I think the broad bump yesterday was probably too broad and we'll see more sector by sector during this volatility period. I mean I can't believe how much Tesla moved up (probably short covering?) - its as if people forgot how much the brand is damaged - unless I missed some robotaxi news? Anyway, I'm probably going to lean bit more into European stocks as I think they will come out of this fray in the best shape.... Did you say Thank You yesterday?
Sold the NVDA I picked up on tuesday evening, this AM. Please keep going back down so I can go in again lol.
The "Insiders" spike is actually were either people selling into the 10 year treasury auction or people that saw the results of the 10 year treasury auction started jumping in. I was in the middle of buying a few things once the auction happened but before the announcement.
That's what we were just talking about. The treasury auction caused the spike before the announcement.
Ah, ok. I don't follow this stuff much anymore and wasn't following along in the thread. The whole thing has gone from a corrupt clown show to a full-fledged corrupt circus, so I'm expecting the worst at all times.
There had to be some corruption too lol No way this admin can keep their lips sealed on something that big.
fwiw, this was Miran, who trying to gaslight the attendees at, https://www.hudson.org/events/chair...n-miran-trump-administrations-economic-agenda, with this intellectual dishonesty. "The American economic story has seen periods of high tariff rates coincide with extraordinary economic success,” . citing the McKinley presidency (1897 - 1901), when the gold standard was still relevant, and there was no Federal Reserve system. Biran also intentionally ignored the tariffs in the Hoover (1930s) / Trump 1.0 (2016-20) tenures. poster Amiga does a better job calling out Miran, https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/the-offical-trump-tariff-thread.325303/page-78#post-15681436, Miran's statement fundamentally misrepresents economic history. While growth did occur during McKinley's high-tariff presidency, attributing this to tariffs commits a basic logical fallacy – correlation does not prove causation. The robust growth of the late 1890s stemmed primarily from the technological revolution sweeping America, massive railroad expansion creating national markets, unprecedented European immigration providing labor, rapid urbanization driving consumer demand, and monetary expansion from new gold discoveries. Moreover, comparing the McKinley era to today's economy is profoundly wrong. The 19th century American economy bore little resemblance to our modern globally-integrated system – international trade was marginal to GDP, global supply chains didn't exist, digital commerce was unimaginable, and America was an emerging industrial power with naturally higher growth rates, not the world's dominant economy. So, what alarms me is, these GUYS BELIEVE HIGH TARIFF is GOOD, thereofre, these tariffs aren't merely negotiating leverage – they represent the administration's core economic doctrine. With advisors like Miran cherry-picking historical examples to justify permanent protectionism while ignoring centuries of economic scholarship, we're witnessing ideology trumping evidence-based policy. This rigid commitment to high tariffs as THE POLICY itself, rather than as a means to an end, is a huge gamble to American prosperity.
