Trumptastic Voyage

[Meho Krljic]

Šta mu rade:


More Americans say Trump's second term has been worse than expected, according to a new poll

Two months into Donald Trump's second term, more Americans say his presidential performance has been worse (41%) rather than better (30%) than they expected, according to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll.

Another 22% say Trump has been "about the same" as they expected.

The new survey of 1,677 U.S. adults, which was conducted from March 20 to 24, finds the president struggling amid rising economic uncertainty to maintain the political momentum that greeted his reelection last November.

(...)

Do these numbers mean Trump's "honeymoon" is over? Possibly. A president's popularity typically peaks in the initial phase of his presidency. But while more Americans said in November that they expected Trump to change America for the better (45%) than said they expected him to change America for the worse (33%), slightly more now think he is, in fact, doing the opposite: changing the country for the worse (43%) rather than the better (40%).

Perceptions of Trump's relationship to democracy have shifted as well. In November, Americans who said Trump "likes to talk tough" but "won't threaten democracy" during his second term (43%) outnumbered those who said Trump "poses a real threat to democracy" (39%). Now, however, the number of Americans who think Trump threatens democracy (47%) is significantly higher than the number who think it's all just bluster (39%).

(...)

This massive disconnect between what's important to Americans and what seems important to Trump comes at a time of persistent economic anxiety:

    Just 26% of Americans now rate the state of the economy as excellent or good; 70% rate it fair or poor. Right before the election, those numbers were 30% and 67%, respectively.

    47% of Americans say the economy is getting worse; only 26% say it is getting better.

    51% of Americans believe inflation is getting worse, roughly the same as last October.

    Only a third of Americans (34%) describe their own personal economic situation as excellent or good, while 64% say it is fair or poor. Those numbers are also unchanged since October.

    Most Americans believe the economy is in a recession today (26%) or headed toward one (26%).

    A full 87% of Americans say grocery prices are too high, while just 7% say they're about right and a mere 1% say they're too low. Two-thirds (66%) say grocery prices are going up.

As a result, Trump's perceived inattention to the economy and the cost of living has damaged his standing with the public. His rating for handling the economy — 39% approve to 51% disapprove — is now lower than his overall job rating. In fact, Trump's economic rating is lower today than it was during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, from May to June 2020 (49% approve to 45% disapprove, on average).

And Trump's rating for handling the cost of living is lower still: 34% approve to 54% disapprove.

A on u međuvremenu:


Museums and parks must remove some items related to race and gender: Executive order

President Donald Trump signed an executive order behind closed doors on Thursday directing federal agencies and the Smithsonian to eliminate what the order calls "divisive" and "anti-American" content from museums and national parks, sources familiar with the order told ABC News.

The order -- called "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History" -- directed the vice president and the secretary of Interior to restore federal parks, monuments, memorials and statues "that have been improperly removed or changed in the last five years to perpetuate a false revision of history or improperly minimize or disparage certain historical figures or events."

The order also directed Vice President JD Vance, who is a member of the Smithsonian Board of Regents, to work to eliminate what it claims are improper, divisive or anti-American ideology from the Smithsonian -- an institution consisting of 21 museums and 14 education and research centers -- as well as the National Zoo in Washington, D.C.

The White House said in the full text of the executive order that over the past decade, a rewriting of history has cast American milestones in a "negative light" and therefore directs museums to remove some historical context relating to race and gender.

It added that future funds for the organization will be banned for exhibits or programs that "degrade shared American values, divide Americans based on race, or promote programs or ideologies inconsistent with Federal law."

Furthermore, it banned the forthcoming American Women's History Museum from recognizing transgender women "in any respect."

The order said that the exhibits and programs that it seeks to remove undermine the nation's "unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness" by casting its success "as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed."

Examples given by the order include an exhibit at the Smithsonian American Art Museum called "The Shape of Power: Stories of Race and American Sculpture," which the order claimed "promotes the view that race is not a biological reality but a social construct" and exhibits at the National Museum of African American History and Culture that the order said "proclaimed that 'hard work,' 'individualism,' and 'the nuclear family' are aspects of 'White culture.'"

[džin tonik]

Evo ko je novi guverner SAD u Srbiji: "Ponosan sam na moje korene, ja sam pravoslavni Srbin"

Vojvoda Mark Brnović koga je predsednik SAD Donald Tramp predložio za Guvernera Sjedinjenih Država u Srbiji je američki advokat i političar.

(...)

