Remember when inflation became an issue ? It was said it was "transitory " due to supply chain issues related to covid disruptions that led to shortages ? That was partly true. It was exasperated by Fed policy and the administration .

Be prepared for a return to supply chain shortages within a couple of months .


“It's my prediction that in 2 weeks' time, arrivals will drop by 35%, as essentially all shipments out of China for major retailers and manufacturers have ceased,” Executive Director Gene Seroka told KNX News.
Seroka said many large importers have “hit the pause button on cargo from China” because they don't want to pay the tariffs.
He said retailers have about a six-to eight-week supply of goods on hand, “but that will quickly dry up” and customers will begin to see those changes on store shelves.

‘Essentially all shipments’ from China cease at Port of L.A. (https://www.audacy.com/knxnews/news/local/essentially-all-shipments-from-china-cease-at-port-of-l-a)

Store shelves will begin to empty just as the summer push for things like school supplies hits and retailers prepare to stock up for the winter holiday season.

Trump's 104% China tariff worries Christmas decoration makers, importers | ABS-CBN News (https://www.abs-cbn.com/news/business/2025/4/9/trump-s-104-china-tariff-worries-christmas-decoration-makers-importers-0154)

Forget Christmas . Rare earth magnet production is almost totally made in China.


China has suspended exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets, threatening to choke off supplies of components central to automakers, aerospace manufacturers, semiconductor companies and military contractors around the world.Shipments of the magnets, essential for assembling everything from cars and drones to robots and missiles, have been halted at many Chinese ports while the Chinese government drafts a new regulatory system. Once in place, the new system could permanently prevent supplies from reaching certain companies, including American military contractors.
China Halts Critical Rare Earth Exports as Trade War Intensifies - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/business/china-rare-earths-exports.html)

I totally agree with Trump that China is a major trade bad actor and cheats ;hits the US with unequal restrictions ,dumps products to undercut competition ,and steals intellectual property as policy.

I even sorta agree with his complaints about the EU although those issues could be resolved amicably . His attacks on Canada and Mexico made zero sense because he negotiated the deals with those nations and ideally they are a part of the solution .

His correct move should've been strengthening US trade relations with the rest of the world ESPECIALLY Canada and Mexico ;to isolate China. There are plenty of nations that would've been more than happy to take up the share China has. Instead he waged trade war with the whole world ;and we are soon going to see the consequences.

Trump made light of impending empty shelves . He dismissed the concerns about Christmas .




“You know, somebody said, ‘Oh, the shelves are going to be empty’. Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally.”

Most people do not give 30 gifts . What world is that from? He's beginning to sound like a pampered entitled lib.

The impact will be felt long before Christmas and yes parents and children will be seeing shortages and price increases just about the time parents have to shell out $$$ to purchase clothing and school supplies.

Go ahead keep mocking and dismissing the concerns .

Scott Bessent wants an allied coalition of nations to counter China’s control of rare earth minerals.

US and allies to prepare 'fulsome group response' to China's export curbs on rare earth minerals: Bessent (https://www.taxtmi.com/news?id=58966)


Perhaps that idea would have a better chance if the US wasn't slapping punitive tariffs on our allies ?

Are those the same allies who have been using protective tariffs against us for years?

if they want to charge their consumers an import tax let them .

Trump suggests US will buy Argentinian beef to bring down prices for American consumers (https://www.foxcarolina.com/2025/10/20/trump-suggests-us-will-buy-argentinian-beef-bring-down-prices-american-consumers/?fbclid=IwY2xjawNjGKlleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFLRFUy TW96MzdxMG9VUTN4AR7eXkoyQnq5vhWqiNSmsxe9150G7LztN_ srtNOFnYUqMXo_UJaPtingBnoaOg_aem_2-zFUj91W1BIuZmGd0zW-g)

But that's only half the equation. In imposing tariffs on American imports, theyare making it more difficult for American companies to compete and are damaging, to some extent, our economy. And yes, it causes some prices to rise, but it also provides more opportunities for jobs and economic growth in their own cities as companies enlarge in order to meet the demand for what are essentially banned American products. And I'm not saying it's a smart strategy on their behalf, but it is what is happening.

last I saw the unemployment rate was slightly higher than 4% The job market changes . As some opportunities leave others emerge. Adaptability and flexibility; learning new skills is the key. I don't think anyone wants to spend their lifetime working at sweat shops making trinkets and tee shirts anymore. And no one or very few in the US wants to pay the price it would take to making them in the US

As for the Japanese protecting their rice ;let them and make their consumers pay the price. I know that by raising protection for steel ; the American companies were late in making needed improvements and innovation

American Protectionism Ruined U.S. Steel (https://reason.com/2024/01/02/protectionism-ruined-u-s-steel/#:~:text=And%20the%20associated%20idea%20that%20th e%20federal,to%20prevent%20its%20sale%20makes%20no %20sense.)


