US Economy UNSTOPABLE.

[Shady]

15 hours ago, Aristides said:

Trump's tariffs were supposed to reduce the deficit and finance tax cuts. Looks like the opposite is happening.

Did you miss that the government ran a surplus in June?

1 hour ago, Boges said:

Hold up. Isn't the influx of capital during COVID seen a problem that made Biden extraordinarily popular? 

No.

[LinkSoul60]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

Did you miss that the government ran a surplus in June?

You need to read the background of why there was a surplus in June...

But tariffs aside, the CBO said there was another major reason that there was a June surplus instead of a deficit: the shifting of certain federal expenditures from June to May.

In its most recent “Monthly Budget Review,” the CBO said that federal spending was lower than it would have been in June because the government made billions of dollars in payments in May that were due on June 1, a Sunday. The Treasury said that some payments for active-duty military, veterans, Supplemental Security Income and Medicare were moved to May because June 1, the normal payment date, was a non-business day.

“If not for those [timing] shifts, the government would have recorded a deficit of $71 billion in June 2025,” the CBO said, emphasizing the word deficit.

https://www.factcheck.org/2025/07/trumps-hollow-surplus-claim/

[Shady]

5 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

You need to read the background of why there was a surplus in June...

 

But tariffs aside, the CBO said there was another major reason that there was a June surplus instead of a deficit: the shifting of certain federal expenditures from June to May.

In its most recent “Monthly Budget Review,” the CBO said that federal spending was lower than it would have been in June because the government made billions of dollars in payments in May that were due on June 1, a Sunday. The Treasury said that some payments for active-duty military, veterans, Supplemental Security Income and Medicare were moved to May because June 1, the normal payment date, was a non-business day.

“If not for those [timing] shifts, the government would have recorded a deficit of $71 billion in June 2025,” the CBO said, emphasizing the word deficit.

https://www.factcheck.org/2025/07/trumps-hollow-surplus-claim/

I guess we'll see how the rest of the year plays out then.

[LinkSoul60]

9 minutes ago, Shady said:

I guess we'll see how the rest of the year plays out then.

Tariffs will help, but they're drowning in the interest on the debt.  Tariffs won't help the consumer though.

We'll see indeed.  Interesting times....

[paxamericana]

Q2 updates, 

 still unstoppable 

[robosmith]

On 8/12/2025 at 5:07 PM, Shady said:

China dwarfs the EU?  Get a clue.

EU is NOT a country; China IS. Duh

[robosmith]

On 8/13/2025 at 8:23 AM, Shady said:

I find those labels somewhat irrelevant nowadays.  Regardless, I've already stated that I'm against broad based tariffs.  I'm simply stating that so far, Trump's economic experiment hasn't resulted in the doom and gloom that was predicted.  All while interest rates remain unusually high.

They are high because tariffs WILL cause INFLATION. What you're seeing NOW is defensive maneuvers which WON'T LAST.

 

[Shady]

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

EU is NOT a country; China IS. Duh

It's a united trade partner, that acts as one economy.  You don't seem to understand a lot of the basics.

[robosmith]

26 minutes ago, Shady said:

It's a united trade partner, that acts as one economy.  You don't seem to understand a lot of the basics.

OTC, it is you who is living in a FANTASY LAND.

Quote

No, the EU does not buy energy for all members; energy procurement is primarily done by individual member states and companies, not by the EU itself. While the EU has mechanisms like the AggregateEU platform to facilitate joint purchasing and solidarity, these are generally voluntary or for specific crisis tools, not a central purchasing body for all energy needs. 

 

[paxamericana]

9 minutes ago, robosmith said:

OTC, it is you who is living in a FANTASY LAND.

 

The EU is a French scheme underwritten by German financials. But for demographic reason the Germans are going away and so too will the EU. Europe is aging into obsolescence.

Edited September 2, 2025 by paxamericana

[Shady]

39 minutes ago, robosmith said:

OTC, it is you who is living in a FANTASY LAND.

 

I wasn't referring to just energy.  Trade in general.  European countries from the EU to counter large economies like China and the United States.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

OTC, it is you who is living in a FANTASY LAND.

 

@Shady is actually more right than you

The EU has several energy purchase agreements in place. The individual countries buy what they need but there's trade deals covering the prices and availability etc.  

For example the EU just did one with the US 

Overview of the U.S.-EU Energy Procurement Agreement

The United States and the European Union have finalized a significant trade agreement focused on energy procurement. This agreement is part of a broader framework aimed at enhancing trade relations between the two economic powerhouses.

Individual countries will still purchase what they need under that agreement and may have individual commitments but it is in fact a deal with the EU for energy and it's far from the only one.

This allows the EU to maximize it's buying power when buying... er.... power. 

So He's right, you don't understand the basics. 

[paxamericana]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

This allows the EU to maximize it's buying power when buying... er.... power. 

This was absolutely necessary for the NATO alliance. A new form of guns for butter deal. The European need to pay the Americans to care. And if they become American captive market then of course we will protect them from the Russian, not out of the kindness of our big American hearts but to prevent the Russian from muscling into our market.

[CdnFox]

50 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

This was absolutely necessary for the NATO alliance. A new form of guns for butter deal. The European need to pay the Americans to care. And if they become American captive market then of course we will protect them from the Russian, not out of the kindness of our big American hearts but to prevent the Russian from muscling into our market.

