Jump to content

Bozo_Casanova

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    14213
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    6

Bozo_Casanova last won the day on November 24 2020

Bozo_Casanova had the most liked content!

Reputation

29522 Surly 1%

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I’m not sure what narrative shift you are talking about, but rational economic actors with a gun to their heads don’t have the luxury of speculation and shouldn’t indulge in it and those who allow their politics to influence their approach to risk management sow the wind. The chain of causality here is that tarriffs and other policies were promised, and many producers and users hedged accordingly. And by the way, as long as we are talking about “narratives,” you shouldn’t minimize what actually happened in 2017, which was the US losing a really dumb trade war that cost us market share we will never get back among other things.
  2. I’m not going to put words in your mouth because, but the bolded statement seems poorly reasoned. You seem to have assumed that Trump’s campaign rhetoric was hollow, but producers that rely on imports did no such thing, because the risk was too high, and that’s the major cause of the GDP contraction. The DOGE stuff is and will remain a rounding error. The threat of new taxes and policy uncertainty are inherently anti-growth and I’m surprised you don’t take them into account. In other words. If the incoming president says “I’m going to do tarriffs and deport a bunch of skilled construction labor,” he need not do it for the economy to start contracting.
  3. If only it was just that.
  4. I tend to think this played a similar role in the PUMA Democrats supporting McCain, and there’s no doubt it was a huge factor for the direction things went during Obamas presidency and after. Hell there was a whole thread on HF or shaggy about the way Obama lifted his chin.
  5. Exactly, although it’s worth mentioning that zoning is less relevant since for many reasons PUDs are the best solution for using AISD property for housing development. oh, and that was another thing they were gun-shy about, because at that time the ANC was on a jihad against PUDs for reasons that were the opposite of the truth.
  6. 2014-2016. You know, back when a bunch of really painful choices were visible on the horizon but still avoidable.
  7. A few years ago I pitched a couple of school board members that AISD could solve several problems at once by redeveloping AISD properties and even school campuses to offer housing to teachers, staff, city and county employees, and families with children enrolled in AISD schools. The families would get slightly* below market rate rental housing in 3 and 4 bedroom apartment, row home and courtyard bungalow units. The district would get an infusion of young families with kids AND a recruiting and retention tool, and by offering it to other parts of the public sector AISD would strengthen interagency cooperation and open up other potential sources for financing and land. It also makes transportation more efficient, Austin would get some missing middle housing, etc. Because, you see, AISD’s biggest problem is a mismatch between the places where the schools are (Austin) and the places where young families and teachers can afford to live (suburbs). Anyway, one nonsensically said it seemed like “a cash grab for developers.” The other said “the neighborhood groups will burn me at the stake if I suggested something like this.” *not subsidized or offered through rental assistance, just priced a little cheaper.
  8. He’s a liability for all four. The T-Wolves are the worst matchup in the field for the Lakers. This
  9. Who would they put in?
  10. The interesting thing is that it stirred up a hornet’s nest on the tankie left and (for different reasons) among nominally democrat voting neighborhood reactionaries, who increasingly are making common cause with suburban Republicans at the state level. The alliance of the Austin Neighborhood Coalition with Bill Aleshire and Ken Paxton to stop zoning reform and transit planning being a local example.
  11. Shortages would be the least of our problems in the “bad” scenario.
  12. The short version is that commodity products are priced by market forces in real time and fundamentally subject to demand. The long answer is extremely complex and the extremely long, but relatively straightforward in that you can’t price in what the market won’t accept, so who ends up wearing the cost increase comes down to 1) elasticity, 2) who has leverage and, 3 on the other hand, who has the balance sheet to use a secular cost increases to consolidate share. The bigger and stronger a player is, the most likely it is that for inelastic goods they eat cost or even lower prices to take share unless they think nobody else can. Contracts are unimportant. Most high volume relationships are done on what amounts to papered up handshake.
  13. Very underrated IMO Very overrated IMO Say more about this- what school, what’s your connection, where does it go, etc.
×
×
  • Create New...