Three decades of steel protection are estimated to have cost consumers and taxpayers over $100 billion. In addition, the higher prices likely encouraged other industries to move production overseas, where, among other things, steel would have been cheaper. Perhaps most significantly, these policies delayed the transitions of workers into new sustainable jobs with high wages. Today, steelworkers still earn high wages, but there are only a quarter as many jobs as there were in 1980. When the political economy was tilted to preserve the producers using old technology, little was done to transition steelworkers into new jobs requiring new skills.


The Story of American Steel and Failed Protectionism | American Enterprise Institute - AEI (https://www.aei.org/economics/the-story-of-american-steel-and-failed-protectionism/)

There is some justification for protecting national security industries and imposing sanctions for bad actors . But even then the better option is creating free trade zones among allies . I'd rather purchase mined minerals from Australia and timber from Canada in exchange for finished products we make .

Trump's zero sum game thinking on trade deficits is childish; ruins relations with key allies and hurts American consumers .

I'd much rather Americans make trinkets and tee shirts than sit idle at home drawing welfare checks. And I don't see how it can be much different than working at a fast-food place. It just seems to me that we cannot continue to sit idly by while, for instance, American cars are subjected to restrictive import tariffs while we allow a tidal wave of foreign cars to come in. At some point we have to support American businesses. Is Trump doing it all right? I doubt it, but I'm glad he is at least doing something.

good luck with that . Less than 4 % of Americans work in textiles. And domestic suppliers provide for a small niche market of consumers willing to over pay .

And I doubt that America would even tolerate a robust textile market these days . Here is South Carolina they are dealing with polluted waterways that they hope that out of dams can contain. That is all due to the textile industry that once dominated here.

EWG: At least 1,500 U.S. textile mills likely dischargers of ‘forever chemicals’ | Environmental Working Group (https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/2022/01/ewg-least-1500-us-textile-mills-likely-dischargers-forever)

And of course technological improvements means a reduced need for human labor .

So what are you suggesting ;a FDR WPA like program digging ditches ;and sewing tee shirts ;designed to keep people busy ?

I was not suggesting anything. I am simply saying that the jobs you seem to turn your nose up at are still legit jobs. Do they make economic sense in today's America? Perhaps not, but we shouldn't allow anyone to have this attitude. " I don't think anyone wants to spend their lifetime working at sweat shops making trinkets and tee shirts anymore." I did a lot of jobs I didn't want to spend my lifetime doing, but they were still legit jobs and helped me to get along the road that led to better jobs. And yeah, rather than handing out money, perhaps we could employ people to clean out ditches, pick up trash, or do any one of a number of things rather than just sitting in the recliner collecting a check.

How Keynesian of you .Taken to the extreme ;digging ditches and filling them back in becomes a permanent job. But please let's call that "infrastructure" spending.

I understand your position about labor . No job is demeaning . But are they necessary ;or are they just keep people busy work ?

My argument is that Roosevelt's make work policies extended the depression. It would've lasted even longer except for wartime mobilization.

Besides ;labor unions would never allow people they don't "represent " to do public works ,

You know and I know that there are jobs Americans won't do without compensation that exceeds the value of the work. The reason why there was an influx of illegals was because American businesses could hire them on the cheap. One of the main purposes of importing is to give consumers more choices and less expensive choices. In that same vein ;imports help American businesses compete by allowing them to access cheaper goods.

There are also tons of productive work associated with imports like transportation ;warehousing ;wholesale and retail . How long will American stores last if they can't sell imports and instead rely on domestic over prices items ?


Imports support more than 21 million American jobs across the country, including a net positive number in every U.S. state.
21 Million U.S. Jobs Depend on Imports, New Study Shows (https://www.rila.org/retail-works-for-all-of-us/resources/retail-international-trade/21-million-us-jobs-depend-on-imports-new-study#:~:text=Jobs%20created%20by%20imports%20are% 20supporting%20families,are%20putting%20these%20Am erican%20jobs%20at%20risk.)

