, and there should be a firm to help them find the best talent, without it breaking the bank. Reach out today for a free assessment of your hiring process. hello@erthtechtalent.com

Links & ResourcesFollow us on social media for updates: ⁠Instagram⁠ | ⁠YouTube⁠Check out our recommended tool: ⁠Prop Stream⁠Thank you for tuning in! If you enjoyed this episode, please rate, follow, and review our podcast. Don't forget to share it with friends who might find it valuable. Stay connected for more insights in our next episode!

Today on AirTalk, the state of the US economy amid tariff threats, ICE raids, and inflation; what it means to tease your partner; how disabled people are at higher risk during natural disasters, and what your first pop culture introduction was to America. Today on AirTalk: State of the US economy? (00:15) Teasing your partner (29:13) Natural disasters put disabled people at higher risk (51:17) What was your first pop culture intro to America? (1:21:51)

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, as he breaks down today's biggest stories shaping America and the world. Texas Flash Flood Tragedy Sparks Grief and Political Blame Game At least 80 people are dead and 40 more are missing after catastrophic July 4th flooding in Texas Hill Country. Among the victims are 10 girls from a Christian summer camp and the camp's heroic owner, Richard Eastland. Despite early and extensive weather warnings, some Democrats blame Trump's NOAA budget cuts for the disaster. Bryan calls these claims factually wrong and morally reprehensible. Trump's Economy Faces Tariff Deadlines and Debt Market Concerns “Liberation Day” tariffs are set to kick in this Wednesday unless trade deals are finalized. While countries like India and the EU ask for exemptions, agriculture remains a sticking point. Meanwhile, the Trump economy shows strength in jobs and wages, but rising debt levels have bond markets on edge. Economist advice: keep personal debt low. Gaza Truce in the Works as Hamas Control Collapses President Trump and Israeli PM Netanyahu are expected to finalize a ceasefire. A Hamas fighter admits the group has lost command, paychecks have stopped, and Israeli drones now dominate the skies. With clans taking over and Hamas in shambles, Bryan asks what a truce really means when there's no one left to enforce it. Iran Sends Saboteurs Through U.S. Border, Issues Death Warrants Iran's clerics issue fatwas calling for the assassinations of Trump and Netanyahu. U.S. intel warns that 35 Iranian operatives are being smuggled in via Mexican cartels. Customs and Border Protection confirms a terror alert is in effect, centered on southern California. China's Xi Might Be Ill or Facing a Coup China's foreign minister admits Beijing wants the Ukraine war to drag on, shocking European diplomats. At home, Xi Jinping is missing public events, sidelining generals, and delegating power. Analysts suspect serious illness or a power struggle is underway, as Xi's diplomatic blunders pile up. Mexican Protesters Demand Americans Leave Demonstrators in Mexico City call U.S. “digital nomads” an invasion, blaming them for high rents and cultural erosion. Signs read “Americans go home.” Mexico's government defends foreigners, but the protests reflect deepening resentment. UK Opera House Goes Dark When Wind Stops Blowing A British opera house that relies solely on wind power suffers six blackouts during a performance, eventually canceling the show. The story underscores the limits of unreliable green energy, leading Bryan to suggest they rebrand as a House of Blues. "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." – John 8:32