You think lowly of women if you think their career choices are dictated by childish propaganda

If the occasion arises, and a recession ensues that brings down the 10Y towards 3.5-3.75%, wouldn't it make sense to increase the amount of refinanced debt towards longer duration? Could that alleviate some pressure for the Treasury going forward?

I have to better understand and learn about whales.

This is also a good take I found: https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqsgc9m4tfyf8hf4z8z7fr3763wtp635t6dnngy9e2d6grjvkk4u8fgm42l3h

No, you are right, it is too soon, but eerie that bitcoin has stayed at around $83k while the market has tanked so much. I would have expected the selloff to drag all perceived risky assets with it.

There is a chance that the next few weeks will be crazy volatile (stock market), it should provide a more material proof about bitcoin's price behavior

And yes, I am a maximalist when talking about maximalism 🤣

talking in absolutes, without any self doubt, in black and white and not greys

Ok, sorry for the late reply. Here it comes from a pretty partial view of things.

In the short term, the tariffs, due to their scope and level, will add a lot of cost to companies importing components, commodities, and even finished products to the US. That extra cost will be shared among those companies (lower margins, and profits) and consumers (higher prices). Both will have a secondary effect of lowering growth. Companies will either cut costs at home (layoffs) or have less cash flows (to re-invest in doing more things faster and better). Consumers will both, ask for higher wages (because cost of living goes up, even in the margin), and will be more careful with their purchases (lowering demand). Those laid off will be even more careful (living on savings and unemployment subsidies). In sum, lower growth and higher prices.

Some say that if the USD goes up by the same amount, the net effect is zero. The jury is out on that one given the scope and materiality of the tariffs. But the USD has, so far, remained at the same level or gone down against other currencies (worse!!).

Over time things will find an equilibrium. Idle Ford plants will make more cars inside the US, etc. The problem is that:

1- to build a plant takes a ton of money, certainty and time. And a falling market makes it hard to raise money. Certainty is in short supply given how uncertain the rules are (are we negotiating or settling new rules? can things change in 2026 or 2028?). And time is a bitch.

2- not everything can be done in the US. Examples: grow coffee, or chocolate, or avocados, or slippers at the prices people are used to.

Again, things will find an equilibrium over the next...10 years? But beware that a closed economy will be less competitive, less productive and overall less wealthy.

From my personal point of view, and it is personal, the best way to tackle this is through more sensible redistribution (eg. education, entrepreneurship) so we keep on winning on the sectors of the highest added value (tech, marketing, creative arts, even robotics and therefore a new kind of manufacturing).

-----

A different angle. The way the computed the tariffs is just bananas. It is not tariffs but a ratio of trade imbalance, where real tariffs (and non tariff barriers like onerous regulations and currency manipulations) are just but a variable among many. Super weird, unfair to the smallest and poorest countries getting to advance, and impossible to realize. Imagine that you are a Subway Sandwich shop owner and you go to your barber to cut your hair. To have a balanced trade you would demand that he buys $20 worth of your sandwiches. It turns the whole idea of specialization, division of labor and free movement of capital on its head. <palmface emoji x 20>

----
Well, that's it. I am sorry if it is neither very well thought out or clear, but hey! today has been a hell of a day. I hope it helps. Cheers!

Yes, there will be many potholes along the way:

- expected EU retaliatory measures, and others
- 2Q pre-announcements and downgrades, followed by artificially deflated earnings and down forecasts
- potential exogenous events (e.g. blow ups, EM instability)
- Apr macro data trickling in May
- revisions to GDP and recession calls
- Fed struggles, maybe even Trump jumps over the fence and takes over
- cabinet reshuffles (eg. Lutnick or Navarro ejected, Bessent runs away)

You say "there was a mismatch between what was promised and what is possible". I agree but not in terms of pain, but of outcomes. I fear that the rebalancing will never arrive or will be smaller than expected. For example, no company is going to commit to big capex investments if things change in 2-4 years. That won't stop them from announcing future investments of "hundreds of billions" as the Admin says. Like DOGE, it all feels like a TV reality show where capturing attention with glitter and drama, day by day, aims to mask a much more complicated and different reality. A reality where real change usually only happens with constant effort and discipline (not edicts and pyres).

By the end of this process there will be a reconning, and the blue collar vote that propelled him will turn to a more extreme and protectionist flavor. Under this scenario, BTC, an orthogonal bet to the system is a good diversifying strategy.

BTW guys, this nostr thing is an awesome therapeutical machine! Thanks!!

Without Trump you never know when BTC would have decoupled.
Aren't we lucky?