AxelFoley85 said:

---

The World Cup is not close to sold out. Artists are canceling full tours over not being able to sell tickets.

---

It's known as the "Blue Dot" phenomenon.

Prices haven't really changed much in the past year, but what people's money can buy recently is a factor mentioned in the story on one of the major networks.

And of course every concert has all kinds of businesses (big and small) that make money through them, so a ripple effect off each cancelation I'm sure.

Haleyscomet50 said:

---

Can't the American people afford to pay a little more so that Israel is safe? Short term pain so we can finally end the terror of the Iranian regime. They fund by proxy attacks on Israel. They just killed 42k protestors. This is Trump putting Americans first doesn't matter that they are 7,000 miles away what would happen if they ever got a nuclear weapon. Americans are so selfish don't you want our President to be a man of his word? He took 230 million from the Addlesons if he said he would protect Isreal he needs to keep his word.

This is a problem cause by Obama doesn't matter that we got our payback when we killed Solamani Trump is protecting us. When you pay 5 dollars a gallon in College Station be proud we are keeping our Grandchildren safe.

---

Oy vey

ts5641 said:

---

Haleyscomet50 said:

---

Can't the American people afford to pay a little more so that Israel is safe? Short term pain so we can finally end the terror of the Iranian regime. They fund by proxy attacks on Israel. They just killed 42k protestors. This is Trump putting Americans first doesn't matter that they are 7,000 miles away what would happen if they ever got a nuclear weapon. Americans are so selfish don't you want our President to be a man of his word? He took 230 million from the Addlesons if he said he would protect Isreal he needs to keep his word.

This is a problem cause by Obama doesn't matter that we got our payback when we killed Solamani Trump is protecting us. When you pay 5 dollars a gallon in College Station be proud we are keeping our Grandchildren safe.

---

Oy vey

---

Had to look that one up as I do not speak Yiddish. "Good grief". And I agree.

RogerFurlong said:

---

It's killing my industry. Prices have gotten insane. Customers are putting off projects. One large one flat out refused to pay the last invoice because they didn't have the money. We're holding on but I'm not sure all of our suppliers will be able to. I know some of our competitors (judging by their bids) are screwed. A lot of good people who really grinded to make it all happen during 2008, and Covid are really struggling, but at least Trump is funny and we're getting cool stuff in D.C.

---

I'm glad that NYC isn't likely to get nuked by a terrorist sponsored by the Iranian state any time soon. Because a nuke in NYC would really slow the economy down.

That said, the $9 billion that Trump spent on the DC ballroom and mall pool doesn't really help present the appearance of fiscal responsibility.

BusterAg said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

It's killing my industry. Prices have gotten insane. Customers are putting off projects. One large one flat out refused to pay the last invoice because they didn't have the money. We're holding on but I'm not sure all of our suppliers will be able to. I know some of our competitors (judging by their bids) are screwed. A lot of good people who really grinded to make it all happen during 2008, and Covid are really struggling, but at least Trump is funny and we're getting cool stuff in D.C.

---

I'm glad that NYC isn't likely to get nuked by a terrorist sponsored by the Iranian state any time soon. Because a nuke in NYC would really slow the economy down.

That said, the $9 billion that Trump spent on the DC ballroom and mall pool doesn't really help present the appearance of fiscal responsibility.

---

Wait, I thought Trump said the ballroom was going to be paid for by the tech bros of Elon and others? Why do we (tax payers) have to pay for it now?

MemphisAg1 said:

---

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

That's an ugly picture. It shows what we know happened with the big Bidenflation that spiked in 2022 and 2023. Then it eased and wages gradually made up to recover some of the lost ground. But this latest inflation spike threatens to turn it upside down again. I hope not. I'm about to retire and have three sons in their mid 30's who are getting off to a good start in life. None of us want to be derailed by the inflation monster.

---

Sorry for the bad news, but if you voted for Trump, this was the expected outcome.

---

Lol, I did vote for Trump and don't regret it.

But to be clear, he advertised that "Chyna" would pay for the tariffs, not the American consumer.

And then of course, it shifted to Wal-Mart and others would pay for it when it became clear that China wouldn't.

And then when that fizzled, he claimed the benefits of tariffs would offset any negative impacts.

... with these latest inflation numbers, I'm not so sure that a majority of Americans will agree with him in the midterms.

---

The inflation is not about the tariffs. It's about printing money. And oil.

But, you know that, I hope, at least.

samurai_science said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Quit. Printing. Money.

The end.

---

And cut spending by massive amounts.

---

That's what I just said.

They are one in the same.

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

That's an ugly picture. It shows what we know happened with the big Bidenflation that spiked in 2022 and 2023. Then it eased and wages gradually made up to recover some of the lost ground. But this latest inflation spike threatens to turn it upside down again. I hope not. I'm about to retire and have three sons in their mid 30's who are getting off to a good start in life. None of us want to be derailed by the inflation monster.

---

Sorry for the bad news, but if you voted for Trump, this was the expected outcome.

