Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
A Near Text Book Perfect VCP Chart Pattern Set-up in Junior Gold Space ...
The image shows a near text book perfect example of what's known as a VCP Chart pattern set-up, and is currently carrying the following simultaneous characteristics .....
- stock price already in a uptrend - as seen in the daily "moving averages" ...
- recent acceleration in stock price moving up ...
- stock price consolidating with a slight "upwards bias" in price ...
- stock price consolidating after a strong price move with a slight upwards bias - on declining daily volume ...
The upward bias in price during a consolidation on declining volume is a rare sign of strength - indicating current strong supply/demand dynamics.
TSXV: SIG ......... OTC: SITKF
Trump's own Stablecoin is announced, and there's hardly a peep from the mainstream media about this off the charts level of profiteering by Slimy Don and his family. Now Trump not only has his own meme coins, his own family of ETFs, but now his own Stablecoin! Any questions about why the Donald completely reversed course on his previous opposition to crypto have been answered. He's going right to the bank.
But it gets A LOT worse, because Trump is letting himself be used by the Fed / finance ghouls to build out the infrastructure for their coming CBDC. He claims to be anti CBDC, but like 'most things Trump' it's a bunch of self serving BS. When the Orwellian CBDC arrives in 5 years, and effectively ends what's left of our freedoms, Slimy Don will have the multi $ billion bribes he took for selling out the country.
---
Grifting Don - >>> Trump Family Venture Plunges Deeper Into Crypto With New ‘Stablecoin’
The Wall Street Journal
by Vicky Ge Huang
3-25-25
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/trump-family-venture-plunges-deeper-into-crypto-with-new-stablecoin/ar-AA1BCO22?cvid=8b89bc13f93e49899368c2122e0b91b3&ei=109
The Trump family’s World Liberty Financial is launching a stablecoin, its latest bid to capitalize on a crypto-market revival kindled by the president’s election.
World Liberty’s USD1 will be backed by short-term U.S. Treasurys, U.S. dollar deposits, and other cash equivalents, the company said Tuesday. The token will be issued on the Ethereum network and a blockchain created by Binance, the crypto exchange that has sought to forge closer ties to the president’s family.
Stablecoins provide the backbone to the decentralized web of digital networks that comprise the crypto markets, functioning as digital dollars used widely to store cash or pay for purchases of other tokens. They aim to maintain a 1:1 exchange ratio with government-issued currencies, and store reserves in cash or cash-like assets such as Treasurys to keep the peg in place.
World Liberty’s stablecoin project marks the Trump family’s latest push into crypto, and comes as the president’s administration has sought to make the U.S. a more-welcoming market for digital assets. Earlier this month, Trump pledged to make the U.S. the “undisputed bitcoin superpower and the crypto capital of the world.”
The Trumps launched World Liberty in October, billing the entity as a decentralized finance project that would help match crypto investors eager to borrow and lend from, and trade with, one another.
Related video: Trump Media Surges 9% In After-Hours Trading After Announcing Partnership With Crypto.com To Launch 'Made In America'-Focused ETFs.
Critics said World Liberty’s stablecoin launch poses a major conflict of interest for President Trump, who has said he hoped to see stablecoin legislation on his desk before Congress’s August recess.
“We haven’t had a president in recent memory ever sign legislation that could directly affect his financial interest,” said Kedric Payne, senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, an ethics watchdog group. “It is a clear violation of the ethics norm.”
The measure that is gaining momentum in Congress now intends to give issuers of stablecoins a regulatory framework, specifying rules on reserves and customer protections. The Trump family’s foray into stablecoins through World Liberty could derail those efforts, according to TD Cowen’s Washington Research Group analyst Jaret Seiberg. Democrats may now press for stronger investor protections and question whether the Securities and Exchange Commission could be trusted as the lead regulator on the stablecoin, Seiberg said.
DeFi users transact with each other without the usual banks and other intermediaries that dominate traditional finance, with terms written directly into the software code. And by swapping stablecoins to complete those transactions, users don’t have to worry about price volatility. The most popular stablecoin is Tether, which traders have widely used to stash their cash, invest in other tokens and swap for traditional currencies. It has also been heavily used for illicit activities, including terrorism financing and drug trafficking.
World Liberty said recently it had raised $550 million from more than 85,000 U.S. and non-U. S. investors—including its largest investor Justin Sun, the founder of Tron—by selling a token called WLFI. Earlier this year, President Trump and first lady Melania Trump also launched a pair of meme coins, a type of cryptocurrency with no intrinsic value. DT Marks DEFI, an entity affiliated with Trump and certain members of his family, owns approximately 60% of the equity interests in WLF Holdco, the parent company of World Liberty Financial.
News about the USD1 stablecoin spread on social media on Monday when Changpeng Zhao, the founder of Binance, welcomed the token to the Binance Smart Chain in a post on X. Zhao later said in another post that scammers created coins with the same name since his initial post, warning that “the official USD1 isn’t tradable yet.”
Representatives of the Trumps have held talks to take a financial stake in Binance’s U.S. arm, The Wall Street Journal reported, and Zhao has been pushing for the Trump administration to grant him a pardon.
World Liberty Financial said it is taking a conservative approach in ensuring its token maintains its stability. TerraUSD, a so-called algorithmic stablecoin, used financial engineering to maintain price stability. The token, which generated yields as high as 20%, crashed in May 2022, wiping out $40 billion and causing financial ruin for investors worldwide.