Vojvoda Brnović je rođen u Detroitu (Mičigen) 1966. godine. Njegovi roditelji su bili Srbi koji su imigrirali iz bivše Jugoslavije, otac iz Crne Gore, a majka iz Splita (Hrvatska). On je izjavio da je njegova majka emigrirala u Sjedinjene Države kako bi pobegla od komunizma.

(...)

"Ja sam veoma ponosan na moje etničke korene. Porodica mog oca je došla iz Crne Gore, a Brnovići su pleme iz Lješanske nahije. Porodica moje majke je došla iz Dalmacije i ja sam pravoslavni Srbin po veri, tako da možete da se kaže da sam pokupio ono najbolje od celog Balkana!...

eto, nije bosanac.

[Krsta Klatić Klaja]

iz Splita, a Srbin, misterija!

[džin tonik]

kakva misterija:

Proboj logoraša iz Jasenovca

Proboj iz logora Jasenovac izvršilo je 22. travnja 1945. godine 600 od preostalih 1073 logoraša, zatočenih u Ciglani, kada su shvatili da ih čeka sigurna smrt. Proboj je preživjelo samo njih 117. Istog dana, proboj je izvršilo i 147 zatočenika u Kožari, od kojih je preživjelo 11 njih.

izmisljeni proboj prezivjelo je stotinjak izmisljenih logorasa srba. nisu svi medju onih izmisljenih milijun zrtava. a navuklo se poslije 1945. na buljuke i srpskih kolonista u opljackane stanove od ljudi. nije tad jos bilo ccacilenda.
tako da se nasao koji srbin u hr i poslije izmisljenog genocida nad izmisljenim srpskim zrtvama u ndh.

[džin tonik]

Tramp imenovao vojvodu Marka Brnovića Anastazija za novog guvernera SAD u Srbiji - reakcije

[Krsta Klatić Klaja]

sve lažovi, pupovci!

[džin tonik]

uglavnom nije iz srbije! milosevic, karadzic, mladic, vucic, pa sad i taj anastazije... svi prave srbende.

[Meho Krljic]

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/hundreds-of-international-students-are-waking-up-to-an-email-asking-them-to-self-deport-for-campus-activism-or-even-sharing-posts-on-social-media/articleshow/119679695.cms

[Truman]

Trump u epizodi "Biblioteke kao državni neprijatelj":
https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/trump-admin-cuts-library-funding-what-it-means-for-students/2025/03

[džin tonik]

Ovo je novi američki guverner u Beogradu

(...)

"Obitelj mog oca došla je iz Crne Gore, Brnovići su pleme iz Lješanske nahije. Majčina obitelj došla je iz Dalmacije, iz okolice Splita. Ja sam pravoslavni Srbin i ponosan sam na svoje balkanske korijene," rekao je za beogradski Kurir.

(...)

Zanimljiv detalj iz njegovog života su imena njegovih pasa – Rakija i Pivo. Osim toga, na društvenim mrežama proširila se snimka koju je 2021. sam objavio na X-u, na kojoj vješto rukuje nunčakama.

blago americi.
https://youtu.be/Sb5aq5HcS1A

[Meho Krljic]

Ilon Mask u epizodi "Ko je izmislio tu podelu vlasti na tri grane SAMO ZAJEBAVAJU POŠTENE MILIJARDERE KOJI KONTROLIŠU IZVRŠNU GRANU VLASTI":


https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1jnrh63/elon_musk_any_federal_judge_can_stop_any_action/?rdt=50046

Elon Musk: "Any federal judge can stop any action by the president, you know, of the United States. This is insane. This has got to stop. It has got to stop at the federal level at the state level"

[džin tonik]

ovi bi lako mogli dovrsiti sto zapoceli transpederi i uciniti ameriku velikom. poput rusije.
 
preostat ce tri tajkuna na jahtama i narod alkoholicara, t.j. tri tajkuna u teslama i narod narkomana.

fascinira da poslije demokrata ni republikanci  nisu mogli izroniti nista normalno; zar uopce vise nemaju ljudi, bas sve poblesavilo? iako su prijeko potrebni ludaci, ali na pravi nacin.

[Palmer]

Bez milijadi američkijeh poreskih obveznika kaput jedna po jedna..