---

Lol, I did vote for Trump and don't regret it.

But to be clear, he advertised that "Chyna" would pay for the tariffs, not the American consumer.

And then of course, it shifted to Wal-Mart and others would pay for it when it became clear that China wouldn't.

And then when that fizzled, he claimed the benefits of tariffs would offset any negative impacts.

... with these latest inflation numbers, I'm not so sure that a majority of Americans will agree with him in the midterms.

---

I see that a lot here. Some posters think that just because someone voted for Trump, they are 100% his cheerleader and don't have the right to complain. about Trump

---

Posters here tried to educate and inform others that tariffs and increased spending were a long-term negative and would not accomplish the stated goals, yet so many people are just too thick-skulled.

The laws of supply and demand don't care about your political affiliations

---

The tariff situation is much more complicated than you give it credit for.

1) What is the US going to do with soaring unemployment due to the massive adoption of AI?

2) Has the US economic policy that has allowed manufacturing of US products to go overseas so that we could specialize in knowledge based industries that have higher marginal value than manufacturing made the US employment left us more exposed, less exposed, or about the same when it comes to AI replacing jobs?

3) Has the practice of US corporations, that were seeking cheaper manufacturing labor overseas, giving away US intellectual property related to manufacturing processes and technologies been a huge, moderate, or small impact on the current state of employment risk in the US due to the adoption of AI? In retrospect, do you think that practice of IP gifting was short-sighted, even though it played to our economic comparative advantage at the time?

4) With the adoption of AI now posed to wreck havok on knowledge based jobs in the US, jobs which have systematically replaced higher-end manufacturing jobs in the US due to our complete ambivalence to currency manipulation and IP theft of our trading partners, what is an appropriate course of action and economic policy to facilitate economic growth for the middle class? Double down on knowledge jobs, which had a higher return and created a comparative advantage for the US from 1970 to 2024?

What drives me crazy is thick-skulled knuckleheads that thing they learned all they needed to know about macro economics in their Econ 102 class as a sophomore, and that all of the answers related to economics can be easily described with a single red and blue supply / demand curve chart.

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

It's killing my industry. Prices have gotten insane. Customers are putting off projects. One large one flat out refused to pay the last invoice because they didn't have the money. We're holding on but I'm not sure all of our suppliers will be able to. I know some of our competitors (judging by their bids) are screwed. A lot of good people who really grinded to make it all happen during 2008, and Covid are really struggling, but at least Trump is funny and we're getting cool stuff in D.C.

---

I'm glad that NYC isn't likely to get nuked by a terrorist sponsored by the Iranian state any time soon. Because a nuke in NYC would really slow the economy down.

That said, the $9 billion that Trump spent on the DC ballroom and mall pool doesn't really help present the appearance of fiscal responsibility.

---

Wait, I thought Trump said the ballroom was going to be paid for by the tech bros of Elon and others? Why do we (tax payers) have to pay for it now?

---

Oh, we don't. Sorry.

The $9 billion was actually the amount that taxpayers have paid for Medicare fraud in Minnesota.

BusterAg said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

That's an ugly picture. It shows what we know happened with the big Bidenflation that spiked in 2022 and 2023. Then it eased and wages gradually made up to recover some of the lost ground. But this latest inflation spike threatens to turn it upside down again. I hope not. I'm about to retire and have three sons in their mid 30's who are getting off to a good start in life. None of us want to be derailed by the inflation monster.

---

Sorry for the bad news, but if you voted for Trump, this was the expected outcome.

---

Lol, I did vote for Trump and don't regret it.

But to be clear, he advertised that "Chyna" would pay for the tariffs, not the American consumer.

And then of course, it shifted to Wal-Mart and others would pay for it when it became clear that China wouldn't.

And then when that fizzled, he claimed the benefits of tariffs would offset any negative impacts.

... with these latest inflation numbers, I'm not so sure that a majority of Americans will agree with him in the midterms.

---

The inflation is not about the tariffs. It's about printing money. And oil.

But, you know that, I hope, at least.

---

Spare me the "inflation is only caused by printing money" mantra. That might be interesting in an academic classroom, but the real world measures inflation by the change in prices, not the change in money supply. CPI, PCE, and PPI are the most common measures, all which measure price changes. Businesses and families plan their budgets by the expected change in prices and incomes, and how they balance.

Many things can cause a change in prices. Money supply for sure. But also shortages and surpluses of supply. Government policy can also have a direct impact. 99.9% of people think of inflation as the change in price for a good or service they buy, regardless of the underlying reason(s). That's the discussion we're having here.

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

Lots of blackpill propagandists on this thread including some "useful person" disciples of the movement, but they do raise a legitimate concern here, even if the alternative is far worse and more economically destructive policies under Democrat power.