“USD1 provides what algorithmic and anonymous crypto projects cannot—access to the power of DeFi underpinned by the credibility and safeguards of the most respected names in traditional finance,” Zach Witkoff, a co-founder of World Liberty Financial, said in a statement.
Witkoff didn’t identify those respected names in the statement, and he and other company executives weren’t made available for comment.
Witkoff, the son of Trump’s ?Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, was among two dozen crypto executives who attended the first-ever White House Crypto Summit earlier this month.
USD1’s reserves will be safeguarded by crypto custodian BitGo and audited regularly by an unspecified third-party accounting firm, World Liberty said. BitGo’s prime brokerage business also agreed to facilitate clients’ USD1 trades.
Mike Belshe, chief executive of BitGo, said he began working with World Liberty on the stablecoin initiative late last year. He said the USD1 stablecoin will become immediately available to BitGo’s 2,500 institutional customers once his company enables the function.
“There is so much excitement about this new stablecoin that pretty much everybody wants to be a part of it,” Belshe said.
<<<
---
OK well, if he was being dishonest or a true warmonger, that's not good. I saw him on TV today excoriating the administration officials involved in the Signal chat fiasco and I've seen him at other times criticizing Trump and I thought he had valid points. But just to come out and advocate to bomb another nation without legitimate justification, no, that's not right.
Om, >> Bolton <<
'Bombs Away Bolton' -- an extreme Neocon, has always been the biggest warmonger in the room. Trump foolishly brought him in as National Security Advisor in 2018, and immediately Bolton went to work ginning up a provocation for the US to attack Iran. Oil tankers suddenly started finding 'mines' on their hulls, blamed on Iran and their proxies, and finally in 2019 came several mysterious missile attacks on Saudi oilfields, blamed on the Houthis. Just prior to the big attack, Trump realized he was being set up, and immediately fired Bolton. The attack happened a few days later, but Trump would not respond as the Neocons desired. The Neocons wanted him to attack Iran and destroy their nuclear weapons program, but Trump had an upcoming election in 2020, so likely told them he would consider doing it after the election.
Anyway, Bolton hates Trump, and instead of being a regular on Fox News he's now a regular on the anti-Trump networks like CNN, etc. But whatever side (Rep or Dem) is the biggest warmonger at the time, that's where you'll find Bolton.
Obama was also under pressure by the warmonger factions (both Neocons and Trilaterals) to send US troops into Syria to topple Assad. The US war factions staged 3 provocations with poison gas to provide the justification for the US 'response', but Obama refused to do it and the Neocons came to hate him. JFK was another one who tried to reject the war faction (he was pulling the plug on the Vietnam war), and that was likely the main motivation for his assassination (he was also going to break up the CIA).
Ironically, the 'US bombs Iran' scenario is likely to happen before too long. Well see what happens, but there's a much broader consensus now that Iran cannot be allowed to get nuclear weapons.
___________________________________________
>>> John Bolton left because Trump wouldn’t let him start a war
There was always going to be a conflict between Trump’s “America First” and Bolton’s “America Everywhere.”
Vox
by Alex Ward
Sep 10, 2019
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/10/20859357/john-bolton-trump-war-north-korea-iran
John Bolton’s ouster as President Donald Trump’s national security adviser reveals something important: Even the deepest Washington insider and pro-war advocate can fail to push this commander in chief to start a major conflict.
When Bolton joined the administration in April 2018, the worry was that the arch nationalist hawk would convince the war-averse Trump to see the world as he did. Here was a guy who for decades called for bombing North Korea and Iran, exercising unilateral American power around the world, and cutting tethers to international institutions.
Bolton actually had a thought-out worldview that in many ways mirrored Trump’s. The question was if the top aide could channel the president’s instincts into actions that he has long wanted an administration to embrace.
In some cases, he succeeded. Trump last year withdrew the US from the Iran nuclear deal, an agreement Bolton railed against and wanted torn apart since Barack Obama signed it. And this year the president backed an effort to remove Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro — a socialist dictator that Bolton has repeatedly criticized — from power.
But Bolton is most known for openly and passionately calling on the US to bomb nations he deems irredeemably dangerous. North Korea and Iran held a special place in his heart, writing that America should attack them for pursuing nuclear weapons and even advocating regime change. Doves worried aloud that missiles would start flying soon after Bolton stepped foot inside the Oval Office.
It wasn’t to be, thankfully.
“I’m the one that tempers him”
Despite Bolton’s best efforts, Trump pursued diplomatic talks with North Korea and resisted escalating tensions despite a resumption in missile tests over the last few weeks. And even after reimposing crushing sanctions on Iran, Trump repeatedly said he’d be willing to negotiate a “better” nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic’s top officials.
There’s little indication Trump wants to ignite another war in the Middle East despite his tough Iran stance. In fact, the Washington Post reported Tuesday that Bolton was “devastated” Trump chose not to attack Iran after it downed an American surveillance drone in June.
Which means that Bolton surely got to Trump on some issues, but failed to convince him to start fights the world over. All he really received for his efforts was open ridicule.
“I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration,” Trump tweeted on Tuesday when announcing the top aide’s ouster. That echoed the president’s comments from four months ago when he told reporters “I’m the one that tempers him. That’s okay. I have different sides. I have John Bolton and other people that are a little more dovish than him.”