[mac]

Ti ne razumeš ono što ni Tramp ne razume. Amerika je deo sveta. Kad je svet zdraviji onda je i Amerika zdravija. Bolesti ne znaju za granice. Pare uložene u prevenciju i suzbijanje više vrede od para za lečenje, kada bolest zakuca na vrata. Ali ovo su dobre vesti za velike farmaceutske kuće. Oni više vole kad se pare troše na lečenje, nego na prevenciju. Za razliku od prevencije, na lečenju može da se zaradi.

Čak i da postoji neka magična bolest koja ne prelazi američku granicu, bolesni ljudi ne proizvode višak vrednosti, stvari postaju skuplje, globalna inflacija raste. Više će da boli države s bolesnicima, ali će da boli i Ameriku.

[Palmer]

Ti ne razumeš ono što ni Tramp ne razume. Amerika je deo sveta. Kad je svet zdraviji onda je i Amerika zdravija. Bolesti ne znaju za granice. Pare uložene u prevenciju i suzbijanje više vrede od para za lečenje, kada bolest zakuca na vrata. Ali ovo su dobre vesti za velike farmaceutske kuće. Oni više vole kad se pare troše na lečenje, nego na prevenciju. Za razliku od prevencije, na lečenju može da se zaradi.

Čak i da postoji neka magična bolest koja ne prelazi američku granicu, bolesni ljudi ne proizvode višak vrednosti, stvari postaju skuplje, globalna inflacija raste. Više će da boli države s bolesnicima, ali će da boli i Ameriku.

Rekao bih da nažalost ti ne razumeš ništa.

Pusti me tih idealizama za male bebe i agendašenja molim te. Kada se WHO I EFSA bavila prevencijom i lečenjem?? Radio sam u farm. kompaniji obišao sve sajmove i approved inspekcije i video koliko se radilo na sledljivosti i održivosti šio mi ga Đura, al' krkao se ozb. suši.. a kamoli prevenciji.. i video sam i gde se pravi brufen a gde se slika inspekcija i šta je GMP. Ogoljeni kapitalizam i povrat investicuje su jedino merilo i eksperimentalna nauka svedena na ekspertizu naručenih studija. Naravno da Tramp to ne razume niti ga zanima ko o tome priča. Samo mi je bezveze da stavljate oreol humanosti jednoom WHOu kao da su se ikada bavile zdravljem. PURE BS.

[Palmer]

Prevencija je verovatno i fluor u vodi za ćepi i obogaćivanje ili fortifikacija kako kome draže:

https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1906449622450524458?t=8K_cvRSGHIDTJHuE-1wOWg&s=19

Tviter kriziranje ovih likova mi je presmešno. Zamisli nije im više obogaćena voda fluorom. Jer vrv je ok da se guta iz česmuše al' nije ok iz paste za zube.

Naravno oba su scam.

To kao onaj vic za titanijum dioksidom u kapsulama (daje bezbojnost kapsuli)  - da je ok u lekovima jer se zna doziranje, a ne u suplementima (kancerogen) pa je tu zabranjen mo'š misliti jer suplemente možeš da gutaš kao plovka.

Naravno oba su scam.

[Meho Krljic]

Da se ne zajebavamo, Trampov ministar zdravlja dovodi Davida Geiera da vodi CDC-ovu studiju o vezi autizma sa vakcinama.


David Geier je sin Marka Geiera, dakle, čoveka od čije je - mnogo puta diskreditovane studije - krenula ta priča o vezi vakcina i autizma. Mark, koji je umro pre neki dan, je izgubio medicinsku licencu zbog ovoga, a David je nikada nije ni imao. Dakle RFK Junior stavlja čoveka čiji je ne samo lični već porodični biznis zasnovan na falsifikovanju nalaza naučnih studija u vezi sa imunizacijom da bude zadužen za proveru podataka studije koja traži vezu između vakcina i autizma u trenutku kada imaju epidemiju malih boginja  u tri države na jugu. Ali problem je WHO. Kako da ne...

[Palmer]

Da se ne zajebavamo. Demokrate su osnovale kkk, branile Big Pharma branile ropstvo od osnivanja i napraville diskurs da ne možeš biti levi libertijanac ako si i za slobodu govora, živi i pusti druge da žive, ali ako si protiv korupcije, ALI ako si protiv Big Pharme, protiv Big Gov, i ratova, i ako si za -pusti decu da budu deca-, onda si naci. Da se nezajebavamo - važi. Big time- Big slow mo thumb up od mene za sve apologete Big Pharme..

