Stuff that caused the GOP to lose the subsequent elections. Promises unkept and failed policies. Between 2006-2008 the GOP led economy crashed. Between 2016-2018 the GOP government failed to provide the promised replacement for Obamacare or an immigration policy.
My fear is that the rhetoric is not backed by any coherent plan or policy. History repeats itself.
Quick footnote: I assume regulatory approval for the robotaxi has now significantly increased.
By now the EV Mandate is smoke and mirrors, no one will stop the adoption of EVs and suppliers will have to deal with a somewhat freer market. It won’t affect Tesla but it might help legacy ICE makers continue selling outdated technology.
Agree!
The Captain
The US, alone in the world, is overrun with huge SUVs and pickups. The US could continue on it’s retrograde path, with EV “mandates” and subsidies withdrawn, replaced by sanctions on EVs. I see auto enthisists cheering the imminent end of CAFE regs. All hail the 5,000lb, V8 powered, truck that “everyone” will be buying, whether that is what they want, or not.
Then there is the issue of “windmill cancer”, impacting the generation fleet. Most of my electric utilities are being whacked today.
Steve
Qaz,
Thank you so so much for the Onion View. Finally, something deeply insightful I can send in reply to my poor friends looking to me for guidance in this critical moment!
d fb
Oh gosh, they dithered and delayed….
d fb
I also fear incoherency, but with the guys now taking over (Musk, RFK Jr, Trump Jrs, and that Judge in Florida etc.,?) I fear coherency even more?
It is a bad habit that must be broken? Restore manly sensibilities and endeavor to persevere?
But being a touch more serious, some of the political creatures on both sides will now be turning their thoughts to what comes… after.
d fb
Two wars of conquest. Warrantless surveillance of US citizens. Imprisonment without legal due process. Torture. Remember the number of “recess appointments” to get around the requirement for Senate “advice and consent” of appointments? And, of course, giving the financial manipulators their head, and we know how that turned out.
Steve
One interesting move I am watching this morning is ITM: iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF, down over 3% or down 6% when compared to the direction of the rest of the market. The largest holding, DHI, is down over 5%.
I have no idea why this result would hammer home construction this much unless it is due to an assumption on higher inflation. Perhaps tariffs on foreign lumber?
There has always been a tariff on foreign lumber.
Remember, tariffs on foreign anything will result in an equal increase in the price of domestically produced alternatives.
Steve
I will restate, perhaps [increased] tariffs on foreign lumber?
I am well aware, that doesn’t address the query as to why home construction companies would be a significant loser based on this result.
The construction industry is one of the larger employers of immigrant workers generally, and undocumented workers specifically. More than lumber, I’d expect this to be a response to concern about labor costs. Single-family homes also use a lot more landscaping than multifamily or commercial, so labor costs can hit them both in installation of landscaping and in the costs of material, since ornamental agriculture may also take a hit.
I bet you are right. No cheap labor for the “JCs”. Of course, they could simply pass on the extra cost, with added profit, to customers. Then “right size” their companies to adopt to the lower number of people who can still afford houses. That is what the US auto industry has been doing: shrinking their volume, but taking more money off each person who does buy from them.
Steve
Same thing with tending, harvesting, and processing food. Will the 20% tariff on imported food allow for increased pay for non-illegal labor for US produced crops?
Steve
Ah, very possible.
Taking a look at Tyson foods, it is currently flat at +.2% Sysco is up about 1.5%, but Conagra is down .7%. All worse than the overall market.
We shall see. Despite discussion of across-the-board tariff increases during the campaign, tariffs are far more often deployed more “surgically” - no matter the politician, or even the country. Tariff policy is more characteristically used to advance or protect very specific producers, often to achieve domestic political priorities, almost everywhere. So we might not see a 20% across-the-board tariff, but instead a range of different amounts on different products - with some getting hit harder, and some being exempt from any new changes.
Remember 2017-2019? It didn’t seem to make much difference when there was the same situation in the 115th Congress…
Pete
The suspicion in some corners are the tariffs are a means of pushing the US toward a flat tax, replacing the progressive income tax. They are certainly profit protection for US industries of all sorts.
Steve
Most likely because interest rates are rising, that’s the thing that usually hurts homebuilders because it makes it that much more difficult to sell their product.