The Republicans could and should do better than they are. I view the intervention in Itan as a necessary burden we had to undertake given the long term black swan threat they represented, but it is time to continue to be decisive about that conflict and issue an ultimatum with a firm deadline, with the consequence for noncompliance being that we bomb them into the dark ages as fast as possible and then turn loose all their angry neighbors on them to keep them suppressed as needed to reopen the straight and they NEVER came back to relevance again. No more BS dragging this out and trading the same proposals back and forth. If they only understand death and crushing defeat, give it to them as rapidly as possible so the rest of the world can move on. If they have no oil to sell, nobody will be giving them weapons or parts for them. Make that clear or make it their reality. The rest of the eorld will adjust.

This paves the way for stability, and a refocus on domestic issues like an apparently incredible amount of fraud and waste in our public spending, and a lot of terrible policy suppressing eco mic growth potential.

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

---

That's how 99.9% of the world defines it. It's ok to acknowledge that and make your peace with it.

BusterAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

That's an ugly picture. It shows what we know happened with the big Bidenflation that spiked in 2022 and 2023. Then it eased and wages gradually made up to recover some of the lost ground. But this latest inflation spike threatens to turn it upside down again. I hope not. I'm about to retire and have three sons in their mid 30's who are getting off to a good start in life. None of us want to be derailed by the inflation monster.

---

Sorry for the bad news, but if you voted for Trump, this was the expected outcome.

---

Lol, I did vote for Trump and don't regret it.

But to be clear, he advertised that "Chyna" would pay for the tariffs, not the American consumer.

And then of course, it shifted to Wal-Mart and others would pay for it when it became clear that China wouldn't.

And then when that fizzled, he claimed the benefits of tariffs would offset any negative impacts.

... with these latest inflation numbers, I'm not so sure that a majority of Americans will agree with him in the midterms.

---

I see that a lot here. Some posters think that just because someone voted for Trump, they are 100% his cheerleader and don't have the right to complain. about Trump

---

Posters here tried to educate and inform others that tariffs and increased spending were a long-term negative and would not accomplish the stated goals, yet so many people are just too thick-skulled.

The laws of supply and demand don't care about your political affiliations

---

The tariff situation is much more complicated than you give it credit for.

1) What is the US going to do with soaring unemployment due to the massive adoption of AI?

2) Has the US economic policy that has allowed manufacturing of US products to go overseas so that we could specialize in knowledge based industries that have higher marginal value than manufacturing made the US employment left us more exposed, less exposed, or about the same when it comes to AI replacing jobs?

3) Has the practice of US corporations, that were seeking cheaper manufacturing labor overseas, giving away US intellectual property related to manufacturing processes and technologies been a huge, moderate, or small impact on the current state of employment risk in the US due to the adoption of AI? In retrospect, do you think that practice of IP gifting was short-sighted, even though it played to our economic comparative advantage at the time?

4) With the adoption of AI now posed to wreck havok on knowledge based jobs in the US, jobs which have systematically replaced higher-end manufacturing jobs in the US due to our complete ambivalence to currency manipulation and IP theft of our trading partners, what is an appropriate course of action and economic policy to facilitate economic growth for the middle class? Double down on knowledge jobs, which had a higher return and created a comparative advantage for the US from 1970 to 2024?

What drives me crazy is thick-skulled knuckleheads that thing they learned all they needed to know about macro economics in their Econ 102 class as a sophomore, and that all of the answers related to economics can be easily described with a single red and blue supply / demand curve chart.

---

Give me a break. What does AI have to do with anything I posted?
We are manufacturing more in the US than ever before, including high-tech manufacturing. You just dont want to see it because it requires fewer jobs than 50 years ago.

I have to remind Infinity Ag every couple of months that there are over 400,000 manufacturing jobs available right now. Just checked, and the BLS shows about 462,000 manufacturing openings in March 2026. There are opportunities out there, but I would argue that tariffs only add to the complexity and confusion for industry participants.

If you don't trust me maybe you can trust Scott Lincicome, who has taken a few more Econ classes than either one of us: https://www.cato.org/commentary/welcome-tariff-complexity-hell

MemphisAg1 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

That's an ugly picture. It shows what we know happened with the big Bidenflation that spiked in 2022 and 2023. Then it eased and wages gradually made up to recover some of the lost ground. But this latest inflation spike threatens to turn it upside down again. I hope not. I'm about to retire and have three sons in their mid 30's who are getting off to a good start in life. None of us want to be derailed by the inflation monster.

---

Sorry for the bad news, but if you voted for Trump, this was the expected outcome.

---

Lol, I did vote for Trump and don't regret it.

But to be clear, he advertised that "Chyna" would pay for the tariffs, not the American consumer.

And then of course, it shifted to Wal-Mart and others would pay for it when it became clear that China wouldn't.

And then when that fizzled, he claimed the benefits of tariffs would offset any negative impacts.

... with these latest inflation numbers, I'm not so sure that a majority of Americans will agree with him in the midterms.

---

The inflation is not about the tariffs. It's about printing money. And oil.

But, you know that, I hope, at least.

---

Spare me the "inflation is only caused by printing money" mantra. That might be interesting in an academic classroom, but the real world measures inflation by the change in prices, not the change in money supply. CPI, PCE, and PPI are the most common measures, all which measure price changes. Businesses and families plan their budgets by the expected change in prices and incomes, and how they balance.