It goes to show that Trump is in control of the most important aspect of his foreign policy: whether or not to go to war.
He has certainly threatened conflict before, going so far as to risk nuclear war with North Korea to persuade Kim Jong Un to come the negotiating table (remember “fire and fury?”). And he’s more willing to use military force than Obama, twice bombing Syria and escalating airstrikes on ISIS and other terrorists worldwide. He’s even continued and augmented US support for Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen.
Still, Trump has walked back every chance he’s had to escalate to the highest level tensions with adversaries. That was always going to put Trump’s “America First” in conflict with Bolton’s “America Everywhere.”
“Where Trump and Bolton seemed to clash the most was on the extent to which aggressive US military intervention should accompany a hawkish foreign policy posture, and then also on the role of diplomacy,” says John Glaser, a US foreign policy expert at the Cato Institute in Washington, DC.
Which brings up the question: Why did Trump pick Bolton in the first place? The answer seems to be that Bolton defended Trump’s foreign policy on Fox News and was a known commodity within Republican circles. The president seemingly wanted an attack dog for himself, but ended up hiring a person who wanted to attack others for real.
Trump’s foreign policy is in shambles, with or without Bolton
The natural instinct is to assume that Trump’s foreign policy will improve with Bolton out the door. The problem is that Bolton didn’t really change Trump — the president still pursued profoundly Trumpian policies.
He’s tried to cozy up to Russia despite its attacks on American democracy. He’s lambasted traditional, long-standing allies from Europe to Asia for not contributing enough to their own defense — losing their trust and respect in the process. He’s mostly forgotten about the hundreds of millions of people that could use American support in Africa. And his trade war with China has hurt the global economy and many of his own supporters in rural areas.
But what he consistently stopped short of was engaging in full-scale war with any adversary. That may be because Trump and Bolton had different views on using force. Bolton wanted bombs to drop in service of regime change and the display of American unilateral power. Trump used threats of violence as a way to look tough and make it appear he was actively decisively.
Trump and Bolton were therefore simpatico on a lot, but it was on war that they differed.
Bolton tried to change Trump’s mind on that. He failed — and got fired for it.
<<<
---
Here's a synopsis of Naomi Wolf's presentation from 2007 (last post). She's a Dem, and was concerned about the 'Patriot Act' and other threats to our individual freedoms. But over time the Dems became even more intolerant of free speech than the Reps supposedly were, so it's a universal phenomenon where power will always seek additional power -
10 Steps for all would be Dictators -
Italy - 1920s (Mussolini)
Germany - 1930s (Hitler)
Russia - 1930s (Stalin)
East Germany - 1950s
Czechoslovakia - 1960s
Chile - 1970s (Pinochet)
China - late 1980s
US - post 9-11
- A terrifying internal or external event, real or fabricated, hyped by the would be dictator.
- Creation of an unaccounable prison system outside the rule of law.
- Develop a paramilitary force that is not answerable to the people.
- Create a surveillance apparatus aimed at ordinary citizens.
- Infiltrate and harass citizen's groups.
- Target key individuals who are critical of government policies.
- Restrict the press. Opposition journalism is labeled treason.
- Criticism is re-cast as treason, and dissent as espionage.
- Martial law.
---
Yeah, it would be great if we could just listen to whatever each of us has to say within certain bounds. Like you can't yell "Fire!!" in a crowded movie theater and other such incendiary or angry or hostile...you get the idea.
Om, >> freedom of speech is being taken away <<
That was happening bigtime prior to Trump, with the 'cancel culture', de-platforming of conservatives off of social media, ie blatant censorship. Trump himself was kicked off Twitter, Facebook, etc, so complete censorship of political content, which is supposed to be the most protected form of speech under the 1st Amendment.
Musk bought Twitter and restored the diversity of political content, but that doesn't mean Trump wouldn't like to censor his opponents if he could get away with it. The desire to control info and what can be said comes naturally to most people who seek power, whether they claim to be conservative or liberal. In 1798, John Adams made criticizing his govenrment a crime ('Alien and Sedition Act'). Currently the various 'hate crime' laws are being expanded, and soon criticizing certain groups will land you in jail.
As the saying goes - 'The price of liberty is eternal vigilance'. Leaders of all stripes will want to weaken their opposition by limiting their ability to speak out. What eventually happens is 'self-censorship', where people just stop talking about touchy topics out of fear, and you wake up one day to find that freedom is gone.
Trump pledges auto, pharma tariffs in ‘near future,’ sowing more trade confusion
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/24/trump-tariffs-autos-pharmaceuticals-sectoral-reciprocal.html
Stunning Signal leak reveals depths of Trump administration’s loathing of Europe
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/25/stunning-signal-leak-reveals-depths-of-trump-administrations-loathing-of-europe
Commentary: How to tell Trump isn't worried about the national debt
Analyze this:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/commentary-how-to-tell-trump-isnt-worried-about-the-national-debt-220350559.html
AI Overview "This is a powerful quote often attributed to German pastor Martin Niemöller, which warns about the dangers of complacency in the face of injustice. It highlights how by remaining silent when others are targeted, one effectively enables the oppression to spread, ultimately leading to their own persecution when it becomes personal. The poem emphasizes that by not speaking out against injustice against groups you do not identify with, you are essentially allowing the erosion of freedoms for everyone."