Naravno da je WHO problem i naravno da agendaše svi koji su branili i propagirali drugima instant vaksanje za Covid. I naravno da su Trampovi krimosi isto krimosi samo desna strana krimosa i bandita. Priča se o smernicama i prevenciji BIG PHARMA samo gura već 20 godina priču prskalica i mazalica belih soba komora za stabilnost i skupih mašina previjenu u oblandu sledljivosti i održivosti i svega što SAMO leči posledicu i ima veliki gle čuda Minimal Order Quantity i dobar obrt dok im se lekovi prave po Indiji iza brda u zgradi u kojoj se ne fotkaš iako si pratio i promovisao I EFSA i WHO smernice kao inspektor. Na terenu. U praksi. Batalite me teorija.

I naravno da sam za perma ban EU i svih kriminalaca i levo i desno.

Kad se postavi da biraš između Adama Smita i Keynesa dobiješ Rona Paula koji bi po svemu trebalo da je levi libertijanac u stv. konzervativac, isto je i sa Alex Jones ili Roganom..

Ne samo jasne podele i obeležavanje svakog ko ne ulazi u diskurs neshiftovanja je važno. Da se ne zajebavamo - Mmmmda važi..

[Krsta Klatić Klaja]

meni je najjače što je Bajden legalizovo drogu pa se niko nije žalio

[Truba]

ma dobro to je bilo u proslosti da su demokrate bili za ropstvo a republikanci protiv
to su stvari prošlosti...sadašnji trenutak treba gledati partijer su se promijenile
rekao bih da republikanci i demokrate ne postoje vise
samo maga i woke

[džin tonik]

I u Americi formula za izračunavanje carina ocenjena kao 'neverovatno glupa': Tramp sebi izbio iz džepa 40 miliona dolara

Carinske stope koje je u sredu predstavio predsednik Donald Tramp proizašle su iz jednostavne formule zasnovane na trgovinskim deficitima SAD sa drugim zemljama. Ne na carinskim stopama koje te zemlje naplaćuju SAD. Niti na ,,manipulaciji valutama i trgovinskim barijerama", kako je Bela kuća prvobitno tvrdila.

Analize objavljene na društvenim mrežama i u vestima pokazale su da su brojevi rezultat mnogo jednostavnije kalkulacije. Podelom suficita određene zemlje u trgovini sa SAD sa ukupnom vrednošću izvoza, a zatim množenjem tog broja sa 0,5.

Ova formula odgovara tarifama koje je Tramp predstavio za Kinu, Evropsku uniju, Indoneziju, Indiju i Vijetnam, ukazao je Ian Bremer. On je globalni politički analitičar i osnivač konsultantske firme Eurasia Group. Na platformi X tim povodom je napisao: ,,Ovo je... neverovatno glupo".

(...)

nevjerojatno glupo, znaci tocno po mjeri. sad samo da ostane dosljedan pri ekonomskim pitanjima i okani se drndanja ukrajine.

[Meho Krljic]

Tramp razara globalizam ali tako da će prvo stradati SAD, čini nam se:


This is the stock market's worst start to a presidential term in modern history

President Donald Trump warned Americans in 2024 that a vote for Vice President Kamala Harris would be a vote for a market meltdown.

"You want to see a market crash? If we lost this election, I think the market would go down the tubes," Trump said at a Pennsylvania rally in late October.

Weeks earlier, Trump confidently predicted that if he lost, "the result will be a Kamala economic crash, a 1929-style depression."

Trump won the election, but he may have been right about a crash occurring after the election.

Trump and his tariffs have taken a bull stock market and are on the precipice of turning it into a bear faster than any president has overseen in modern history. If the stock market closes in bear territory – a drop of 20% from a recent peak – it would be the earliest in a new administration a bull market has turned into a bear in the history of the S&P 500, which dates back to 1957.

These same tariffs may also take a booming economy and turn it into a recession.

The S&P 500 had lost 15% of its value since Inauguration Day as of Sunday night. And that doesn't even count the massive losses set for Monday's opening bell.

The only similar drop for an elected president so quickly into his presidency was under George W. Bush in 2001.

The next largest drop after Bush and Trump was Carter in early 1977. That decline was under 6%, to give you an idea of just how far the rabbit hole the market is right now.

The current market wipeout hit a crescendo after Trump's "Liberation Day" event, where he shocked and alarmed the business world by promising to increase tariffs at an unprecedented pace. Indeed, two-thirds of the 15% fall in the S&P 500 has been since Liberation Day.

"Liberation Day has been followed by Annihilation Days in the stock market," Ed Yardeni, of Yardeni Research, wrote in a note to clients on Sunday.