Many things can cause a change in prices. Money supply for sure. But also shortages and surpluses of supply. Government policy can also have a direct impact. 99.9% of people think of inflation as the change in price for a good or service they buy, regardless of the underlying reason(s). That's the discussion we're having here.

---

1) Most of the changes in prices for specific goods are temporary, and economics will work them out over the medium term.

2) Do you think it is good economic policy to control the short-term prices of goods to ensure that there isn't short-term "inflation"? That is a direction of economic policy that has been explored in the past.

3) What would you have done differently from a governmental policy perspective to prevent the current amount of short-term "inflation"?

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

---

That's how 99.9% of the world defines it. It's ok to acknowledge that and make your peace with it.

---

According to Polymarket, as many as 4% of people were putting money on Jesus returning by December 31, 2026, as recently as April (it reached 5% in February). There are lots of ignorant people out there. And many of them vote.

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

---

That's how 99.9% of the world defines it. It's ok to acknowledge that and make your peace with it.

---

According to Polymarket, as many as 4% of people were putting money on Jesus returning by December 31, 2026, as recently as April (it reached 5% in February). There are lots of ignorant people out there. And many of them vote.

---

Can you claim a win if Jesus shows up and mows my grass this afternoon? He will have disciples Eduardo and Jose with him but i think it should count.

tysker said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

That's an ugly picture. It shows what we know happened with the big Bidenflation that spiked in 2022 and 2023. Then it eased and wages gradually made up to recover some of the lost ground. But this latest inflation spike threatens to turn it upside down again. I hope not. I'm about to retire and have three sons in their mid 30's who are getting off to a good start in life. None of us want to be derailed by the inflation monster.

---

Sorry for the bad news, but if you voted for Trump, this was the expected outcome.

---

Lol, I did vote for Trump and don't regret it.

But to be clear, he advertised that "Chyna" would pay for the tariffs, not the American consumer.

And then of course, it shifted to Wal-Mart and others would pay for it when it became clear that China wouldn't.

And then when that fizzled, he claimed the benefits of tariffs would offset any negative impacts.

... with these latest inflation numbers, I'm not so sure that a majority of Americans will agree with him in the midterms.

---

I see that a lot here. Some posters think that just because someone voted for Trump, they are 100% his cheerleader and don't have the right to complain. about Trump

---

Posters here tried to educate and inform others that tariffs and increased spending were a long-term negative and would not accomplish the stated goals, yet so many people are just too thick-skulled.

The laws of supply and demand don't care about your political affiliations

---

The tariff situation is much more complicated than you give it credit for.

1) What is the US going to do with soaring unemployment due to the massive adoption of AI?

2) Has the US economic policy that has allowed manufacturing of US products to go overseas so that we could specialize in knowledge based industries that have higher marginal value than manufacturing made the US employment left us more exposed, less exposed, or about the same when it comes to AI replacing jobs?

3) Has the practice of US corporations, that were seeking cheaper manufacturing labor overseas, giving away US intellectual property related to manufacturing processes and technologies been a huge, moderate, or small impact on the current state of employment risk in the US due to the adoption of AI? In retrospect, do you think that practice of IP gifting was short-sighted, even though it played to our economic comparative advantage at the time?

4) With the adoption of AI now posed to wreck havok on knowledge based jobs in the US, jobs which have systematically replaced higher-end manufacturing jobs in the US due to our complete ambivalence to currency manipulation and IP theft of our trading partners, what is an appropriate course of action and economic policy to facilitate economic growth for the middle class? Double down on knowledge jobs, which had a higher return and created a comparative advantage for the US from 1970 to 2024?

What drives me crazy is thick-skulled knuckleheads that thing they learned all they needed to know about macro economics in their Econ 102 class as a sophomore, and that all of the answers related to economics can be easily described with a single red and blue supply / demand curve chart.

---

Give me a break. What does AI have to do with anything I posted?
We are manufacturing more in the US than ever before, including high-tech manufacturing. You just dont want to see it because it requires fewer jobs than 50 years ago.

I have to remind Infinity Ag every couple of months that there are over 400,000 manufacturing jobs available right now. Just checked, and the BLS shows about 462,000 manufacturing openings in March 2026. There are opportunities out there, but I would argue that tariffs only add to the complexity and confusion for industry participants.

If you don't trust me maybe you can trust Scott Lincicome, who has taken a few more Econ classes than either one of us: https://www.cato.org/commentary/welcome-tariff-complexity-hell

---

My friend. Don't you get it? You keep giving me the same Boomer logic over and over again.

If someone has multiple degrees in a certain hot field from top US universities, there is a certain expectation about jobs they will do. But if they cannot get those jobs but they see H1Bs get the SAME jobs that they should be getting, it is a big problem. If such people get laid off with the CEO claiming "AI took your job" but then opens up 1000000 reqs for the same positions in India, that is a problem.

Get it now? I can't make it any simpler.