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/martin-niemoeller-first-they-came-for-the-socialists
I read that some woman said that she was afraid to tell jokes about some of this to-do, I forget exactly what it was - Musk or Trump's antics. It's like our freedom of speech is being taken away.
Btw, could you do me a favor? Start referring to me as om, like the Hindu sacred word. That's the origin of the first part of my alias.
Ombow, Yes, the deportation orgy definitely sets some scary precedents, with midnight roundups, goon squads, detention camps, etc. If this gets normalized, the apparatus can be turned on political dissidents, the general public, etc, so a slippery slope -
>>> First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
<<<
---
Yeah, they should be using a scalpel instead of a chainsaw. All these things could have been done in an orderly, more rational fashion.
Also, some of the people sent to El Salvador aren't actually gang members - they really should have been given due process, don't you think?
Yeah, did I ever mention that it is thought that the beast of Revelation will come out of Europe, possibly the EU, and likely from ROME? That's by interpretation of Daniel. It makes sense because Europe was home to the first two world wars. Since Europe has made the determination that it needs to re-arm in order to be able to defend itself, the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle are coming together. Many think that 666 is the number of Caesar Nero and that he will be reincarnated as the beast.
I don't know much about Bolton, but when I see him talk on TV, he makes a lot of sense. What don't you like about him?
Ombow, Yes, being an 'armchair quarterback' doesn't achieve much, but it helps relieve some of the frustration :o)
With the current tariffs, they are a bad idea all around right now -
- Instant inflation
- Crash the financial markets
- Fed policy and 'soft landing' out the window
- Economic slowdown / recession, US and globally
- Chases countries out of US orbit, into he arms of BRICS
- Accelerates the 'debt bomb' unraveling
Also, what's the big rush? No one has challenged Trump's ability to impose tariffs, so the '100 days' deadline isn't relevant. Because of the time constraints, he has to do the deficit reduction cuts fast, but that isn't the case with the tariffs, and they (tariffs) are by far the most disruptive and angst producing policy for the financial markets.
---
You have a lot of theoreticals in your argument. I agree that sometimes it's a good idea to make peace with your enemies, but if Trump forsakes Ukraine to the benefit of Russia, that's bad news. Europe on the whole isn't happy with Trump and the way he seemingly wants to abandon our allies. Someone said that going to war with our friends with this tariff business is like kicking them in the teeth. That's not the way to treat your friends.
Also, it's a good idea to have friendly relations with China rather than go to war with them, but Trump's threatening steep tariffs on them, too. How can he have it both ways?
He's not going to get China and Russia fighting with each other. Why did you suggest that?
The danger with trying to figure things out like you are trying to do is that your attempt will most likely not succeed..
Ombow, Trump's idea of abandoning NATO / Europe is a big mistake imo. Left to their 'own devices', the Europeans can bungle right into WW 3. Making them pay more for the cost of NATO is fine, but the US needs to remain firmly established in Europe, not only to keep them out of WW 3, but to discourage them from moving toward joing BRICS. If Europe leaves the US orbit and joins BRICS, the US' world dominance is over.
However, a big problem has been with who is running US foreign policy? For a long time (Cold War) the US had the 'Trilateral wing', and then the Neocon wing took over for a while during the Bush Jr years. The Trilaterals (Rockefeller wing) traditionally saw Russia and China as the key threats, and wisely were extremely cautious in dealing with them. On the other hand, the Neocons were laser focused on the Middle East, and only really cared about Russia if it affected the M. East. But these two policy wings had a quasi 'merger' after - 1) Putin helped Iran build nuclear power plants, and 2) Putin intervened militarily in Syria. That's when the focus of both US policy factions joined together against Russia in earnest, and when the proxy war approach (Ukraine-Russia) was decided upon.
Anyway, if US policy is going to be run by extreme Neocon loonies like Victoria Nuland or John Bolton, Europe is better off without a US dominated NATO. If the Ukraine war gambit continues, or is repeated, it's going to be WW 3 at some point. So there's the dilemma -- 1) the US leaves NATO and the Europeans bungle into WW 3, or - 2) the extreme Neocons are in power in the US, and they put us into WW 3. So the solution is to maintain US control over NATO, while keeping the loonies (extreme Neocons) out of positions of power in the US.
---
More on Triangulation strategy / Tertius gaudens -
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175949503
---
Ombow, >> leaning pro-Russia <<
That's actually a smart strategic move, if it can help weaken the close Russia-China alliance. The worst thing a superpower (US) can do is to have its main rivals united against it. Instead, the idea is to maneuver your rivals into fighting each other, thus weakening both. That's the classic 'Tertius Gaudens' strategy (divide + rule) that Kissinger and Nixon used when they opened up relations with China (1972). By normalizing relations with China, the US was able to drive a wedge deeper between Russia and China (Sino-Soviet split). The British Empire used Tertius Gaudens a lot, and learned the strategy from the Venetians, who were masters at dividing their enemies.