The awfulness of the past two days of trading were matched only by the 1987 crash, the 2008 financial crisis and the Covid crash of 2020.

Of course, the recent market's plunge alone isn't all that's unique about the current situation. What was happening before the plunge makes it particularly special.

Bush took office with a market that was already in decline. As you read this article, it might be hard for some of you to remember or imagine that there was a stock market crash related to the internet.

The bursting of the dot-com bubble plunged the caused the S&P 500 by to drop 10% in 2000. It would, therefore, be tough to say that Bush was responsible for the poor state of the market in April 2001.

Trump, on the other hand, inherited a bull market. The S&P 500 gained 23% in 2024.

Indeed, it is quite easy to say that Trump is directly responsible for the dive under his presidency given how much of it occurred since Liberation Day.

We should note that the 15% drop under Trump in the S&P 500 does not qualify as a bear market yet. A bear market by most definitions requires a drop of 20% from a recent peak. The Nasdaq already crossed that threshold, however, closing in a bear market on Friday for the first time since 2022. The Russell 2000 is in a bear market, too.
An economy in decline

Of course, there is the matter of whether what happens on Wall Street affects or is at least representative of the larger economy.

The answer to the first part of that sentence is probably "yes," while the answer to the second part could very well be "yes," too.

Although some Trump officials have argued they are trying to help Main Street, even if it hurts Wall Street, it's not easy to separate the two.

This isn't the early 1970s anymore when polling indicated that less than 25% of Americans were involved in the stock market. Those were the days before IRAs and 401(k)s. As of 2024, more than three-in-five Americans were involved in the market in some way per Gallup.

"Wall Street is Main Street," Yardeni said. "The two streets prosper and suffer together...Main Street owns lots of stocks in American corporations that are facing massive disruptions as a result of Trump Tariffs 2.0."

Moreover, David Kotok, co-founder of Cumberland Advisors, warned the Trump tariffs will act as a massive supply shock akin to the 1973-1974 oil price shock during the Yom Kippur War.

"The Trump tariffs are a massive tax hike imposed as a sales tax on American consumers," Kotok said. "Supply shocks mean higher inflation coupled with slow growth or recession, which is the worst of all worlds for the central bank."

While there isn't one universally agreed upon definition of a recession, take a look at these odds: JPMorgan has raised the chance of a recession to 60%. It had previously been 40%. Goldman Sachs has raised it from 20% to 45%. HSBC puts it at 40%.

We'll see if the National Bureau of Economic Research calls a recession before the end of the year. They rely upon a host of metrics to make that determination.

Another definition of a recession is if we have two consecutive quarters of decline in the real gross domestic product. We've already seen forecasts for real GDP plummet. Some forecasts have it falling below zero for quarter 1 of this year, and others have it barely staying positive.

The last time real GDP had two consecutive negative quarters in the first year of an elected presidency after not having a recession the year before? 1953, as the United States was coming out of the Korean War.

The only war Trump can point to if a recession does occur is the trade war he started.

And to be clear all of this could become a nasty cycle. If the market becomes convinced a recession is on the way, stocks could fall further. RBC Capital Markets notes that the median loss for the S&P 500 during a recession is 27%.

Confidence is a fragile thing and the steep market selloff could easily spook CEOs and consumers alike. The hole blown in Americans' 401(k) plans and investment portfolios is so massive that it will be hard to ignore. And if consumers stop spending, all bets are off in this economy.

[džin tonik]

Trump: Da predsjednički izbori 2020. godine nisu bili...

Američki predsjednik Donald Trump oglasio se na svom Truth Social profilu o ratu u Ukrajini.

Otvoreno je optužio ukrajinskog predsjednika Volodimira Zelenskog i svog prethodnika Joe Bidena za započinjanje rata.

(...)

Predsjednik Zelenski i Pokvareni Joe Biden napravili su apsolutno užasan posao...

H. Hitrec: Zajecala Jeckova na novi Zakon o grobljima

Dramatičan geotjedan s gostovanjem globalnoga carinskog cirkusa u vlasništvu Donalda Trumpa, koji vodi program u pješčanoj areni šatora s bičem u rukama. Nakon nekog vremena publika opaža da je u stvari riječ o klaunu.

(...)