So you enticing Steve, an MIT/Stanford Computer Science grad with "manufacturing jobs" won't work. He will want to work on the latest LLMs and on SuperIntelligence and crap like that. But he will find those jobs given to Ramesh and Suresh from Tandoori College of Engineering, in Fakesville Haidurabad, India.

However... Steve may be enticed with a C-level job in those manufacturing companies with a $100000000000 salary. Do you have any of those in the 462,000 manufacturing jobs you claim exist? Or are those all blue-collar jobs that the olds seem to be so enamored with?

Show me.

BusterAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

It's killing my industry. Prices have gotten insane. Customers are putting off projects. One large one flat out refused to pay the last invoice because they didn't have the money. We're holding on but I'm not sure all of our suppliers will be able to. I know some of our competitors (judging by their bids) are screwed. A lot of good people who really grinded to make it all happen during 2008, and Covid are really struggling, but at least Trump is funny and we're getting cool stuff in D.C.

---

I'm glad that NYC isn't likely to get nuked by a terrorist sponsored by the Iranian state any time soon. Because a nuke in NYC would really slow the economy down.

That said, the $9 billion that Trump spent on the DC ballroom and mall pool doesn't really help present the appearance of fiscal responsibility.

---

Wait, I thought Trump said the ballroom was going to be paid for by the tech bros of Elon and others? Why do we (tax payers) have to pay for it now?

---

Oh, we don't. Sorry.

The $9 billion was actually the amount that taxpayers have paid for Medicare fraud in Minnesota.

---

Okay, cool, but, again, why is any money not from Elon and the tech bros wallets going to this when it was said by Trump that those guys would be paying for it?

I'd like to think that $9 billion could go to so many other things that could have a direct impact on everyday Americans.

infinity ag said:

---

tysker said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

tysker said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

That's an ugly picture. It shows what we know happened with the big Bidenflation that spiked in 2022 and 2023. Then it eased and wages gradually made up to recover some of the lost ground. But this latest inflation spike threatens to turn it upside down again. I hope not. I'm about to retire and have three sons in their mid 30's who are getting off to a good start in life. None of us want to be derailed by the inflation monster.

---

Sorry for the bad news, but if you voted for Trump, this was the expected outcome.

---

Lol, I did vote for Trump and don't regret it.

But to be clear, he advertised that "Chyna" would pay for the tariffs, not the American consumer.

And then of course, it shifted to Wal-Mart and others would pay for it when it became clear that China wouldn't.

And then when that fizzled, he claimed the benefits of tariffs would offset any negative impacts.

... with these latest inflation numbers, I'm not so sure that a majority of Americans will agree with him in the midterms.

---

I see that a lot here. Some posters think that just because someone voted for Trump, they are 100% his cheerleader and don't have the right to complain. about Trump

---

Posters here tried to educate and inform others that tariffs and increased spending were a long-term negative and would not accomplish the stated goals, yet so many people are just too thick-skulled.

The laws of supply and demand don't care about your political affiliations

---

The tariff situation is much more complicated than you give it credit for.

1) What is the US going to do with soaring unemployment due to the massive adoption of AI?

2) Has the US economic policy that has allowed manufacturing of US products to go overseas so that we could specialize in knowledge based industries that have higher marginal value than manufacturing made the US employment left us more exposed, less exposed, or about the same when it comes to AI replacing jobs?

3) Has the practice of US corporations, that were seeking cheaper manufacturing labor overseas, giving away US intellectual property related to manufacturing processes and technologies been a huge, moderate, or small impact on the current state of employment risk in the US due to the adoption of AI? In retrospect, do you think that practice of IP gifting was short-sighted, even though it played to our economic comparative advantage at the time?

4) With the adoption of AI now posed to wreck havok on knowledge based jobs in the US, jobs which have systematically replaced higher-end manufacturing jobs in the US due to our complete ambivalence to currency manipulation and IP theft of our trading partners, what is an appropriate course of action and economic policy to facilitate economic growth for the middle class? Double down on knowledge jobs, which had a higher return and created a comparative advantage for the US from 1970 to 2024?

What drives me crazy is thick-skulled knuckleheads that thing they learned all they needed to know about macro economics in their Econ 102 class as a sophomore, and that all of the answers related to economics can be easily described with a single red and blue supply / demand curve chart.

---

Give me a break. What does AI have to do with anything I posted?
We are manufacturing more in the US than ever before, including high-tech manufacturing. You just dont want to see it because it requires fewer jobs than 50 years ago.

I have to remind Infinity Ag every couple of months that there are over 400,000 manufacturing jobs available right now. Just checked, and the BLS shows about 462,000 manufacturing openings in March 2026. There are opportunities out there, but I would argue that tariffs only add to the complexity and confusion for industry participants.

If you don't trust me maybe you can trust Scott Lincicome, who has taken a few more Econ classes than either one of us: https://www.cato.org/commentary/welcome-tariff-complexity-hell

---

My friend. Don't you get it? You keep giving me the same Boomer logic over and over again.