Today things are worse than during the Nixon / Kissinger era, since China and Russia are so incredibly united, and together have built the BRICS juggernaught. The US is now the 'odd man out', and we have ourselves to blame. It will be a lot harder to drive a wedge between China and Russia today. Trump wanted to normalize relations with Russia in his first term, but was stymied. The alternate plan eventually used was to get a proxy war going, and weaken Russia that way. The precedent for that approach was the 10 year Soviet-Afghanistan war (1980s), which helped bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union. But this time it didn't work, so it's back to the drawing board. Had Trump been allowed to normalize relations with Russia in 2016, that would have taken a lot of the wind out of BRICS, and the US would be a lot better off now.
---
Full article - >>> Trump’s tariff obsession is a lose-lose proposition
The Guardian
by Steven Greenhouse
Mar 24, 2025
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/24/trumps-tariff-obsession
The president thinks tariffs are ‘the greatest thing ever invented’ – but his trade war seems based on fiat and whim
I’ve been writing about manufacturing in the US since the 1980s, and it’s been heart-wrenching to report on dozens of factory closings and the devastation they have done to workers and communities. As the nation grasped for ways to slow these plant closings, I also wrote about Washington’s use of carefully employed trade measures, like targeted tariffs, and how they helped save some plants and jobs, especially in the steel industry.
Carefully targeted tariffs can be a winning strategy, but Donald Trump’s obsession with tariffs – especially across-the-board ones that are neither careful nor targeted – has already shown itself to be a lose-lose strategy. Perhaps it’s too generous to use the word strategy to describe what the president is doing, because his tariffs seem based on fiat and whim, not on thoughtful planning.
Trump is like Elmer Fudd with his shotgun, shooting every which way: Canada today, China tomorrow and perhaps Champagne country the day after, with tariffs imposed one day, suspended the next and then re-imposed a few days later, but, wait, those re-imposed tariffs might be canceled next week. It’s a “strategy” of chaos and capriciousness, with some viciousness thrown in.
Obsessed as he is with tariffs, Trump calls tariffs “the greatest thing ever invented”, and “the most beautiful word in the dictionary”. He talks as if tariffs will create an economic nirvana, but the opposite is happening. Stock markets are plummeting, corporate confidence is tanking, consumers fear higher prices and economists warn the measures might push the US into recession.
Let’s count the ways Trump’s tariffs are a lose-lose proposition.
First, at a time when Americans are feeling beaten and bruised from the pandemic-era burst of inflation, the tariffs – which are really a tax on imports – will inevitably push up prices. Trump’s tariffs will hit less affluent Americans hardest because they spend a higher percentage of their income on clothes and other imported goods. Many of those Americans voted for Trump, believing him when he said he’d reduce prices.
Second, even though Trump boasts that tariffs will make American industry great again, it’s dubious whether Trump’s tariffs will do much to spur manufacturing. Trump has evidently forgotten that if you want to persuade corporations to build new factories – in this case, to bring back operations from overseas – then you need to reassure business executives that there will be economic and policy stability. But that’s the opposite of what Trump, the emperor of chaos, is all about. If you were a CEO, would you shell out $200m to build a new factory in the US in response to Trump’s tariffs when you know that Trump might lift those tariffs tomorrow or in two weeks or whenever a foreign leader flatters him or promises to let Eric and Don Jr build a Trump hotel at a beautiful seaside resort in their country?
Trump is eager for hundreds of companies to build new factories in the US, but with his on-again-off again, here today-gone-tomorrow tariffs, he has made many stability-craving CEOs too scared to build new plants. Moreover, if Trump wants to attract the manufacturing industries and jobs of tomorrow, he’s been shooting himself and the US in the foot with his ideological war against the industries of the future, including electric vehicles, renewable energy and semiconductors. Trump is even threatening to kill Biden’s hugely successful subsidy program to build sophisticated new semiconductor plants in the US.
Third, Trump’s tariffs are undermining economic growth; even Trump’s team has acknowledged the threat of recession. His tariffs are sabotaging supply chains, and that will disrupt production at many factories. His scattershot tariffs are so alarming companies that many are hesitating on plans to invest in new plant and equipment. That also undercuts growth. In addition, the widespread fears that tariffs will push inflation skyward have caused consumer sentiment to fall sharply. That could cause consumer spending, the major engine of the US economy, to decline.
Any honest, fair-minded cost-benefit analysis will show that Trump’s tariffs will cause far more damage than gain
Fourth, Trump’s tariffs are hitting various U.S. industries hard. Trump’s hefty 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports will hurt US auto makers by raising the cost of vital raw materials and making US-made cars less competitive vis-a-vis foreign automakers. Not only that, trade retaliation from Canada, Europe and China is already harming many US industries – including agriculture, motorcycles and Kentucky bourbon—and that, too, will push the economy toward recession. And let’s not forget that Trump’s tariffs are hurting the targeted countries, and that’s slowing their – and worldwide – economic growth.
Fifth, another big way we lose is that Trump, by slapping tariffs on Canada, Mexico and the European Union, has further angered and alienated many of our closest allies, and that comes on top of his disparaging Nato and increasingly allying the US with Russia. In this way, Trump may destroy the Atlantic Alliance, which has been pivotal for maintaining peace and prosperity, though not perfectly, since the second world war.
