Lone Candle
Champion of Truth
The fall of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies will make imports more expensive. This increases the costs of imports on top of the more direct effect of tariffs.
The dollar’s decrease will make U.S. exports cheaper overseas, however, this may be counteracted by foreign countries retaliating against U.S. exports in response to Trump tariffs, and by foreign customers boycotting U.S. companies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD5iHKOOgg8
Is China Dumping the Dollar? – And is Ray Dalio Right about Reserve Currencies?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7nj4b-619A
Trump defying a Supreme Court order is a constitutional crisis. The crisis comes to a head with Congress derelict in its duty. The only one with the power to enforce limits on the president’s power is Congress through its power of impeachment and a little bit through passing legislation that restrains the president.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiBggW15jLk
“Passed in 1920, the Jones Act severely limits competition in the American shipping market by requiring that ships operating between U.S. ports be American-built, American-crewed, and American-flagged. The number of ships that meet the Jones Act’s standards has been declining for decades, and now fewer than 100 are in operation. Anyone who wants to ship goods—including rum—from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, or other outlying U.S. territories to the mainland is required to use one of those few dozen vessels.
Unsurprisingly, the lack of competition drives up shipping costs. The lawsuit points out that it costs roughly three times as much to ship rum from Hawaii to Los Angeles as it does to ship the same goods from Los Angeles to Australia—an international route where greater competition keeps prices lower, even though the trip is significantly longer.”
https://reason.com/2025/02/25/is-the-jones-act-unconstitutional/
“The rule intends to reduce federal bureaucracy by reverting the mission of CEQ to its origins. The agency, which was created with the passage of NEPA, was originally intended to advise the executive branch on environmental matters and NEPA implementation. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed an executive order that required federal agencies to comply with NEPA regulations published by the CEQ. Since then, the council has been the guiding agency for the federal government’s NEPA reviews.
Trump’s executive order reversed Carter’s, which rescinded CEQ’s regulatory authority over other federal agencies. The proposed rule, if implemented, would not strike down NEPA altogether (this would require congressional approval). Instead, it would remove CEQ’s NEPA regulations from the federal register and allow federal agencies to use their own rules to comply with the law. Many agencies, including the Department of Energy, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Forest Service, already have their own NEPA regulations in place.
Any effort to streamline the NEPA process should be welcomed by all. Since its passage in 1969, the law has become a redundant, bureaucratic nightmare that has slowed down or killed key infrastructure, energy, and environmental projects.”
https://reason.com/2025/02/25/trump-administration-moves-to-streamline-environmental-reviews/
Elon Musk makes basic attacks against Social Security that Republicans have been making for many decades, and Joe Rogan is impressed like these are new ideas. Elon’s attacks are wrong or misleading in multiple ways.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C12IdscHGNo
Man who worked with Trump in his first term explains that Trump is not qualified to be president. He isn’t interested in policy, he doesn’t read his briefings, he’s vulnerable to being manipulated by praise, and he’s not concerned about the world but just about himself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBIRPVUkWBA
“At the end of the day, protectionism is rooted in fear and pessimism: fear that we’ll be outcompeted, and pessimism about the idea that a growing, dynamic economy can make us all better off. Libertarians are fond of making just such claims—so fond that Cass coined a term to mock us for it. Instead of tussling over the size of different constituencies’ relative shares of the fixed economic pie, the libertarian view is that our goal should be to grow the pie so everyone’s share is bigger. Cass calls this “economic piety,” and he rejects it. For him, the goal is not to grow the economy; it’s to direct the economy for the benefit of deserving constituencies such as blue-collar workers.
This is pure zero-sum thinking. It cements in place a mindset where one group’s gains necessarily come at some other group’s expense. To libertarians, technological innovation is a boon because it makes the whole economy more productive and everyone richer in the long run. But some people usually are hurt in the short run—think of the proverbial buggy-whip salesmen when automobiles come along. Protectionists are inclined to be suspicious of the tech sector and sympathetic toward policies that would tamp down economic dynamism in the name of protecting the would-be losers. The result, inevitably, is stagnation.”
https://reason.com/2025/03/01/trumps-dramatic-crossroads/
The Bond Market Rules Everything
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVk5Xpd9cvg
“Legally, the answer is complicated and untested. No Fed chair has ever been removed by a President.
The Federal Reserve Act allows for the dismissal of Board members, including the chair, “for cause.” But that has historically been interpreted as misconduct or incapacity, not policy disagreements. “The court would typically not see disagreements over interest rates settings as ‘for-cause,’” Binder says.”
…
“Still, the Trump Administration appears to be laying the groundwork for a potential confrontation. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently told Bloomberg that he expects to begin interviewing possible replacements for Powell in the fall.”
…
“At the heart of that debate is a nearly century-old legal precedent: Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a 1935 Supreme Court ruling that limited the President’s ability to remove leaders of independent agencies without cause. The ruling has long shielded Fed chairs from political dismissal, but could soon be tested by a conservative Supreme Court.”
…
“Trump has blamed Powell for failing to act aggressively enough to support economic growth, saying the Fed chair is “playing politics” by keeping interest rates steady. But central bankers—and many economists—argue the opposite: that an independent Fed is essential to managing inflation and stewarding the economy, and that caving to political demands could damage the economy and global trust in U.S. institutions.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-fire-jerome-powell-213123735.html