If someone has multiple degrees in a certain hot field from top US universities, there is a certain expectation about jobs they will do. But if they cannot get those jobs but they see H1Bs get the SAME jobs that they should be getting, it is a big problem. If such people get laid off with the CEO claiming "AI took your job" but then opens up 1000000 reqs for the same positions in India, that is a problem.

Get it now? I can't make it any simpler.

So you enticing Steve, an MIT/Stanford Computer Science grad with "manufacturing jobs" won't work. He will want to work on the latest LLMs and on SuperIntelligence and crap like that. But he will find those jobs given to Ramesh and Suresh from Tandoori College of Engineering, in Fakesville Haidurabad, India.

However... Steve may be enticed with a C-level job in those manufacturing companies with a $100000000000 salary. Do you have any of those in the 462,000 manufacturing jobs you claim exist? Or are those all blue-collar jobs that the olds seem to be so enamored with?

Show me.

---

Has anything in your post actually happened except in your imagination? I'm sure some workers are being undercut in wages. You know what, welcome to real life. Sometimes, it's not ****ing fair. We all have struggles, and, sorry to say, there are lots of people, such as yourself, who cry out to politicians to solve their problems.

I found your primary concern:

Quote:

---

If someone has multiple degrees in a certain hot field from top US universities, there is a certain expectation about jobs they will do.

---

Kids have been lied to by people like you about what to expect upon receiving these "multiple degrees." Your mindset is so backward-looking that you refuse to acknowledge that markets, industries, and economies shift all the time, and you instill these misconceptions in the minds of our children. Instead, you pine for the halcyon days of factory work and no competition from outside parties.

You know which field also has an expectation of more opportunities upon receiving "multiple degrees," yet is constantly being pushed out by lower-cost professionals and tech, such as AI? Public school teachers. And you know what many wind up doing when times get tough? Quitting or going into Admin work (i.e., not teaching)

The kids are smarter than anyone posting here and are obviously adjusting accordingly. We've already seen that fewer males are choosing opportunities in trades and skilled labor rather than going to college.
Call it Boomer logic if you like, but I'd rather people compete than rely on the government to protect them.

tysker said:

---

Give me a break. What does AI have to do with anything I posted?

---

Pretty much everything.

Do you believe that the US' comparative advantage of shipping manufacturing jobs overseas is going to decrease with the advent of AI?

tysker said:

---

I found your primary concern:

Quote:

---

If someone has multiple degrees in a certain hot field from top US universities, there is a certain expectation about jobs they will do.

---

Kids have been lied to by people like you about what to expect upon receiving these "multiple degrees." Your mindset is so backward-looking that you refuse to acknowledge that markets, industries, and economies shift all the time, and you instill these misconceptions in the minds of our children. Instead, you pine for the halcyon days of factory work and no competition from outside parties.

---

Well, we do agree here, for sure, until the last sentence.

If our economy relied upon a lot more smart manufacturing that required smart people with degrees, our economy would be in a lot better shape. But, it's hard to compete against slave labor from Chinese companies armed with US IP related to quality control. No amount of smartness in manufacturing is going to compete against slavers and thieves.

There was an alternate universe where many more smart, degreed people in the US were in charge of smart manufacturing facilities that could have been incredibly efficient and provided great jobs to everyone who worked there from the manufacturing floor all the way to the C-suite. But, those companies could not exist in a world where China was competing against those companies in ways that are not and should not be tolerated in the US economy.

You are presenting what I believe to be a false dichotomy. Our economy, that is currently built upon extremely efficient knowledge workers, is going to have to adapt significantly in order to survive. Investing in smart manufacturing is one very plausible way forward. Penalizing evil manufacturing practices from our trading partners is one way to facilitate that investment. Tariffs are a blunt tool for that, but, something is better than nothing. The complicated legal environment we find ourselves in is due to different factions of our government fighting over the best way forward. That is likely for the better, honestly, in the long term, that this type of in-government fighting exists.

BusterAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

Give me a break. What does AI have to do with anything I posted?

---

Pretty much everything.

Do you believe that the US' comparative advantage of shipping manufacturing jobs overseas is going to decrease with the advent of AI?

---

There are approximately 462,000 manufacturing jobs available right now. How many are being shipped overseas, exactly? Is it bad that those jobs are disappearing as AI becomes more powerful and useful for everyone?

Let me put it this way: in 1930, about 25% of the labor force was in agriculture, and nowadays it's about 2%. Plus, we're producing up to 5 times as much food. I would argue we are better off even with the substantial decrease in agricultural labor.

If you think manufacturing is structurally different, that might make sense. But modern manufacturing is already much, much more capital- and technology-intensive, so it's not obvious we should expect large increases in labor demand even if more production returns onshore.

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

It's killing my industry. Prices have gotten insane. Customers are putting off projects. One large one flat out refused to pay the last invoice because they didn't have the money. We're holding on but I'm not sure all of our suppliers will be able to. I know some of our competitors (judging by their bids) are screwed. A lot of good people who really grinded to make it all happen during 2008, and Covid are really struggling, but at least Trump is funny and we're getting cool stuff in D.C.

---

I'm glad that NYC isn't likely to get nuked by a terrorist sponsored by the Iranian state any time soon. Because a nuke in NYC would really slow the economy down.

That said, the $9 billion that Trump spent on the DC ballroom and mall pool doesn't really help present the appearance of fiscal responsibility.

---

Wait, I thought Trump said the ballroom was going to be paid for by the tech bros of Elon and others? Why do we (tax payers) have to pay for it now?

---

Oh, we don't. Sorry.

The $9 billion was actually the amount that taxpayers have paid for Medicare fraud in Minnesota.

---

Okay, cool, but, again, why is any money not from Elon and the tech bros wallets going to this when it was said by Trump that those guys would be paying for it?

I'd like to think that $9 billion could go to so many other things that could have a direct impact on everyday Americans.

---

There is no money going to the construction of the ballroom, that I know of.

There is proposed money going into keeping POTUS safe. That is probably a good idea, since so many people are trying to kill POTUS, and a POTUS assassination is a tragedy that DC will pounce on to bilk US taxpayers of $trillions, regardless of which side of the aisle POTUS is on. Look no further than the Patriot Act for proof.

As for the $9 billion, that is the actual price tag of the Minnesota Medicare Fraud, and it has nothing to do with the ballroom. The best use of that $9 billion is to not pay it to Somalian pirates, but to never collect it as taxes in the first place. That is the best way to make sure it has a direct impact on everyday Americans.

BusterAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

It's killing my industry. Prices have gotten insane. Customers are putting off projects. One large one flat out refused to pay the last invoice because they didn't have the money. We're holding on but I'm not sure all of our suppliers will be able to. I know some of our competitors (judging by their bids) are screwed. A lot of good people who really grinded to make it all happen during 2008, and Covid are really struggling, but at least Trump is funny and we're getting cool stuff in D.C.

---

I'm glad that NYC isn't likely to get nuked by a terrorist sponsored by the Iranian state any time soon. Because a nuke in NYC would really slow the economy down.

That said, the $9 billion that Trump spent on the DC ballroom and mall pool doesn't really help present the appearance of fiscal responsibility.

---

Wait, I thought Trump said the ballroom was going to be paid for by the tech bros of Elon and others? Why do we (tax payers) have to pay for it now?

---

Oh, we don't. Sorry.

The $9 billion was actually the amount that taxpayers have paid for Medicare fraud in Minnesota.

---

Okay, cool, but, again, why is any money not from Elon and the tech bros wallets going to this when it was said by Trump that those guys would be paying for it?

I'd like to think that $9 billion could go to so many other things that could have a direct impact on everyday Americans.

---

There is no money going to the construction of the ballroom, that I know of.

There is proposed money going into keeping POTUS safe. That is probably a good idea, since so many people are trying to kill POTUS, and a POTUS assassination is a tragedy that DC will pounce on to bilk US taxpayers of $trillions, regardless of which side of the aisle POTUS is on. Look no further than the Patriot Act for proof.

As for the $9 billion, that is the actual price tag of the Minnesota Medicare Fraud, and it has nothing to do with the ballroom. The best use of that $9 billion is to not pay it to Somalian pirates, but to never collect it as taxes in the first place. That is the best way to make sure it has a direct impact on everyday Americans.

---

Okay, well, so long as he ballroom gets paid for the way Trump said it would, a la Google, I'm good.

According to the Google:

Quote:

---

President Donald Trump has stated that his White House ballroom project is being paid for by private donors and "generous Patriots", and that he will also be contributing his own money.


The administration maintains that the project requires zero cost to taxpayers, although the total cost estimate increased to $400 million.

---

The USSS along with DOD wanted to harden the Ballroom envelope extensively. Trump gaggled on this before heading to China.

Those funds are indeed coming from taxpayers along with whatever PEOC type work below ground.

The roof is to be hardened from drone / bomb / missile attacks. There was vague mention this would be property wide (so residence, west wing, etc) as well as further extending the secure perimeter around the WH.

$2 billion is not probably a low estimate. But dead presidents or dead foreign heads of state cost much much more.

tysker said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

Give me a break. What does AI have to do with anything I posted?

---

Pretty much everything.

Do you believe that the US' comparative advantage of shipping manufacturing jobs overseas is going to decrease with the advent of AI?

---

There are approximately 462,000 manufacturing jobs available right now. How many are being shipped overseas, exactly? Is it bad that those jobs are disappearing as AI becomes more powerful and useful for everyone?

Let me put it this way: in 1930, about 25% of the labor force was in agriculture, and nowadays it's about 2%. Plus, we're producing up to 5 times as much food. I would argue we are better off even with the substantial decrease in agricultural labor.

If you think manufacturing is structurally different, that might make sense. But modern manufacturing is already much, much more capital- and technology-intensive, so it's not obvious we should expect large increases in labor demand even if more production returns onshore.

---

I disagree here pretty vehemently.

US manufacturing will employ fewer people than foreign manufacturing, but there is room for a LOT of employment growth.

Just for example, Tesla employs about 0.1% of all US private employees to produce about $100 Billion in manufacturing output. Tesla primary manufactures things, and they do it pretty efficiently. In an alternate reality, there is enough room in the US economy for 10 - 15 Tesla's before we hit manufacturing output that is on par with our global share of GDP. That's another 2 million manufacturing jobs. That is significant, and it is not that far fetched.

flown-the-coop said:

---

The USSS along with DOD wanted to harden the Ballroom envelope extensively. Trump gaggled on this before heading to China.

Those funds are indeed coming from taxpayers along with whatever PEOC type work below ground.

The roof is to be hardened from drone / bomb / missile attacks. There was vague mention this would be property wide (so residence, west wing, etc) as well as further extending the secure perimeter around the WH.

$2 billion is not probably a low estimate. But dead presidents or dead foreign heads of state cost much much more.

---

I'm all for the security part of it, that makes sense.

Seeing how it takes forever for things to get done, it'll be a miracle if Trump gets to see any of it while in office. Which is why I hate the left having a fit: it's not as if it's not going to be used be every president for the future.

Anyway, as long as Trump stays to his word about the ballroom, zero effs given about the rest.

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

---

Increase in prices of individual products =/= inflation.

Increase in overall prices in terms of money = inflation.

It's simple tautology.

Gradin said:

---

Trump says he doesn't think.

---

FIFY

BusterAg said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

---

Increase in prices of individual products =/= inflation.

Increase in overall prices in terms of money = inflation.

It's simple tautology.

---

What's the term for Americans having less money because of what's done in Washington?

Do one of those fit or we talking just simple SOL?

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

---

Increase in prices of individual products =/= inflation.

Increase in overall prices in terms of money = inflation.

It's simple tautology.

---

What's the term for Americans having less money because of what's done in Washington?

---

Taxes.

BusterAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Increases in prices =/= inflation. No need to be upset about that.

---

Increase in prices of individual products =/= inflation.

Increase in overall prices in terms of money = inflation.

It's simple tautology.

---

What's the term for Americans having less money because of what's done in Washington?

---

Taxes.

---

Taxes made groceries, gas, and everything else go up in the past year? I thought we all got a tax cut?

Reports today that tax refunds are far outpacing what they originally predicted / thought. So it's all the increased spending from the OBBB tax refunds that's driving demand and costs higher.

BusterAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

Give me a break. What does AI have to do with anything I posted?

---

Pretty much everything.

Do you believe that the US' comparative advantage of shipping manufacturing jobs overseas is going to decrease with the advent of AI?

---

There are approximately 462,000 manufacturing jobs available right now. How many are being shipped overseas, exactly? Is it bad that those jobs are disappearing as AI becomes more powerful and useful for everyone?

Let me put it this way: in 1930, about 25% of the labor force was in agriculture, and nowadays it's about 2%. Plus, we're producing up to 5 times as much food. I would argue we are better off even with the substantial decrease in agricultural labor.

If you think manufacturing is structurally different, that might make sense. But modern manufacturing is already much, much more capital- and technology-intensive, so it's not obvious we should expect large increases in labor demand even if more production returns onshore.

---

I disagree here pretty vehemently.

US manufacturing will employ fewer people than foreign manufacturing, but there is room for a LOT of employment growth.

Just for example, Tesla employs about 0.1% of all US private employees to produce about $100 Billion in manufacturing output. Tesla primary manufactures things, and they do it pretty efficiently. In an alternate reality, there is enough room in the US economy for 10 - 15 Tesla's before we hit manufacturing output that is on par with our global share of GDP. That's another 2 million manufacturing jobs. That is significant, and it is not that far fetched.

---

There are about 12.5 million manufacturing jobs in the US, representing about 8% of the workforce and about 10% of GDP. Just so I'm clear, you think there is room in the US for another 10-15 companies of TSLA's size and output? TSLA is one of the top 10 largest public companies of ALL TIME (and all time is a long time). SO you believe there is enough capacity to simultaneously recreate the output of these companies (top 10 market cap):

MSFT
AAPL

NVDA

Saudi Aramco (not US listed)

GOOG

AMZN

META

All the while, adding 2 million more jobs, an increase of over 15% from current levels. That would be a seismic shift. Especially given current demographics and a declining labor force participation rate.

By comparison, your 'not far fetched post' rests on there being enough room in the employment landscape to shift 2 million jobs into manufacturing, which represents the entirety of the following industries (source chatgpt):
Software publishing & computer systems design: ~2-2.5 million

Trucking: ~2 million drivers and related workers

Legal services: ~1.52 million

Air transportation + support: ~1-2 million

Utilities (electric, gas, water): under 1 million directly, but large infrastructure impact

Automobile manufacturing and parts: roughly 1 million+

Warehousing and storage: around 2 million

Construction of buildings (subset of construction): a few million

Agriculture/farm-related employment: ~2-3 million

To be fair, I love the enthusiasm. I just don't trust any of your figures or assumptions