Trump zamrzava oko 2,3 milijarde dolara za financiranje Harvarda

Američko ministarstvo obrazovanja priopćilo je u ponedjeljak da zamrzava oko 2,3 milijarde dolara saveznih sredstava Sveučilištu Harvard zbog odluke sveučilišta da se bori protiv zahtjeva Bijele kuće, uključujući i zatvaranje programa raznolikosti, jednakosti i uključivosti.

(...)

[džin tonik]

Trump Kini dignuo carine na 245 %

 

[Truman]

https://www.index.hr/vijesti/clanak/dvije-njemacke-tinejdzerice-htjele-turisticki-obici-sad-zavrsile-u-zatvoru/2663499.aspx

[Meho Krljic]

Dosta trezven tekst o Trampovim carinskim potezima u The Atlanticu:



https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/archive/2025/04/china-trump-trade-war/682524/

The United States could still prevail if it does everything right. The problem is that the Trump administration is doing everything wrong.


If Donald Trump were trying to lose his trade war with China, it's hard to see what he would be doing differently. The president's gambit is likely to strengthen China's geopolitical position, embolden Beijing militarily, and diminish both the United States' global standing and its economy.

Earlier this month, Trump increased tariffs on all goods from China to 145 percent. China, in turn, responded with 125 percent tariffs on American goods, plus more targeted measures. This is a classic trade war: two countries engaged in a tit-for-tat escalation of trade barriers, each with the goal of forcing the other country to back down and, at least in theory, agree to certain concessions.

The Trump administration believes that it has the upper hand in this fight. "We export one-fifth to them of what they export to us," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently remarked, "so that is a losing hand for them." That view has things backwards. The fact that the American economy is hooked on Chinese goods is a massive weakness for the U.S., not an advantage. For many categories of goods, China is not only America's top supplier but also the world's dominant supplier, meaning that the U.S. can't simply get them from other countries. According to data gathered by Jason Miller, a professor at Michigan State University who specializes in supply-chain management, China produces more than 70 percent of the world's lithium-ion batteries, air conditioners, and cookware; more than 80 percent of the world's smartphones, kitchen appliances, and toys; and about 90 percent of the world's solar panels and processed rare earth minerals, the latter of which are crucial inputs to cars, phones, and several key military technologies.

Pivoting to producing these goods at home would take years, if not decades: It would involve forming new companies, building new factories, creating supply chains from scratch, and training fleets of workers. For it to happen at all, companies would have to be confident that the tariffs would be in place for the long term. China, meanwhile, is only heavily dependent on the U.S. for a small fraction of its imports, and most of those items, such as soybeans and sorghum, can be imported from elsewhere.

Chinese businesses will be hurt by losing access to the American market, but that is an easier problem to solve. China can redirect some of its exports to countries in Europe and East Asia, whose citizens also need phones, toys, and toasters. Beijing could also give money to its own citizens to create more demand for its products at home and provide subsidies to its businesses to help them remain solvent. This asymmetry gives China what the economist Adam Posen calls "escalation dominance": the ability to inflict disproportionate harm on its economic enemy.

China's advantage has been bolstered by years of meticulous preparation. Multiple China watchers told me that Trump's 2018 trade war—in which, at its height, the U.S. imposed an average tariff of about 20 percent on Chinese goods—convinced Beijing that it had to be ready to engage in economic combat at a moment's notice. Since then, China has invested heavily in such industries as energy, agriculture, and semiconductor production to reduce its dependence on American imports, while pursuing a concerted strategy to consume more goods at home and find new non-U.S. export markets. The goal of these efforts, in the words of Chinese President Xi Jinping, is to "ensure the normal operation of the national economy under extreme circumstances."


Beijing has also built an arsenal of offensive economic weapons. Already, China has responded to Trump's trade war by banning exports of several rare earth minerals, a move intended to produce shortages of both major consumer goods (such as cars and phones) and military equipment (such as submarines and fighter jets); launching antitrust investigations into DuPont and Google; and halting all business with Boeing, America's top aircraft manufacturer. If the situation escalates further, Beijing might block certain high-profile U.S. companies, such as Apple and Tesla, from doing any business in China at all. Then there's the nuclear option: China, the second-largest foreign holder of U.S. debt, could quickly sell off a sizable chunk of its $760 billion in U.S. Treasuries, a move that would send interest rates soaring, spook investors, and perhaps even trigger a financial crisis.

"China is ready for this fight," Yeling Tan, a public-policy professor at Oxford University who focuses on Chinese political economy, told me. "It has been busy preparing for an entrenched economic conflict with the U.S. for a long time."