Perhaps, I have no particular insight one way or another, but at the very least it's true it's not the only deal like that they've done. Which is important for the purposes of the discussion that was at hand, although I can't imagine why the EU wouldn't want such agreements between all of its major military allies. War is when energy resources become the most important

[paxamericana]

Trump is not wrong for taking a transactional approach to the NATO Alliance. Pay us and we will protect you. 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

Trump is not wrong for taking a transactional approach to the NATO Alliance. Pay us and we will protect you. 

well that is probably wrong because all it takes is deciding someone else is a better deal to leave the USA in the dust.  I mean it's pretty obvious that it's kind of a dumb idea. You're begging to let yourself get used. 

But, it IS wise to secure arrangements that will deny your enemies the ability to weaponize the control of energy to exert pressure on your allies during times of peace and thus forcing them to side with an enemy on occasion, as we've seen with russia and europe. 

if europe can count on us oil and the us can reduce russia's influence, it is of great strategic importance. 

[paxamericana]

30 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

well that is probably wrong because all it takes is deciding someone else is a better deal to leave the USA in the dust.  I mean it's pretty obvious that it's kind of a dumb idea. You're begging to let yourself get used.

It's not for economic reason, the economic reason is just a cover to sell to the American people who subsidises the NATO alliance. It's for security. Not against Russia but to prevent the Europeans from fighting each other and having the excuse to go build some Nukes. We're quite literally keeping the peace. 

Besides, 

The US simply does not have a rival. Largely because of geography, we have the World's best lands able to float a massive naval fleet. No other country have the capital to sustain and maintain said force.This makes us the world's only natural super power, a continental sized naval power at that. Which means, we can reach any corner of the planet and bring to bear an entire Naval Carrier Strike group, smashing what ever needs smashing. We have 12 of those. We defeated Imperial Japan and Industrial Germany, at the same time. We also destroyed the Soviets in the Cold war. Working with the Americans instead of against them, is shall we say a wise decision. Post soviet Russia and China is learning that lesson now. India, will learn that lesson too. 

Edited September 2, 2025 by paxamericana

[Nationalist]

18 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

The US simply does not have a rival. Largely because of geography, we have the World's best lands able to float a massive naval fleet. No other country have the capital to sustain and maintain said force.This makes us the world's only natural super power, a continental sized naval power at that. Which means, we can reach any corner of the planet and bring to bear an entire Naval Carrier Strike group, smashing what ever needs smashing. We have 12 of those. We defeated Imperial Japan and Industrial Germany, at the same time. We also destroyed the Soviets in the Cold war. Working with the Americans instead of against them, is shall we say a wise decision. Russia and China is learning that lesson now. India, will learn that lesson too.

Well...I doubt the usa could defeat both Russia and China at the same time. Its just not realistic.

As for India...I say close all immigration for them...and let them enjoy their own...

Plumbing.

Edited September 2, 2025 by Nationalist

[Chrissy1979]

China is officially the world’s greatest superpower now and it’s not even close.  And it’s all MAGA’s fault because they’re weak girly-men with an even weaker leader.

[paxamericana]

43 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

China

 

[paxamericana]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

both Russia and China

The Russian are a push over spent force, if America really wanted to, they would have let the Ukrainian win but that would complicate other issue. (Hint* America does not have a strategic interest in destroying Russia, we only want to box them in)

China, needs to be taken down a couple of notches. But it remains to be seen as a potential threat. Mainly because their system is heavily dependent on Energy, food , fertilizer and a host of other essential industrial material import to maintain modern life. We estimated that China would run out of food in 3 months and Energy in 6 to sustain their popullation. So if the shooting starts, half of their popullation would die from starvation and famine in the first year. This is before you consider that Japan and all the neighboring countries have a vested interest of boxing in China as well. So if the shooting starts, the Americans would not be fighting alone. 

Edited September 2, 2025 by paxamericana

[Nationalist]

8 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

The Russian are a push over spent force, if America really wanted to, they would have let the Ukrainian win but that would complicate other issue. (Hint* America does not have a strategic interest in destroying Russia, we only want to box them in)

China, needs to be taken down a couple of notches. But it remains to be seen as a potential threat. Mainly because their system is heavily dependent on Energy, food , fertilizer and a host of other essential industrial material import to maintain modern life. We estimated that China would run out of food in 3 months and Energy in 6 to sustain their popullation. So if the shooting starts, half of their popullation would die from starvation and famine in the first year. This is before you consider that Japan and all the neighboring countries have a vested interest of boxing in China as well. So if the shooting starts, the Americans would not be fighting alone. 

Do you know that if every person in China, spit into the Pacific all at once, the resulting tsunami would wipe out the US west coast?

The numbers are not good for such an insane scenario. 

Edited September 2, 2025 by Nationalist

[paxamericana]

New data show US economy grew even faster than forcasted at 3.8 % in Q2 . Let's see how Q3 will shake out, there are signs of growing head wind with a shrinking work force slowed immigration and increase cost for imported goods from tariff. “During a speech Tuesday, Powell noted that the economy “is showing resilience in the midst of substantial changes in trade and immigration policies.” Translates to growth is stunted.

Edited September 27, 2025 by paxamericana

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

New data show US economy grew even faster than forcasted at 3.8 % in Q2 . Let's see how Q3 will shake out, there are signs of growing head wind with a shrinking work force slowed immigration and increase cost for imported goods from tariff. “During a speech Tuesday, Powell noted that the economy “is showing resilience in the midst of substantial changes in trade and immigration policies.” Translates to growth is stunted.

3.8  is a good quarter.  If he can sustain that he'll be able to claim a win over time provided inflation doesn't gobble it up

[paxamericana]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

3.8  is a good quarter.  If he can sustain that he'll be able to claim a win over time provided inflation doesn't gobble it up

There is an important point however that the growth were mainly driven by AI investment like data center, and related infrastructure. So not all sectors saw the same growth.

Edited September 27, 2025 by paxamericana