While indeed some jobs will increase due to businesses reshoring ;I doubt it will be a net positive . And besides ;most unskilled labor is being replaced by robotics and AI .

The truth is that productivity this decade has increased significantly due to technological developments and in doing so have shed jobs no longer productive . That is the way it has always been . The demand for farriers decreased dramatically with the advent of the automobile .
So while there is dignity in ditch digging; it makes little sense to employ people in make work jobs.

To sum up my position ; even if a nation uses protectionist policies it is a net negative to retaliate through tariffs.Yes it punishes the country that does them But it also punishes Americans . It is better to find alternatives through building trade alliances .

Yesterday Trump had a hissy fit over some Canadian ads . How having hostile trade policies with an important ally on out border benefits the US in any way is beyond me. Trump says the ad misquoted Reagan . I have used the same quote many times. While it was true that Reagan spoke them while imposing tariffs himself ;the truth is that Reagan was very much a free trader. He used them temporarily and short lived solution as a last resort because Japan was clearly violating a trade agreement; unlike Trump who sees tariffs as an essential part of his economic polices.

But please let's call that "infrastructure" spending.But I didn't suggest that. I'm just saying that if we are going to send someone a check every month who is capable of work, then let's put them to work. If they don't want to do the work, they can look elsewhere. It doesn't cost any more than we are already spending.

My solution would be workfare . But we are past the time when our elected officials had the cajónes to suggest it like Gingrich and Clinton's reforms of 1996 ;only tougher rules to keep blue states from gaming it . I am looking to end government jobs wherever it is practical . As far as I am concerned most of the swamp desk jockeys do jobs the equivalent of ditch digging .

A post I can certainly agree with. Our government is far, far too large, and its sheer size means it pokes its nose into areas where it is not needed or wanted.

A post I can certainly agree with. Our government is far, far too large, and its sheer size means it pokes its nose into areas where it is not needed or wanted.

Next big thing will be SCOTUS decision on the constitutionality of Trump's tariffs . I kinda know how it will go . Clueless Joe had much of his agenda reversed mercifully by SCOTUS using the Major question doctrine which says SCOTUS needs to apply "common sense" when determining if Congress delegated the power to the Congress that the constitution assigned to them. (a more mind numbing explanation here )
The Major Questions Doctrine | Congress.gov | Library of Congress (https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12077)
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises

Trump's tariffs violates this clause .

To lay punative tariffs on Ontario because Trump is upset with an ad they aired is the height of abuse.

"Because of their serious misrepresentation of the facts, and hostile act, I am increasing the Tariff on Canada by 10% over and above what they are paying now."

Trump got mad at a TV ad ;so the American consumer will pay more.

To lay punative tariffs on Ontario because Trump is upset with an ad they aired is the height of abuse.Have to agree with that. He can really be childish at times.

Trump and Xi parlayed this week and came away with a status quo from May. This is good because it averted a complete disaster going into an election year.
Trump called it a 12 out of 10 result . lol . The biggest positive is he isn't going full nuclear 100% + tariffs .He is actually shaving some % in exchange for China not sending as much American killing fentanyl precursors to the drug cartels . Xi will not completely stop exports of rare earth minerals to the US giving us time to hopefully decouple from dependence .
Maybe he is slowly learning his lesson. He is making deals with other nations to help supplant the need to import from China(see his deal with Australia ) . That is not a bad thing. It should've been his first moves instead of threatening allies .

Give a hat tip to tariffs for the election results yesterday. Affordability and inflations the highest issue mentioned.

As anticipated the cost of the tariffs is increasingly being born by the consumers . What isn't is being picked up by American companies.
Goldman Estimates Consumers Will Pay Half of Tariff Costs (https://www.pymnts.com/consumer-insights/2025/goldman-raises-estimates-of-tariff-related-costs-paid-by-consumers/#:~:text=Goldman%20Sachs%20now%20estimates%20U.S., for%20businesses%20and%20consumers%20alike.)



But they were going to bring American jobs !


A report from outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas showed almost 950,000 US job cuts (https://www.challengergray.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Challenger-Report-September-2025.pdf) this year through September, the highest year-to-date total since 2020—and that was before the heavy October run of announcements. (Excluding that first year of the Covid-19 pandemic, US job cuts in the first nine months have already surpassed full-year layoffs for every year since 2009.) When something is almost the worst since the Great Recession, North says, “that’s not a very encouraging number.”