Sixth, any honest, fair-minded cost-benefit analysis will show that Trump’s tariffs will cause far more damage than gain. Although Trump says his tariffs will “create jobs like we have never seen before”, economic studies have found that the tariffs Trump imposed in his first term failed to increase the number of jobs. Those tariffs created a small number of jobs in some industries, but retaliation and supply-chain disruptions caused job losses in other industries. A study by economists at MIT, the World Bank, Harvard and the University of Zurich concluded that Trump’s first-term tariffs “neither raised nor lowered US employment” and didn’t “provide economic help to the US heartland”.
With Trump’s tariffs changing day to day, it’s impossible to predict how many jobs those tariffs will create or destroy. Thus far, his tariffs have caused US stock markets to lose $4tn in value, and those losses could grow. If Trump’s tariffs were to create 100,000 jobs, which some economists say is unrealistically optimistic, the cost would be an astronomical $40m per job ($4tn divided by 100,000). If his tariffs created 10,000 jobs, the cost would be $400m per job.
With Trump’s tariffs slowing economic growth, if they result in a 1 percentage point drop in annual GDP, that would mean a loss of $300bn a year in economic output. (1% of the nation’s $30tn GDP). If Trump’s tariffs yielded 100,000 jobs, the cost would be $3m per job. Or if Trump’s tariffs raise inflation by 1%, that would cost American consumers roughly $200bn a year – which would mean a cost of $2m per job created.
Returning to Elmer Fudd, his goal was always to shoot Bugs Bunny, but his gun often blew up in his face by mistake. With his tariffs, Elmer Trump seems well on his way to shooting the US economy by mistake.
<<<
---
According to the top secret conversation that took place on Signal, top administration officials are blatantly anti-Europe. And as we know, Trump seems to be leaning pro-Russia. There's going to be big trouble of some kind within the next four years.
Paraphrasing Senator Rubin Gallego - "If this breach had occurred under the Biden administration, Republicans would be losing their minds!" Such is the sad state of partisan politics today.
What a strategy. He changes his mind every day on the scope and breadth of the tariffs.
Trump’s tariff obsession is a lose-lose proposition
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/24/trumps-tariff-obsession
Bigworld, Yes, things are a mess, and Trump's ineptitude with these tariffs could be the pin that pops the balloon.
Reducing the deficit and ending the Ukraine war are definitely needed. Ideally the deficit reduction should be done gradually and systematically, but unfortunately politics won't allow that, so they are forced to do everything in the first 100 days. That's extremely disruptive, and along with the tarrifs, we get pushed into recession / stagflation. I'm thinking at minimum the stock market has a 2022 type decline (~ 9 mos), depending on how long it takes to get into and out of recession. Just a guess though.
One good thing with Trump is that he doesn't have much appetite for criticism, so when the financial markets tank and his approval ratings sink, he should respond and try to reverse the damage. That's how he was in his first term --> hyper-attuned to the level of the stock market. But this time? He doesn't have to run for office again, so doesn't care as much about public opinion. But he still hates to look bad, so hopefully that is enough for him to back off when 'damage control' is clearly needed. Rickards says the Fed's own limit is a market drop of 15%, and then they move to prop things up.
---
gfp: If you look at market history as I do the market has not even begun to appreciate downside risk in tis still vey overvalued market. As I said a few days ago...stock to 100% cash and short term Treasuries. Don't allocate a dime to the stock market until Buffett sends out the news that he's a buyer. It will be easier on your psyche, and in the end you'll feel like an investing genius.
Markets rarely go from their penultimate high to their generational low in one fell swoop. I suspect that this market will be a slow churn downward with the market fluctuations from overbought to oversold....a stair step downward. Lower highs followed by lower lows. There is no permanent conviction. Over the last few weeks we went from fear induced selling, to daily fluctuations, to the present time where the buyers are gaining traction. As the FOMO muppets jump back on the train the smart money will be happy to unload shares to them. There has to be a bag holder. The retail investor is always the guy.
So with this type of environment I will continue my approach of playing the volatility, alternating between UVXY and SVIX. I'm now thinking that the VIX dropping to at least 16 is almost a given. And the lower it goes the more attractive it will be to shed SVIX and start scaling in on UVXY. If the market doesn't shed 20% by the end of summer this fall will be a prime opportunity for a really gnarly sell off.
gfp: I don't care how long this buying binge lasts. The longer the better, because the inevitable crash will be that much more severe. The country is stuck with Biden era deficit spending until September. And while the Trump Administration won't be able to eliminate the $2.5 Trillion deficit completely they are going to make a huge dent in it when his first budget gets negotiated. Even if they only manage to cut that number in half that is still going to be $1.25 Trillion less liquidity propping up the economy and the markets.
The real truth on the economy is that if you strip away all government spending from the GDP calculations we have had negative growth since Covid. The economy under Biden was mostly propped up by wasteful government spending and a huge increase in government jobs which are counterproductive to growth. So Trump isn't going to be the cause of a drop in GDP. It is that with interest on our debt exceeding our defense budget the status quo could not possibly go on. Bessent has to roll over $10 Trillion this year. If he can't do so at lower rates due to lackluster demand then the interest on the debt will eat up an even larger portion of the Federal budget. Every living Senator, Congressman, current or out of office, that ever voted for all the grotesque overspending should immediately lose all pension benefits. They have boxed the country into an economic corner that even at best will take several generations to get under control.
So since Nvidia is down, now is the time to buy as it's very possibly on an upswing, right? You don't buy when a stock is overvalued, right? Its RSI looks to be about 50.