Despite all of these challenges, the experts I spoke with agreed that the United States could still defeat China in a trade war if it does everything right. The problem is that the Trump administration is doing everything wrong.

China has some advantages in a head-to-head economic matchup with the U.S., but America has a secret weapon: its friends. If the United States were to join forces with its traditional allies in Europe, North America, and East Asia to collectively cut off China while deepening trade relations with one another, then this bloc could inflict much more damage on China (which would have fewer places to sell its goods) while minimizing its own pain (Chinese imports could be more easily and quickly replaced). This would require considerable planning and preparation. The U.S. and its allies would have to embark on a colossal coordinated economic mobilization to quickly develop new industries, develop a monitoring system for global supply chains staffed with an army of well-trained bureaucrats to prevent cheating, roll out the trade restrictions on a gradual timeline to give businesses and investors time to adjust, and establish clear conditions by which they would be willing to end the trade war. That's a partial list.

Trump has, of course, done nearly the opposite of everything I just described. Instead of spending years, or even months, investing in American industry, Trump is angling to get rid of the major investments in semiconductor and clean-energy manufacturing implemented under the Biden administration. Instead of engaging in a gradual tariff rollout, the administration jacked up tariffs to 145 percent over the course of a few weeks. Instead of providing businesses and investors with clear guidance, the administration has changed its story by the day, if not the hour. And instead of building a coalition of allies, Trump has spent the past few months threatening, feuding with, and tariffing them. Even if the U.S. were to suddenly change course and try to build an anti-China coalition, a prospect recently floated by Bessent, it is likely too late. What country would sign up for economic hardship for the sake of an "ally" that has not only treated it poorly but has also repeatedly demonstrated that it can't be trusted to honor any bargain?

The outcome of a trade war is determined not only by the pain inflicted but also by each country's tolerance for that pain. On that front, the United States has one thing going for it: Voters generally support taking on China. One study of Trump's first-term trade war with China found that voters in places that were most exposed to the effects of import tariffs became more likely to vote for Trump in 2020. A CBS poll in February found that 56 percent of voters supported placing new tariffs on China, even as majorities opposed tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and Europe.

The question is whether voters' appetite for punishing China will outweigh the sting of chronic shortages and higher prices. Trump's first-term tariffs against China were relatively modest, so they didn't lead to big price increases. This time around, sticker shock will be impossible to ignore. Voters consistently cited inflation as the most important issue in the 2024 election. How will they react when the politician who promised lower prices instead presides over the opposite? According to several recent polls, most voters had soured on Trump's tariffs before they had even gone into effect. Making matters worse, the combination of Chinese retaliation against American exporters and tariff-induced uncertainty facing businesses may also lead to a broader economic slowdown. Many economists warn of a return to 1970s-style stagflation: the toxic combination of soaring prices and rising unemployment.



Even Trump might lack the stubbornness to persist through that level of economic distress. He has already broken the cardinal rule of trade wars—never tell your opponent where your breaking point is—by "pausing" his global reciprocal tariff policy in the face of chaos in the bond market. Even if Trump were willing to withstand the political pressure for longer this time, he's unlikely to outlast Xi Jinping, who faces neither term limits nor elections. "Beijing is very good at waiting," Dan Wang, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, told me. "They might not be able to last forever, but they can certainly last longer than a single election cycle."

In all likelihood, then, Trump will eventually be forced to back down. This might take the form of a deal in which China agrees to largely symbolic concessions that allow Trump to save face. (This is how the first Trump-China trade war de-escalated.) But China might not be so quick to offer Trump an easy way out. In that case, surrender might instead take the form of a series of tariff carve-outs to different industries, to the point where the exceptions exceed the actual tariffs. In either case, the result would be the same: The U.S. would have inflicted considerable economic pain on itself without getting much in return.

China, however, would have gotten quite a bit. Last week, the Spanish government declared its intent to strengthen relations with China. The European Union recently agreed to restart talks to settle a trade dispute over Chinese EV imports and will be sending a delegation to Beijing in July for a summit with Xi. South Korea and Japan recently revealed that they will be reopening negotiations over a long-stalled free-trade agreement with China. This week alone, Vietnam signed dozens of new economic deals with China, and Xi is currently on a tour of Southeast Asia to solidify relations with other countries in the region.