The ‘Low Hire, Low Fire’ US Economy Seems to Be Over - Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-11-03/the-low-hire-low-fire-us-economy-seems-to-be-over)


Job openings in October slumped to the lowest level since February 2021, Indeed measure shows (https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/04/job-openings-in-october-slumped-to-the-lowest-level-since-early-february-indeed-measure-shows.html)


High prices and job losses is not a good recipe for winning the 2026 midterms

Today SCOTUS hears oral arguments on the constitutionality of Trump's tariffs.

The Constitution says that Congress has the power to tarifff. Trump says he has the power because of some kind of emergency powers
( Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977)

I cant' wait to hear Solicitor General D. John Sauer tell the justices that Ottawa airing an ad critical of Trump's Canada tariffs constitutes an emergency.

Here's the deal that I think SCOTUS will decide. Granted Congress from time to time passes laws giving the President limited powers to tariff . But Trump abused that power and taken the concessions to the extreme. If the tariffs stands then it becomes a Congressional power they will never regain again.

The major question doctrine would say that if Congress had indeed intended the President use broad discretion in imposing tariffs then they would've clearly written it into the law. The nondelegation doctrine says specifically that Congress cannot concede such broad legislative powers to the President.

Major questions doctrine - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_questions_doctrine)

Nondelegation doctrine - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondelegation_doctrine)

Should be an interesting hearing. There are 44 friends of the court briefs to consider as well as the arguments of the 2 sides.

Listened on and off to the Q&A oral hearings. I may be wrong. But I did not hear a justice who seriously supported the administrations position on tariffs. Some like Alito weakly tip toed trying to find a constitutional rational .

Gorsuch asked the coup de grace question . He asked why the separation of powers is not violated . He said if Congress were to give away the power with a 1 vote majority .They would need an almost impossible 60 vote majority to reverse it. In essensce they would be permanently giving up their power . Only Congress can tax . Trump's tariffs are taxes on importers(and more often on consumers ) . Congress never gave the President such power AND they do not have the power to give it up regardless .

Trump has tried to suggest that he has the power to impose tariffs anywhere ;any time ;any ;amount whenever he wants to .SCOTUS will tell him no he can't .

What Trump CAN do is us sanctions and import quotas to influence foreign governments .

Affordability and inflations the highest issue mentioned.Affordability (high prices) are the legacy of the high inflation of the Biden years. Inflation at present is slightly less than 3%, and that is a pretty good figure. Only a period of deflation would help with prices, but deflation, as I understand it, is generally not considered to be a good economic indicator. To vote democrat on the basis of 3% inflation is really foolish.


What Trump CAN do is us sanctions and import quotasWouldn't the practical result of import quotas be about the same as that of tariffs? It would result in higher prices due to the relative scarcity of the imported items and the ability of domestic producers to raise prices without fear of losing market share.

Wouldn't the practical result of import quotas be about the same as that of tariffs?

It could . It may even be worse . I was speaking strictly of the constitutionality .

One thing however . quotas don't have to be across the board. One nation's quota restrictions is another nation's opportunity . If we want to decouple from China dependency it is what has to be done. There is no way US manufacturing can make up the demand .


“In recent weeks, my administration has strengthened American economic security by forging agreements with allies and friends across the world to broaden our critical minerals supply chains,” Trump said.
Trump discusses rare earth metals with Central Asian leaders | AP News (https://apnews.com/article/trump-central-asia-rare-earth-metals-china-4d98912acea17cace354dbb65be55275)



That is the correct course to take instead of tariff threats . We are now not considered reliable partners with some of our most critical allies .


To vote democrat on the basis of 3% inflation is really foolish.

High prices ;the affordability issue ? Nothing to see here . It is my predecessor's fault. That sounds just like the lines Clueless Joe would say.
This is what people remember
Trump promised lower prices on Day One. (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/LqZsvVI_-N4)

Honestly I can't find one thing I purchase besides gas that has not gone up considerably in the last year. . I do a lot of the family shopping ? I know my weekly amount spent is well above 3% (and I carefully look for sales and am not loyal to brands ) . I purchased a car last year . The same model this year has gone up well over 3% . The average cost of a new car went to $50,000 this year.