‘Load Up,’ Says Morgan Stanley About Nvidia Stock Following GTC
https://www.tipranks.com/news/load-up-says-morgan-stanley-about-nvidia-stock-following-gtc
Yes, I know about narcissism. I know about megalomania, too. And absolute egotism and vanity.
How do you like this - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/
It will be proven that these guys are a danger to the country and I'm thinking big trouble of some kind is going to happen.
Ombow, >> NVDU <<
Nice bounce, but NVDU is still down 30% from its Feb high, and 45% from early Jan. So what these 2X ETFs giveth, they can also taketh away, so it all comes down to timing.
With Trump, it looks like a 4 year roller coaster ride, so I'm not sure what to do on the stock side. Trump requires constant drama, all centered upon himself and his needy ego. Fwiw, over the weekend I listened to a psychologist discussing narcissism, and Trump is a classic (summary below). I'd rather not have my financial future riding on this clown act, but what are the alternatives? Cash and T-bills I guess, with a very small allocation to stocks. That seems logical anyway, especially with a recession likely thanks to the drama queen in the WH -
Narcissism -
- Lack of empathy
- Sense of entitlement
- Grandiosity
- Constantly seeking validation
- Arrogant
- A condition of self esteem
Other related traits -
- Impulsivity
- Act first, think later
- Cannot take responsibility
- Can never admit they're wrong
- Can never show weakness
- Instead, they double down on mistakes
In business, these are traits that could lead to bankruptcy (4 X for Trump)
As President --> ?
---
I'm makin' bank, man. Serious BANK!!!!
gfp, you could have been making some serious coin with NVDU!!
I don't understand why Tesla has such a high valuation, do you? I wouldn't say its prospects for the future are promising.
Trump Tariffs Are the Stock Market’s Kryptonite. Why the Rally Won’t Last and 5 Other Things to Know Today.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/trump-tariffs-stock-market-what-to-know-today-f71fceb8
President Donald Trump’s so-called Liberation Day is approaching fast and the stock market is at the mercy of every twist and turn that creates.
April 2 is the deadline when U.S. reciprocal tariffs are due to kick in but there is already uncertainty about what will actually happen. The market is likely to move with any developments on what levies may or may not come into force. It’s not investors’ first rodeo, they are now used to the tariffs deadline cycle.
In fact, that’s already happening. Several sector-specific tariffs look set to be omitted—including those on autos, pharmaceuticals, and semiconductors, The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday. Though that may be more of a postponement than anything else. Reciprocal tariffs on other countries could also be more targeted than previously feared.
While that may provide a boost for stocks, it does nothing to ease the mounting uncertainty surrounding U.S. trade policy. Companies and consumers alike will find it very hard to commit to investments in this climate.
On that front, the Conference Board’s consumer confidence index on Tuesday will provide insight into just how much impact tariff headlines are having–in February the index posted its biggest drop since August 2021. Another sizable drop could stop the market’s nascent rally in its tracks.
Dollar Tree earnings Wednesday may also be worth watching for further evidence on the health of more price-conscious consumers. Finally, the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation metric Friday could also be a catalyst for stocks this week. Economists expect the core PCE index to rise 2.7% in February, up from 2.6% in January.
The data will be useful but what the investors really want is clarity when it comes to tariffs and Trump’s trade policy. Even beyond April 2 it’s hard to imagine the market ever feeling certain about what comes next–and that means volatility may be here to stay for the long term.
—Callum Keown
And that may be the main reason that McCartney is a billionaire.
Yes, some parts of Massachusetts are like that - in the western part of the state. That's where my mother's parents are from.
"Take Me Home, Country Roads", also known simply as "Country Roads", is a song written by Bill Danoff, Taffy Nivert and John Denver.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_Me_Home,_Country_Roads
>>> ‘Don’t fight Bessent’s Treasury’ is new mantra in US bond market
Bloomberg
by Ye Xie and Liz Capo McCormick
March 23, 2025
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/don-t-fight-bessent-treasury-190000609.html
(Bloomberg) — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent can’t stop talking about 10-year bond yields. In speeches, in interviews, week after week, he states and restates the administration’s plan to push them down and keep them down.
Some of this is normal — keeping government borrowing costs in check has long been part of the job — but Bessent’s fixation on the benchmark US note is so intense that he’s forced some on Wall Street to tear up their predictions for 2025.
In the past couple weeks, chief rates strategists at Barclays, Royal Bank of Canada and Societe Generale have cut their year-end forecasts for 10-year yields in part, they said, because of Bessent’s campaign to drive them lower. It’s not just the jawboning, they added, but the fact that Bessent can follow it up with concrete action like limiting the size of 10-year debt auctions or advocating for looser bank regulations to boost bond demand or backing Elon Musk’s frantic campaign to cut the budget deficit.
“What used to be often mentioned in the bond market is the idea of don’t fight the Fed,” said Guneet Dhingra, head of US interest rates strategy at BNP Paribas SA. “It’s somewhat evolving into don’t fight the Treasury.”
Yields have come down already, plunging a half-percentage point on the 10-year — and by similar amounts across the rest of the Treasury curve — over the past two months.