A Chinese trade-war victory would also embolden Beijing in noneconomic matters. China hawks have long insisted that one of the most important deterrents in preventing Chinese aggression, such as invading Taiwan, is the threat of an economic blockade. But if Beijing demonstrates that it can withstand such a barrage, that threat will lose credibility. China will become more likely to take aggressive actions, and American politicians will lose their appetite for using economic coercion to stop it. In that sense, a failed trade war could make the chances of an actual war more likely. You might even say that Trump's tariff policy sounds a bit like the "disastrous" American military adventures that he has so often criticized. Only this time, he's the one leading the charge.

[Truman]

Tramp daje zeleno svetlo Rio Tintu: Sprema se kontroverzan projekat, uništiće ,,svetu zemlju"


Ako ništa drugo, Trumpu se mora odati priznanje da je principijelan - uništava i sopstvenu zemlju. 

[Meho Krljic]

Da vidimo malo šta kažu razni komentatori kako Trampu ide.


Debakl oko deportacije "kriminalaca" i "terorista" je, mislim, dobar primer kako Tramp voli da pravi poteze koji deluju odlučno, ali koji, naravno, fundamentalno ugrožavaju funkcionisanje društva. Da bi se lako deportovali pripadnici salvadorske bande MS-13, dakle da ne mora da se dokazuje da su prekršili zakon niti, jelte, da su stvarno povezani sa tom bandom, koriste se zakoni vezani za ratno vreme i proglašava se da je MS-13 "strana sila" koja je izvršila invaziju na SAD. Dakle, ljudi se proteruju tako što se opisuju kao "neprijateljski tuđini". Slučaj Abrega Garcije je odlična ilustracija na koliko je nivoa ovo pogrešno, pa ko hoće da čita, ima ovde detlajno ne samo kako su prekršeni svi mogući zakoni i sudske odluke već i ZAŠTO administracija nakon prvobitne tvrdnje da je u pitanju bila greška prelazi na tvrdnje da se radi o teroristi i kriminalcu. Kome su,ne zaboravimo, fotošopovali gang-tetovaže na sliku kojom je Tramp onomad mahao na pres-konferenciji.


Dobro, a kako ide situacija sa carinama i dovođenjem sveta u red? Trampova ideja je da sa svaom državom koja se prepala od carina isposluje ekspresni trgovinski dil, a što ne samo da nije nešto što rade predsednici nego i nje nešto što se radi ekspresno, naprotiv, pričamo o napornom poslu u kome se procenjuje šta možeš da žrtvuješ i šta time dobijaš i to traje godinama i rade ga stručnjaci za spoljnotrgovinsku razmenu itd. CNN ima analizu:

'The Art of the Deal' meets global reality


Evo jedan mali isečak:

Almost all US presidents over the last 20 years have been frustrated at China's refusal to open its markets to US products, among other issues, including Chinese intellectual property theft. Intimidating Beijing might have worked 25 years ago. But China is now a superpower. It can hurt the US as much as the US can hurt China.

"I think the Chinese are going to feel vindicated," Richard Haass, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations told CNN's Kasie Hunt. "We imposed tariffs on China; China pushed back with large tariffs of their own. It looks to be the United States that is backing down. From China's point of view, this is how they hoped it would play out."

Beijing's refusal to blink was predictable, although the White House, which seems to lack expertise on China, appeared surprised.

"If a negotiated solution is truly what the US wants, it should stop threatening and blackmailing China and seek dialogue based on equality, respect and mutual benefit," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said Wednesday. "To keep asking for a deal while exerting extreme pressure is not the right way to deal with China and simply will not work."

O Mirovnom procesu u Ukrajini da i ne pričamo. Ali evo opet CNN. Tramp toliko otvoreno drži stranu Putinu da, jelte, to skoro da ulazi u teritoriju viceva. Rusija po njegovim rečima, pristaje na kompromis time da neće da osvoji celu Ukrajinu pa Ukrajin amora da bude srećna što predaje samo Krim. Podsetimo se da je Ukrajina svoje nuklearno oružje predala Rusiji pre tri decenije uz eksplicitni ugovor da će imati TRENUTNU pomoć ako na nju bude izvršena agresija.


Naravno, Tramp je više puta izjavio da će rat u Ukrajnini biti gotov za 24 sata ako on bude izabran. Sad kaže da je valjda očigledno da nije mislio bukvalno. CNN seo i prebrojao koliko puta je ovo izjavio u oficijelnim nastupima i, evo ispada da je izjavio 53 puta, dakle, dosta OZBILJNO je to zvučalo.

[džin tonik]

nije pitanje je li tramp los, vec je li dovoljno los.