Affordability is an issue . The average first time home buyer is now 40 . We have reached European levels where no youth owns their own home unless they have high paying jobs or inherit them. I fully understand why youth would reject that status quo. I fully understand why Mancommie appeals to people who are desperate for a change.
Not that his solutions work . In fact they are insane. Rents too high ? freeze them yeah that's the ticket instead of finding a way to increase the supply .

The only logic I see in Trump's on again off again tariffs is a vindictive ' get even' agenda instead of an economic growth agenda.
He sees zero sum games winners and losers . Trade benefits both nations .
How can he expect American companies to reshore when his polices raise the costs of the materials they need to do so? How can they reshore when day to day there is uncertainty ?

“It’s frustrating because we’re the most American auto company, and we export the most, and yet, we have this $2 billion headwind, which prevents me from investing even more in the U.S.”

Ford CEO says $2 billion in tariff costs prevents more US investments (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/ford-ceo-says-2-billion-in-tariff-costs-prevents-more-us-investments/ar-AA1NCDRL)
Lucerne scrapped a $50 million reshoring project in Detroit because of the impact of Trump's aluminum tariffs.
How tariffs disrupted this auto supplier’s reshoring project - Automotive News (https://www.autonews.com/manufacturing/suppliers/an-trump-tariffs-daily5-0922/)

Instead of zero sum pie dividing he is more on tract with his negotiations for rare earth minerals . It becomes a collaboration game instead of a competition.

Trump knows his tariffs are in trouble . Higher prices are reaching the shelves and SCOTUS may force him to reverse his "emergency" tariffs.
So he is floating a plan....“A dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including rich people!) will be paid to everyone.”

Trump says he'll issue $2,000 tariff dividend to all except 'high-income people' - ABC News (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-hell-issue-2000-tariff-dividend-except-high/story?id=127356839)

So much for paying off the national debt. So much for them not being a tax.
His plan is socialist redistribution pure and simple. Giving bribes and gimmees to the public to buy votes is the Dems SOP . My friend used to call this tactic 'giving bread crumbs to the pigeons '

And so, as it turns out, he has become just another D.C. pol.

To give everyone $2,000 would cost $600 billion . . CRFB says this is twice the annual amount Trump’s tariffs are expected to raise annually.
Tariff Dividends Could Cost $600 Billion Per Year-2025-11-10 (https://www.crfb.org/blogs/tariff-dividends-could-cost-600-billion-year?mod=djemAllThingsKimStrassel)

US exempts 200+ agricultural products from reciprocal tariffs | Supply Chain Dive (https://www.supplychaindive.com/news/us-exempts-200-agricultural-products-reciprocal-tariffs/805625/)

But But But ......... Americans don't pay for tariffs . The nation being tariffed pays Right ?

Wouldn't it be both?

No the importer pays and that gets passed on to the customer .The only way the customers don't pay is if the importer absorbs the costs .

Who Pays Tariffs? Americans Will Bear the Costs of the Trade War (https://taxfoundation.org/blog/who-pays-tariffs/)

5 things to know about tariffs and how they work | PBS News (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/5-things-to-know-about-tariffs-and-how-they-work)

I see your point. Not sure the importer can just raise prices to pay the full amount since there are alternatives that have not raised their prices, or at least not as much as the importer has to.

on the other hand there is nothing to prevent alternate domestic sources to also raise prices to the new benchmark. That is what happened with steel . It reduces competition for the domestic suppliers



“We have seen some tariff impacts. We try to buy almost everything domestically, and almost all of our products are assembled domestically, but components of the completed products we buy may come from other countries and are subject to tariffs, so some of the products we buy have seen tariff increases. As far as the steel we use to manufacture all of our storage units, bobtails and transports, it’s all coming domestically now, so we’re insulated from direct tariffs there. However, indirectly, domestic mills have increased prices because the tariffs made international steel more expensive, which gave them the ability to raise their own prices.”
– Michael Kruger, sales and purchasing, Westmor (https://www.lpgasmagazine.com/tag/westmor-industries/)

Measuring the impacts of US tariffs - LP Gas (https://www.lpgasmagazine.com/measuring-the-impacts-of-us-tariffs/)

Nothing other than the higher prices will drive down demand and thus drive down sales. Yes, the steel manufacturers have raised prices, but have they raised prices as much as the price increases on imported steel? Evidently not, since Kruger said they are buying domestic steel to be insulated from direct tariffs. If it was all a wash, then there would be no reason to go domestic.