Tessera
Folgen

Tom Barson

@tbarson49.bsky.social

Retired global IT services director. Hopeless eclectic with weaknesses for economics, history, philosophy of science, geopolitics, mathematics, and music. East Lansing, MI

616 Posts143 Follower471 Folgt
Claudia Sahm @claudia-sahm.bsky.social · last yr.

“Fifty years from now, you will want to be able to look in the mirror and know that you did what you thought was right, in every part of your life. At the end of the day, your integrity is all you have.” Jay Powell www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/s...

Baccalaureate remarks by Chair Powell at the Princeton University Baccalaureate Ceremony

Thank you, President Eisgruber, for the opportunity to speak here today. Congratulations to the Princeton University class of 2025 on the tremendous achievemen

federalreserve.gov

Tom Barson@tbarson49.bsky.social · last yr.

Might one reason be that the US mainly exports that light Texas crude? (I've been told that the US mainly refines heavy oil and exports the higher-priced light stuff. If that's the case, then tariffs could have a big impact. Customers can't buy if they can't sell.)

Steve Rattner@steverattner.bsky.social · last yr.

Despite Trump’s assertions, drill baby drill simply isn’t happening — drillers have started shedding rigs. My @morningjoe-msnbc.bsky.social Chart

Tom Barson@tbarson49.bsky.social · last yr.

Note that this isn't economics, or even "political economy". Only in a pure great power conflict "game" could you possibly justify the assertion that the least-loser "wins" via an implicit claim that less is more.

Branko Milanovic@brankomilan.bsky.social · last yr.

When people write that US is losing with tariffs, they fail to understand the nature of the game the US is playing. It is playing a lose-lose game, but that game makes sense if the US thinks that China will lose more, and thus in relative sense US will be up. Absolute losses do not matter as such.

Tom Barson@tbarson49.bsky.social · last yr.

In the "It's an ill wind..." dept., @delong.social reminds us that if a bot has replaced Navarro, Hassett, Bessent & Co, Liberation Day might be a net win. FWIW, I ran the "Reciprocal Tariff" formula past DeepSeek, which quickly replied that it was nonsense. braddelong.substack.com/p/tariffs-by...

Tariffs by Chatbot: Trump’s Trade Policy as AI-Generated Farce

Trump’s tariff regime isn’t just wrong—it’s mathematically incoherent, diplomatically corrosive, and economically catastrophic...

braddelong.substack.com

Adam Bonica@adambonica.bsky.social · last yr.

1/🧵 Judges across ideological lines are ruling against Trump at strikingly similar rates (84% liberal, 86% centrist, 82% conservative). This isn't partisan opposition to Trump—it's the judiciary functioning as intended by cutting across partisan lines to uphold the Constitution.

Title: Both Liberal and Conservative Judges Rule Against Trump Description: A scatter plot showing the rulings of judges against or in favor of Trump, categorized by ideology using the DIME score. The x-axis represents Judge Ideology (DIME Score), ranging from liberal (-1) to conservative (1), and the y-axis represents the case outcome (against or for Trump). • Blue dots represent liberal judges, purple dots represent moderate judges, and red dots represent conservative judges. • Some judges are labeled, including Rudolph Contreras, Lauren King, John Coughenour, and James Emanuel Boasberg on the liberal to moderate side, and Carl Nichols, Richard J. Leon, and Joseph N. Laplante on the conservative side. • A note mentions that Boasberg, though slightly right-leaning, was initially appointed by George W. Bush. • The visualization suggests that judges from both ideological backgrounds ruled against Trump.