That sharp move, to be clear, is less about Bessent and more about his boss, President Donald Trump, whose tariff and trade-war threats have sparked fears of a recession and pushed investors out of stocks and into the safety of bonds. That’s not exactly the kind of bond rally Bessent had in mind — he wants it to be the product of fiscal discipline and sustainable economic growth — but it has only added to the sense among some in the market that this administration is going to bring down yields one way or another.
A representative for the Treasury didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Any number of things, of course, could undo Bessent’s plans and send yields jumping back higher: a rebound in the stock market, fresh signs that inflation remains stubbornly high or setbacks Musk and his DOGE team have in reducing spending.
In a recent interview with Breitbart News, Bessent expressed confidence that the budget cuts will be significant enough to fuel “a natural lowering of interest rates” that helps revitalize the private sector, echoing an argument he’d laid in appearance on CBS, CNBC and at the Economic Club of New York.
In addition to spending cuts, lower taxes and policies aimed at reducing energy prices are intended to boost economic output while tamping down inflation.
“They’ve kind of capped yields,” said Subadra Rajappa, head of US rates strategy at SocGen, who cut her year-end forecast for the 10-year by three-quarters of a percentage point to 3.75%. “If they see yields start to drift higher than 4.5%, I think you are going to see them jawboning and making sure they reemphasize that they are focused on debt and deficits and cutting spending.”
This sort of speculation has given rise to the idea of a so-called Bessent put in the bond market, a riff on the famous Greenspan put (named after former Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan) in which central bank intervention became highly linked to drops in the stock market.
Dhingra is recommending his clients buy 10-year inflation-linked notes, in part because of Bessent’s commitment to suppressing long-term yields. But it’s been more than just the former hedge fund manager’s words that have convinced him.
Bessent last month unveiled plans to keep sales of longer-term debt unchanged for the next several quarters, surprising Wall Street dealers who predicted supply increases later this year. It was an about-face of sorts after he criticized his predecessor Janet Yellen on the campaign trail for manipulating bond issuance in a bid to keep borrowing costs low and juice the economy ahead of the election.
He’s also backed a review of the Fed’s supplementary leverage ratio. Wall Street bond dealers have for years cited the burdens they face making markets in Treasuries due to the SLR, which boosts the amount of capital they have to put aside when holding the debt.
“Bessent has not only delivered verbal intervention, but also delivered concrete actions, which have supported bond yields to move lower,” Dhingra said. “This is a bond vigilant administration keeping the bond vigilantes at bay.”
For Blake Gwinn, head of US rates strategy at RBC Capital Markets, it was both the likely negative impact from Trump’s tariff policies on growth as well as Bessent’s push to bring yields down that prompted him to cut his 10-year yield forecast to 4.2% from 4.75% earlier this month.
“The administration has almost kind of capped 10-year yields,” Gwinn said. “They’re kind of implicitly saying, if 10-year start to move higher or the economy starts to stumble and the Fed’s not playing ball, we’re just going to go out and slash 10-year issues.”
<<<
---
Ombow, It's amazing, but a single hit song like that can provide an entire lifetime of royalty income for a songwriter. In his autobiography, Robby Krieger of the Doors said the song 'Light My Fire' (which he wrote) ultimately generated more income than the entire Doors catalogue combined. He said from the beginning they had decided to split everything four ways, which was unusual, but the royalty stream was so huge that it didn't matter, they all ended up with more $ than they could possibly spend :o)
Ombow, I think that song was mostly written by this guy and his wife (below), but Denver did have some input. It originally went 'almost heaven, Massachusetts' :o)
John Denver - Thank God I'm A Country Boy (Official Audio)
John Denver - Take Me Home, Country Roads (from The Wildlife Concert) - Great Voice
I'm glad that music has become such a big part of our lives. Maybe most of the credit for that goes to The Beatles exploding on the scene and then keeping it going. Johnny Boy Denver came up with a great song here, a classic, he hit the nail on the head expressing this eternal emotion for wanting to be home.
Venezuela wants their people back from Salvadoran prisons -
Who does Trump think he is doing such a thing??
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c17q170zwjeo
Yes, excellent. They could win on one of those shows on TV - American Idol, The Voice, America's Got Talent...
Bigworld, Here's a conservative stock approach that I'm considering for 2025. The Fed has penciled in 2 rate cuts for the year, so the 3-10 year Treasury bonds should produce some price upside (cap gains), which would help offset any additional downside on the stock side. So a combination of VGIT (intermediate term Treasury ETF), and VOO (S+P 500) might make sense. The VGIT is currently paying 3.6% interest, and the S+P 500 has 1.2% in dividends, plus add in the likely cap gain from the VGIT for the year, and these help counterbalance the risk of additional stock downside.
So for example -- using 10 K increments, split 5K in VGIT, and 5K in VOO. Not very exciting, but a type of 'hedge', and it would at least allow some participation on the stock side. Stocks have already had a 10% haircut, so some of the downside risk has already been baked into current prices.
I'm feeling bearish, but realize how unpredictable the market can be. And who knows, Trump could come to his senses on the tariffs, the PPT could decide to prop up the market, and Wall St might start getting accustomed to the higher uncertainty levels, etc. Sounds like wishful thinking, but probably best to keep all bases covered, at least modestly.
---
The Petersens -
Another great family group -
I see they're from the Philippines -
I've watched this band also, but they're not as good as Missioned Souls.
It's amazing how good they are. The truth is that they have God-given talent - literally.
Here's another nice cover song by a family band -
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |