Private lending is a concern.
Stock valuations are my bigger concern. Although I feel bullish about the economy, I have a hard time staying in stocks.
Well, I do care about people that are at the bottom of the housing situation to begin with
already.
I agree stocks seem very pricey pretty much across the board from a PE perspective. Only
way I can halfway convince myself they are worth it , is if we are indeed on the door step
of a new AI revolution. But I don’t see it justifying these stock prices.
But hey, some guy was saying the DJIA was heading to 100,000 in 3 years.
1 Like
Here’s some good news:
I might be owed some f****** money.
1 Like
You going to sue the government?
Per AI (I hilariously don’t actually know if this good data because I got it from AI)
Historical Context (Fourth Quarter)
2024: The GDP grew at a 4.93% rate (Year-end).
2023: The GDP grew at a 6.18% rate (Year-end).
2022: The GDP grew at a 7.89% rate (Year-end).
I’m going to ask for refunds from the company’s that charged me the tariffs.
1 Like
More confusion in the state of the economy since covid. And/or the AI
revolution.
1 Like
The Court said he had to be more targeted in his tariffs and could not apply a blanket tariff. I’m waiting for Plan B to emerge. I don’t think it will impact China, Mexico & Canada because he used fentanyl as the excuse for tariffs initially. Of course, he’s been all over the board with Cnada
1 Like
They are going to be careful in how they word stuff.
I also expect him to try something else. There will be ongoing court battles in this space. I’m guessing for the rest of his term.
1 Like
A potus can’t just call anything a national emergency to skirt around the
delegations among the branches of government. Think it’s a good decision,
but wish it could have went down 9-0.
Should be fun to watch plan B unfold.
2 Likes
Here’s Clarence Thomas’s dissent:
“NEITHER the statutory text nor the Constitution provide a basis for ruling against the President.” 
“Congress authorized the President to “regulate . . . importation.” Throughout American history, the authority to “regulate importation” has been understood to include the authority to impose duties on imports.” “The meaning of that phrase was beyond doubt by the time that Congress enacted this statute, shortly after President Nixon’s highly publicized duties on imports were UPHELD based on identical language.” “The statute that the President relied on therefore authorized him to impose the duties on imports at issue in these cases.” “Because the Constitution assigns Congress many powers that do not implicate the nondelegation doctrine, Congress may delegate the exercise of many powers to the President.” “Congress has done so repeatedly since the founding, WITH THIS COURT’S BLESSING.”
Certain posters here and a few SC justices want the president to have absolute power inspite of the constitution.
2 Likes
1 Like
Nothing’s changed.
I agree and that’s their right, without naming names. SC rulings can always raise
disagreement among the governed, and the court has shown ability to get things very wrong and not honor precedent either. So it’s just a point in time decision.
Happy this decision went this way.
1 Like
Chris,
Do you think his dissent is valid ?
Are you okay with the ruling or prefer it went the other way ?
1 Like
I think the precedent of Nixon’s tariffs makes his dissent defendable. I haven’t read the complete ruling. I especially want to read what Gorsuch wrote. That Kavanaugh was in dissent and Gorsuch wasn’t, was a big surprise
